Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print
Methane production/emissions in trees and forests (Read 1414 times)
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21563
Gender: male
Methane production/emissions in trees and forests
Mar 27th, 2019 at 1:49pm
 
"Forest ecosystem methane (CH4) research has focused on soils, but trees are also important sources and sinks in forest CH4 budgets. Living and dead trees transport and emit CH4 produced in soils; living trees and dead wood emit CH4 produced inside trees by microorganisms; and trees produce CH4 through an abiotic photochemical process. Here, we review the state of the science on the production, consumption, transport, and emission of CH4 by living and dead trees, and the spatial and temporal dynamics of these processes across hydrologic gradients inclusive of wetland and upland ecosystems. Emerging research demonstrates that tree CH4 emissions can significantly increase the source strength of wetland forests, and modestly decrease the sink strength of upland forests. "

"The growing body of literature on CH4 dynamics in forest ecosystems shows that they are far more complex biogeochemical environments than previously believed, and that our previous focus on soil processes alone is insufficient for a rigorous understanding of forests’ greenhouse gas balance and radiative climate forcing. Progress toward this goal will be most effective if we recognize that all CH4‐generating and consuming processes occur in all forest ecosystems regardless of their classification as upland or wetland."

Full article -
https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nph.15624#

Just another thing climate models don't do well.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
DonDeeHippy
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Cool Stuff

Posts: 2782
Australia
Gender: male
Re: Methane production/emissions in trees and forests
Reply #1 - Mar 27th, 2019 at 8:47pm
 
so the more forests we tear down the better the models will be  Cheesy
Back to top
 

I am me
 
IP Logged
 
Captain Nemo
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16810
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Methane production/emissions in trees and forests
Reply #2 - Apr 8th, 2019 at 4:56pm
 
I KNOW I'm rite! Windmills CAUSE Cancer!! I'm SMART! MY uncle went to MIT! ANYTHING that makes wind causes cancer! Windmills! Ceiling Fans! Helicopters! Thats why I wear MY Aluminum HAT when I'm in MY Helicopter! You CAN'T get cancer when you wear aluminum!!

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrFan/status/1113928157025964033

Back to top
 

Fire the LIAR in 2028!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Johnnie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 12485
Gender: male
Re: Methane production/emissions in trees and forests
Reply #3 - Apr 8th, 2019 at 5:15pm
 
So trees fart.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21563
Gender: male
Re: Methane production/emissions in trees and forests
Reply #4 - Apr 8th, 2019 at 5:47pm
 
And just think - methane is part of the carbon cycle. The carbon molecules must have been there for the methane to form.

And it quickly breaks down into its constituent parts.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Captain Nemo
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16810
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Methane production/emissions in trees and forests
Reply #5 - Apr 8th, 2019 at 9:54pm
 
One could try to explain that a short-term Carbon cycle is nothing like the problem of burning stuff that took millions of years to lay down in only a century or two ... but then again ... a waste of time against the brain-dead AGW deniers.  Roll Eyes
Back to top
 

Fire the LIAR in 2028!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21563
Gender: male
Re: Methane production/emissions in trees and forests
Reply #6 - Apr 8th, 2019 at 10:52pm
 
Captain Nemo wrote on Apr 8th, 2019 at 9:54pm:
One could try to explain that a short-term Carbon cycle is nothing like the problem of burning stuff that took millions of years to lay down in only a century or two ... but then again ... a waste of time against the brain-dead AGW deniers. 



Really? Who denies AGW? Deforestation causes AGW. Wink
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Captain Nemo
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16810
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Methane production/emissions in trees and forests
Reply #7 - Apr 8th, 2019 at 11:02pm
 
lee wrote on Apr 8th, 2019 at 10:52pm:
Captain Nemo wrote on Apr 8th, 2019 at 9:54pm:
One could try to explain that a short-term Carbon cycle is nothing like the problem of burning stuff that took millions of years to lay down in only a century or two ... but then again ... a waste of time against the brain-dead AGW deniers. 



Really? Who denies AGW? Deforestation causes AGW. Wink


But burning fossil fuels doesn't according to you?  Cheesy
Back to top
 

Fire the LIAR in 2028!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21563
Gender: male
Re: Methane production/emissions in trees and forests
Reply #8 - Apr 8th, 2019 at 11:25pm
 
Captain Nemo wrote on Apr 8th, 2019 at 11:02pm:
But burning fossil fuels doesn't according to you? 


