Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Trends in atmospheric CH4  (Read 3769 times)

Stephan

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 802
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 269
  • Likes Given: 141
Trends in atmospheric CH4
« on: July 11, 2019, 09:59:23 PM »
The February 2019 numbers of methane were recently published:
February 2019:     1865.4 ppb
February 2018:     1856.2 ppb
Last updated: June 05, 2019
The March 2019 numbers of methane were recently published:
https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends_ch4/
March 2019:     1866.4 ppb
March 2018:     1857.5 ppb
(increase by almost 9 ppb)
Last updated: July 05, 2019
Eyeballing from the graph the increase was a little lower than March 2018, but bigger than March 2017.
It is too late just to be concerned about Climate Change

Stephan

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 802
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 269
  • Likes Given: 141
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #1 on: August 07, 2019, 09:46:13 PM »
The April numbers of methane were published today:
April 2019:     1865.8 ppb
April 2018:     1856.7 ppb
Last updated: August 05, 2019
Yearly increase a little bit higher than 9 ppb.
Highest ever recorded April value since measurements started. An increase of 14,4 % since 1983.

______
Source: https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends_ch4/
It is too late just to be concerned about Climate Change

bligh8

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 310
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 57
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #2 on: August 10, 2019, 05:18:53 PM »
The Leaks That Threaten the Clean Image of Natural Gas
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2019GL082635

 Abstract
Urban emissions remain an underexamined part of the methane budget. Here we present and interpret aircraft observations of six old and leak‐prone major cities along the East Coast of the United States. We use direct observations of methane (CH4), carbon dioxide (CO2), carbon monoxide (CO), ethane (C2H6), and their correlations to quantify CH4 emissions and attribute to natural gas. We find the five largest cities emit 0.85 (0.63, 1.12) Tg CH4/year, of which 0.75 (0.49, 1.10) Tg CH4/year is attributed to natural gas. Our estimates, which include all thermogenic methane sources including end use, are more than twice that reported in the most recent gridded EPA inventory, which does not include end‐use emissions. These results highlight that current urban inventory estimates of natural gas emissions are substantially low, either due to underestimates of leakage, lack of inclusion of end‐use emissions, or some combination thereof.....more within the article.
Sorry if this was posted b4...did not see it in search




TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5429
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 531
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #3 on: August 11, 2019, 02:37:03 PM »
I'm reasonably sure that this was discussed some years ago - possibly on our sister site?


It's worth revisiting & I'll join the conversation tomorrow.


Fair Warning
Terry

bligh8

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 310
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 57
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #4 on: August 11, 2019, 02:52:27 PM »
Good Morning Terry

Yea, there has been many papers/articles posted about this unnecessary/unattractive area of NG.
..A bridge to no ware..  comes to mind.  I see Berkley CA became the first city no ban NG, hopefully others will follow.  It's still a little early around here and quiet, a good time to tend my garden.

Have a day
bligh

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5429
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 531
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #5 on: August 12, 2019, 02:13:38 PM »
IIRC
My conclusion at the time was that cities, particularly older cities needed to require their gas supplier(s) to repair and maintain their infrastructure.


The wellheads were problematic, the intra-city higher pressure pipelines were doing a decent job, but the low pressure, low volume system and marginally profitable at best distribution networks were in need of very expensive repairs.


Raising the costs of gas for all users is probably the only way to pay for these repairs without making it a city responsibility and taxing the whole community to benefit those distributing or using the energy.


Abandoned lines don't need to be repaired, they simply need to be identified and separated from the system - again as the responsibility of the supplier who had been feeding those networks.


I strongly believe that NG has a place in our energy systems, at the very least until coal has been eliminated.
Terry

bligh8

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 310
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 57
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #6 on: August 12, 2019, 03:18:35 PM »
Terry

They came through my neighborhood about 4/5 yrs ago and replaced all the low pressure lines in the street and the lines running up to the house meters.  I might think that this was a state wide effort knowing the economics of the township in which I live, still, I'm guessing here.

I see we have some shared history, I've a master's degree in "street"  mostly NYC downtown east side, alphabet city, dark days.  Got out in 87 just before the A-Train came into town...pure luck.

