A Global Warming Nightmare Scenario

A Global Warming Nightmare Scenario

Could we call this the _other_ "crystal meth" crisis??


NEW YORK TIMES

April 18, 2006

Op-Ed Columnist

The Big Burp Theory of the Apocalypse

By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

It's a dark and stormy night, and deep within the ocean the muddy
bottom begins to stir.

Giant squids flee in horror as reservoirs of methane frozen at the bottom
of the ocean begin to thaw, releasing bubbles that rise to the surface.
Soon the ocean surface is churning and burping gas like a billion overfed
infants, transforming the composition of our atmosphere.

That's a scene from a new horror movie I'm envisioning, called "Killer
Ocean." I'm hoping it might play in the White House and Congress,
because it depicts one of the more bizarre and frightening ways in which
global warming could devastate our planet — what scientists have
dubbed the "methane burp."

Since President Bush is complacent about conventional risks from
climate change, such as the prospect that those of us in Manhattan will
end up knee-deep in the Atlantic, let's try fear-mongering.

Methane is a greenhouse gas that is 20 times more powerful than carbon
dioxide. And thousands of gigatons of methane, equivalent to the total
amount of coal in the world, lie deep within the oceans in the form of
ice-like solids called methane hydrates.

The big question is whether global warming — temperatures have risen
about one degree Fahrenheit over the last 30 years — will thaw some of
these methane hydrates. If so, the methane might be released as a
gargantuan oceanic burp. Once in the atmosphere, that methane would
accelerate the greenhouse effect and warm the earth and raise sea levels
even more.

"The juiciest disaster-movie scenario would be a release of enough
methane to significantly change the atmospheric concentration," suggests
the excellent discussion of methane hydrates by scholars at
http://www.realclimate.org.

One reason for concern about a methane hydrate apocalypse is that
something like it may have happened several times in the past. For
example, 251 million years ago, there was a catastrophe known as the
Permian extinction that came close to wiping out life on earth.

Nobody is sure what caused the Permian extinction, but one theory is
that it was methane burps.

And as long as I'm fear-mongering, there was also a better understood
warming 55 million years ago, known as the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal
Maximum, or PETM. That was a period when temperatures shot up by
10 degrees Fahrenheit in the tropics and by about 15 degrees in polar
areas, and many scientists think it was caused by the melting of methane
hydrates.

"The PETM event 55 million years ago is probably the most likely
example of their impact, though there are smaller events dotted through
the record," says Gavin Schmidt, a NASA expert on climate change. He
emphasizes the uncertainties, but adds that since we are likely to enter a
climate that hasn't been seen for a few million years, it's reasonable to
worry about methane hydrates.

To be sure, some experts are skeptical. Daniel Schrag, a geochemist at
Harvard, doubts that methane hydrates were the culprit 55 million years
ago. For starters, he says, the theory doesn't offer a good explanation of
the initial change that melted the methane hydrates.

For all the uncertainty, there is an important point here: The history of
climate shows that it does not evolve slowly and gracefully, it lurches.
There are tipping points, and if we trigger certain chain reactions, then
our leaders cannot claim a mulligan. They could set back our planet for,
say, 10 million years.

The White House has used scientific uncertainty as an excuse for its
paralysis. But our leaders are supposed to devise policies to protect us
even from threats that are difficult to assess precisely — and climate
change should be considered even more menacing than a nuclear-armed
Iran.

Moreover, uncertainty cuts both ways. The best guess of climate experts
is that the seas will rise by two feet by 2100, but if the West Antarctic
Ice Sheet were to melt, then that alone would raise the seas by 20 feet.

Frankly, it's the well-known risks of rising temperatures and sea levels
— more than worry about a cataclysmic methane burp — that should
drive us to curb carbon emissions.

But our political system doesn't seem able to grapple with scientific
issues like climate. Our only hope for firm action would be a major
U.S.-led global initiative to curb carbon, and the Bush administration has
already dropped the ball on that.

The best reason for action on global warming remains the basic
imperative to safeguard our planet in the face of uncertainty, and our
leaders are failing wretchedly in that responsibility. If we need an
apocalypse to concentrate our minds, then just imagine our descendants
sitting on the top of Mount Ararat beside their ark, cursing us for
triggering a methane burp.