Enteric methane produced (tonnes)
1990 1,039857
1998 1,069750
1999 1,102670
2000 1,127900
2001 1,101238
2002 1,123076
2003 1,123438
2007 1,111647
2008 1,078928
Enteric methane produced in 2008 was less than that produced in 2000 and virtually the same as in 1998.
Methane oxidises to CO2 in 8-12 years so we can all sleep soundly in our beds knowing that all the enteric methane produced today is only replacing the methane that was produced ten years ago. The atmospheric concentration of methane will not have altered at all.
So indisputably, no global warming from enteric methane!
Unfortunately there are still some plonkers out there who think enteric methane is a problem. One can only wonder with incredulity.
If all the fossil fuel emissions of CO2 were tracking as those from enteric methane are, there would be no global warming industry at all, because there would be no problem.
If you think any of your friends would appreciate this information and could spare $50 to become a member, send them this email and encourage them to help us out a little bit. Try your neighbours first, none of them are members. Then your friends, they are not members either etc etc. We need them all if we are going to make any difference.
Richard Cumming says
“Methane oxidises to CO2 in 8-12 years”
and H2O?
For methane to be a problem it must be proved firstly that:-
1) Methane occupies a place on the atmospheric absorption spectrum that intercepts amounts of out-going radiation sufficient to create heating and how much of that is of anthropogenic origin?
2) Methane that does absorb out-going radiation has a significant heating effect in itself and compared to the heating and cooling effect of water vapour.
3) Methane molecules are of sufficient number in the atmosphere to be worthy of consideration in themselves and compared to water vapour.
4) Methane heat produced as a result of out-going radiation absorption as quantified by measurement is abnormal and directly correlated and attributable to anthropogenic emissions.
5) Methane absorption of out-going long-wave (OLR – LWIR) radiation over-rides in-coming short-wave solar radiation (SWIR) on balance.
Condition 5) is improbable given that the heating effect of solar SW is far greater than re-emitted LW e.g. solar SW is able to heat to the oceans (the planets greatest heat sink) but LW cannot beyond a few micro metres. See:-
Why Greenhouse Gases Won’t Heat the Oceans
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2010/08/why-greenhouse-gases-wont-heat-oceans.html
Those conditions are far from proven despite the assertion of the FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS that anthropogenic climate change is a “well established fact”
All methane mitigation measures are based on the AGW assumption – not on the answers to the above conditions i.e. research funds pledged by NZ at COP15 to investigate animal emissions would have been better spent on proof/disproof of the role of methane (and CO2) in the atmosphere. Otherwise the focus is cart-before-the-horse.
These issues are being pursued at this site under the “Methane (CH4)” thread header with access to absorption band plots:-
http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/open-threads/climate/climate-science/atmosphere/#comment-31483
The same conditions apply to carbon dioxide.
I suggest that you subscribe to CCG blog comments via Google Reader. The site contains a massive climate science information repository that is being added to continually and Google Reader is THE BEST way to follow comments in your own time (no clogged email inbox). Reader has either expanded or list view and I have been able to scan over 1000 comments in list view no problem. Clicking on a comment header opens the comment in a new tab for reply – brilliant.
To access the threads at the site beyond the blog posts, use the “Open Threads” button on the blog toolbar. Other categories can be accessed by bookmarking this INDEX:-
Disproving AGW
Controversy and scandal
Climate
Economics
Politics
Energy and fuel
ETS and carbon taxes
CO2
Climate science
Atmosphere
Water Vapour
Temperature records
Ocean and Heat
Solar and Cosmic
NIPCC
IPCC science
IPCC organisation
IPCC politics
UN
News
New Zealand
Australia
UK
USA
Europe
Asia
Pacific
South America
Africa
Sea levels
Polar regions, glaciers and ice
Global warming
Ocean acidification
http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/open-threads/climate/disproving-agw/#comment-26342
The methane thread is under “Atmosphere”.
Another avenue to provoke discussion on anything topical relevant to the indexes but not specifically covered by any category is to use “Open threads as promised”
http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/2010/10/open-threads-as-promised/
I’ve used it to document my investigation of Radiative Heat Transfer in Global Climate Models (GCMs)
http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/2010/10/open-threads-as-promised/#comment-28251
(BTW, Richard Treadgold is the blog owner – not myself)
Richard Cumming says
I’m wondering whether the first tranche of the $45m pledged at COP15 is being directed at animal nutrition (yield) with lip service to CH4. That would explain MAF coyness..
I restrained myself from pointing out to the MAF contact that from the outside, all we can see is MAF officers on travel junkets (Banff, Canada – nice) with no accountability. I’ll give it some time, but questions are begging.
Re CH4 levels.
The Ministry for the Environment has the audacity to display the CO2 and CH4 plots on their website. The important thing is not the strong intra-annual methane cycles (Mauna Loa shows the same for CO2), but that CH4 has plateaued (it’s not a problem) and CO2 is not correlated to temperature (it’s not a problem either).
http://www.mfe.govt.nz/environmental-reporting/atmosphere/greenhouse-gases/atmospheric-levels.html
From CO2 Science:-
“we feel confident in suggesting that if the recent pause in CH4 increase is indeed temporary, it will likely be followed by a decrease in CH4 concentration, since that would be the next logical step in the observed progression from significant, to much smaller to no yearly CH4 increase.”
“So what has been responsible for the recent dramatic slowdown — and possible ultimate cessation — of the post-Little Ice Age upward trend in the air’s CH4 concentration? We believe that some significant portion of the welcome development can be attributed to the cumulative effect of a number of indirect impacts of the concomitant increase in the air’s CO2 concentration, as described in several of our Subject Index Summaries”
See Subject Index Summaries links on source page.
“Other phenomena are undoubtedly helping to reduce the air’s methane concentration as well; and it will be exciting to see, in the days and years ahead, if their combined influence will actually lead to a sustained downward trend in the concentration of this important greenhouse gas. Such a result would be like having one’s cake and eating it too; for it would enable the planet to reap the great biological benefits that come from atmospheric CO2 enrichment without creating a significant net increase in the atmosphere’s greenhouse effect.”
http://www.co2science.org/subject/m/summaries/methaneatmos.php
Clearly, methane is now not a problem and the govt should not allocate anymore funding to research it or to sponsor travel to exotic locations for MAF officers.
But if they’re just researching animal nutrition – fine, just stop the travel junkets.
The same can be said for CO2.