I do not have, nor could I guess at a reasonable response to our current FF problem only that I might think that we should STOP digging the crap up and let the cards fall will they will.
I would prefer a controlled decent into chaos rather than let's just set the planet on fire.

bligh   
« Last Edit: August 12, 2019, 03:23:44 PM by bligh8 »

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5429
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 531
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #7 on: August 13, 2019, 02:42:26 AM »
Yea
I thought my second time through was pushing it. :-[  But I take it we both ended up on our feet.


Fixing the pipes is far more economical than replacing every gas appliance with it's electrical counterpart.


It wasn't so long ago in California that area heating with resistance coils was as illegal as lighting a pathway using NG lights. Heat your bath water with a resistance heater and watch that meter spin. San Francisco can get damn cold - and recently a little too warm for comfort. The power draw in inclement weather is going to make it even harder for PG&E to make a comeback after that ridiculous court decision.


If your price for a product doesn't cover the costs of maintaining your infrastructure you're structurally bankrupt and some one will be stuck with the bill. Better a little squawking now than lots of screaming later when gas can't be supplied.


Where I'm at everything's electric, but my electricity isn't even metered, it's wrapped in my (controlled) rent. - another situation that would be illegal in California, Oregon, Nevada or Arizona.


Berkley has been known to be out on the bleeding edge for half a century. Hope this isn't the misstep that flings them to the ground.


Keep your mast pointing upward.
Terry

DrTskoul

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 212
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #8 on: August 13, 2019, 03:25:27 AM »
Terry

They came through my neighborhood about 4/5 yrs ago and replaced all the low pressure lines in the street and the lines running up to the house meters.  I might think that this was a state wide effort knowing the economics of the township in which I live, still, I'm guessing here.

I see we have some shared history, I've a master's degree in "street"  mostly NYC downtown east side, alphabet city, dark days.  Got out in 87 just before the A-Train came into town...pure luck.

I do not have, nor could I guess at a reasonable response to our current FF problem only that I might think that we should STOP digging the crap up and let the cards fall will they will.
I would prefer a controlled decent into chaos rather than let's just set the planet on fire.

bligh

Either way it will not be very controlled...

KiwiGriff

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 313
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 178
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #9 on: August 15, 2019, 08:23:39 AM »
This fits here somewhat.

Ideas and perspectives: is shale gas a major driver of recent increase in global atmospheric methane?
Abstract
Quote
Methane has been rising rapidly in the atmosphere over the past decade, contributing to global climate change. Unlike the late 20th century when the rise in atmospheric methane was accompanied by an enrichment in the heavier carbon stable isotope (13C) of methane, methane in recent years has become more depleted in 13C. This depletion has been widely interpreted as indicating a primarily biogenic source for the increased methane. Here we show that part of the change may instead be associated with emissions from shale-gas and shale-oil development. Previous studies have not explicitly considered shale gas, even though most of the increase in natural gas production globally over the past decade is from shale gas. The methane in shale gas is somewhat depleted in 13C relative to conventional natural gas. Correcting earlier analyses for this difference, we conclude that shale-gas production in North America over the past decade may have contributed more than half of all of the increased emissions from fossil fuels globally and approximately one-third of the total increased emissions from all sources globally over the past decade.
https://www.biogeosciences.net/16/3033/2019/
The fracked gas boom is not the breathing space on the way to carbon free some wish for.

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5429
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 531
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #10 on: August 15, 2019, 11:39:34 PM »
^^
That was unexpected.


I knew fracked gas was dirty. I didn't think it was that bad.
Poland with her insistence on coal + LNG from fracked wells could use up the entire EU's CO2e budget.
The US with fracking and Trump is out of the race.
China is building new thermal coal plants.
Canada needs her Tar Sands.
India is burning anything combustible.
and the UK faces more blackouts.


Lets build more EVs boys, it's the only way out of this hole.
Terry


nanning

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1078
  • 0Kg CO2, 35 KWh/wk,130L H2O/wk, No heating
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 159
  • Likes Given: 7027
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #11 on: August 16, 2019, 07:43:24 AM »
And give them to all non-rich chinese, indian and african people as an act of compassion  :-* (their airquality) and an act of selfless  ;D international cooperation in mitigation.
"It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that prevents us from living freely and nobly" - Bertrand Russell
   Simple: minimize your possessions and be free and kind    It's just a mindset.       Refugees welcome

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5429
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 531
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #12 on: August 16, 2019, 12:59:42 PM »
And give them to all non-rich chinese, indian and african people as an act of compassion  :-* (their airquality) and an act of selfless  ;D international cooperation in mitigation.
We could give them the EVS, and sell them the electricity!
Immolation is a traditional Hindu thing is it not? ::)
Terry

FishOutofWater

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 745
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 281
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #13 on: August 17, 2019, 04:35:24 PM »
That report that fingers fracked methane may be correct but the math does not give a unique solution. There are multiple possible sources of changes in C-13/C-12 ratios. The article correctly points out that fracked gas has a different ratio that gas from traditional gas reservoirs because of oxidation reactions that take place when gas migrates to a reservoir. However, there are other possible sources that might also produce the observed change in isotope ratios. There's no bad science here but the results are ambiguous and other researchers have fingered other possible sources such as Asian agricultural activities including rice growing.

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5429
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 531
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #14 on: August 17, 2019, 06:02:24 PM »
That report that fingers fracked methane may be correct but the math does not give a unique solution. There are multiple possible sources of changes in C-13/C-12 ratios. The article correctly points out that fracked gas has a different ratio that gas from traditional gas reservoirs because of oxidation reactions that take place when gas migrates to a reservoir. However, there are other possible sources that might also produce the observed change in isotope ratios. There's no bad science here but the results are ambiguous and other researchers have fingered other possible sources such as Asian agricultural activities including rice growing.


If the choice is blaming Asian subsistence farmers or North American job providers I know who gets my support. 8)
Terry

Stephan

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 802
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 269
  • Likes Given: 141
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #15 on: September 06, 2019, 09:48:11 PM »
The value for May 2019 has been published:
May 2019:     1862.8 ppb
May 2018:     1854.8 ppb
Last updated: September 05, 2019
An annual increase of 8 ppb, slightly lower than the increase in the last months.
It is too late just to be concerned about Climate Change

Stephan

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 802
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 269
  • Likes Given: 141
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #16 on: October 07, 2019, 10:33:25 PM »
The value for June 2019 has been published:
June 2019:     1860.2 ppb
June 2018:     1852.0 ppb
Last updated: October 05, 2019
The annual increase of 8.2 ppb is roughly equal to the one from May 2019.
It is too late just to be concerned about Climate Change

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5429
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 531
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #17 on: October 08, 2019, 12:36:20 AM »
Possibly related to S&Ss latest findings from Siberia.

"the scientists did not need special plastic cones that were prepared to collect methane. Water "boiling" with methane bubbles could be scooped up with buckets."


"It is manifested by an increase in methane concentration in air up to 16 ppm (millionths of a share), which is 9 times more than the average planetary values. No one has ever registered this before! "


Hat tip to Kassy
Terry


Re: Arctic Methane Release
 Reply #1087 on: Today at 12:41:58 PM

jai mitchell

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2045
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 84
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #18 on: October 24, 2019, 03:47:08 AM »
massive acceleration happening.

Haiku of Past Futures
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

Ken Feldman

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 821
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 92
  • Likes Given: 102
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #19 on: November 05, 2019, 10:47:15 PM »
The July update has been posted to NOAA's site.

https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends_ch4/

Quote
July 2019:     1858.6 ppb
July 2018:     1849.0 ppb
Last updated: November 05, 2019

vox_mundi

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1740
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 729
  • Likes Given: 115
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #20 on: November 07, 2019, 05:58:43 AM »
NASA Flew Gas Detectors Above California, Found ‘Super Emitters’
https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2019-11-06/nasa-flew-gas-detectors-above-california-found-super-emitters



Over the course of three years, NASA flew a plane carrying gas-imaging equipment above California and made a discovery that surprised even the state’s own environmental agencies: A handful of operations are responsible for the vast majority of methane emissions.

In a report published in Nature on Wednesday, scientists estimated that 10% of the places releasing methane -- including landfills, natural gas facilities and dairy farms -- are responsible for more than half of the state’s total emissions. And a fraction of the 272,000 sources surveyed -- just 0.2% -- account for as much as 46%.

For example, of the 270 surveyed landfills, only 30 were observed to emit large plumes of methane. However, those 30 were responsible for 40% of the total point-source emissions detected during the survey.

NASA’s aircraft made dozens of flights across 10,000 square miles from 2016 through 2018. Landfills accounted for 41% of the source emissions it identified, manure management 26% and oil and gas operations 26%.

The team identified more than 550 individual point sources emitting plumes of highly concentrated methane. Ten percent of these sources, considered super-emitters, contributed the majority of the emissions detected. The team estimates that statewide, super-emitters are responsible for about a third of California's total methane budget.



The results are already effecting change. The survey revealed four incidents of leaking natural gas distribution lines and one leaking liquefied natural gas storage tank, which operators confirmed and repaired.

Riley M. Duren et al. California's methane super-emitters, Nature (2019)
« Last Edit: November 07, 2019, 01:53:00 PM by vox_mundi »
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

Tor Bejnar

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3108
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 402
  • Likes Given: 198
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #21 on: November 07, 2019, 03:05:40 PM »
Quote
Over the course of three years, NASA flew a plane carrying gas-imaging equipment above California and made a discovery that surprised even the state’s own environmental agencies: A handful of operations are responsible for the vast majority of methane emissions.
I think this is great news!  It is far easier, politically and physically, to fix a few big problems (of this nature) than it is to fix a very large number of so-so problems.  (Stopping the 10 speeders going 20 units over the posted school zone speed limit is easier than stopping the 10,000 going 5 units over. [pick your units: mph, kmph])
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Stephan

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 802
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 269
  • Likes Given: 141
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #22 on: November 07, 2019, 09:13:47 PM »
The July update has been posted to NOAA's site.

https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends_ch4/

Quote
July 2019:     1858.6 ppb
July 2018:     1849.0 ppb
Last updated: November 05, 2019
Thank you for posting this. It is an annual increase of 9.6 ppb, higher than in the last months...
It is too late just to be concerned about Climate Change

pietkuip

  • New ice
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 49
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #23 on: November 08, 2019, 12:05:23 AM »
Data from Barrow, in the high Arctic. This year shows a 50 ppb increase.

So that might be where the global acceleration comes from.
Source: https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/dv/iadv/graph.php?code=BRW&program=ccgg&type=ts
« Last Edit: November 08, 2019, 12:11:56 AM by pietkuip »

kassy

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 867
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 368
  • Likes Given: 378
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #24 on: November 08, 2019, 12:20:25 AM »
There are plenty of other sources so that is only part of it.
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Stephan

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 802
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 269
  • Likes Given: 141
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #25 on: December 08, 2019, 08:36:57 PM »
The CH4 concentration values for August are available now:

August 2019:     1863.6 ppb
August 2018:     1851.9 ppb
Last updated: December 05, 2019

The annual increase (11.7 ppb) is significantly above from that of the last months. At the moment I have no clue whether this is just natural variability, an outlier or a trend change...
It is too late just to be concerned about Climate Change

pietkuip

  • New ice
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 49
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #26 on: December 08, 2019, 09:50:14 PM »
The CH4 concentration values for August are available now:

August 2019:     1863.6 ppb
August 2018:     1851.9 ppb

The annual increase (11.7 ppb) is significantly above from that of the last months. At the moment I have no clue whether this is just natural variability, an outlier or a trend change...
Barrow showed burps of more than 50 ppb in August. And even higher ones in October.
https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/dv/iadv/graph.php?code=BRW&program=ccgg&type=ts

kassy

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 867
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 368
  • Likes Given: 378
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #27 on: December 08, 2019, 10:39:39 PM »
Interesting. Now we have a whole month to wonder what the next value will be.  :)
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Stephan

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 802
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 269
  • Likes Given: 141
Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« Reply #28 on: December 10, 2019, 10:35:35 PM »
The CH4 concentration values for August are available now:

August 2019:     1863.6 ppb
August 2018:     1851.9 ppb
Last updated: December 05, 2019

The annual increase (11.7 ppb) is significantly above from that of the last months. At the moment I have no clue whether this is just natural variability, an outlier or a trend change...
I took the time and checked the average August annual methane increase. Apart from 1998 (the super El Niño year) there has never been such an increase since 1990.
It is too late just to be concerned about Climate Change