Nope. I didn't say that. If everything was equal burning fossil fuel would increase temperature. However everything is not equal, it varies. Rainfall, thunderstorms, cyclones all impact climate. The problem is trying to tease out the Anthro component.  Anthro CO2 is estimated to be 3-4% of total CO2. But no-one really knows for sure. You need to have two parameters to work out the third. And the estimation vary wildly.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Captain Nemo
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16810
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Methane production/emissions in trees and forests
Reply #9 - Apr 9th, 2019 at 12:12am
 
Anthropogenic CO2 emissions


See also: radiative forcing, List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions, and Global warming


While CO2 absorption and release is always happening as a result of natural processes, the recent rise in CO2 levels in the atmosphere is known to be mainly due to human (anthropogenic) activity.[80]

There are four ways human activity, especially fossil fuel burning, is known to have caused the rapid increase in atmospheric CO2 over the last few centuries. 1) Various national statistics accounting for fossil fuel consumption, combined with knowledge of how much atmospheric CO2 is produced per unit of fossil fuel (e.g. liter of gasoline).[81] 2) By examining the ratio of various carbon isotopes in the atmosphere.[80]

The burning of long-buried fossil fuels releases CO2 containing carbon of different isotopic ratios to those of living plants, enabling distinction between natural and human-caused contributions to CO2 concentration. 3) Higher atmospheric CO2 concentrations in the Northern Hemisphere, where most of the world's population lives (and emissions originate from), compared to the southern hemisphere.

This difference has increased as anthropogenic emissions have increased.[82] 4) Atmospheric O2 levels are decreasing in Earth's atmosphere as it reacts with the carbon in fossil fuels to form CO2.[83]

Burning fossil fuels such as coal, petroleum, and natural gas is the leading cause of increased anthropogenic CO2; deforestation is the second major cause. In 2010, 9.14 gigatonnes of carbon (GtC, equivalent to 33.5 gigatonnes of CO2 or about 4.3 ppm in Earth's atmosphere) were released from fossil fuels and cement production worldwide, compared to 6.15 GtC in 1990.[84] In addition, land use change contributed 0.87 GtC in 2010, compared to 1.45 GtC in 1990.[84]

In 1997, human-caused Indonesian peat fires were estimated to have released between 13% and 40% of the average carbon emissions caused by the burning of fossil fuels around the world in a single year.[85][86][87] In the period 1751 to 1900, about 12 GtC were released as CO2 to the atmosphere from burning of fossil fuels, whereas from 1901 to 2013 the figure was about 380 GtC.[88]

Anthropogenic carbon emissions exceed the amount that can be taken up or balanced out by natural sinks.[89] As a result, carbon dioxide has gradually accumulated in the atmosphere, and as of 2013, its concentration is almost 43% above pre-industrial levels.[13][14] Various techniques have been proposed for removing excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere in carbon dioxide sinks. Currently about half of the carbon dioxide released from the burning of fossil fuels is not absorbed by vegetation and the oceans and remains in the atmosphere.[90]

Excess CO2 emitted since the pre-industrial era is projected to remain in the atmosphere for centuries to millennia,[91] even after emissions stop. Even if human carbon dioxide emissions were to completely cease, atmospheric temperatures are not expected to decrease significantly for thousands of years.[92]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere
Back to top
 

Fire the LIAR in 2028!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21563
Gender: male
Re: Methane production/emissions in trees and forests
Reply #10 - Apr 9th, 2019 at 12:39pm
 
Well that was enlghtening.

Captain Nemo wrote on Apr 9th, 2019 at 12:12am:
While CO2 absorption and release is always happening as a result of natural processes, the recent rise in CO2 levels in the atmosphere is known to be mainly due to human (anthropogenic) activity.[80]



So tell me - when plants absorb this anthropogenic CO2 and re-emit it; does it change back to its old form or retain its new identity? How then, if it reatains its new identity, which seems likely,can we tell whether it is new new CO2 emissions or old new CO2 emissions?

Captain Nemo wrote on Apr 9th, 2019 at 12:12am:
Burning fossil fuels such as coal, petroleum, and natural gas is the leading cause of increased anthropogenic CO2; deforestation is the second major cause. In 2010, 9.14 gigatonnes of carbon (GtC, equivalent to 33.5 gigatonnes of CO2 or about 4.3 ppm in Earth's atmosphere) were released from fossil fuels and cement production worldwide, compared to 6.15 GtC in 1990.[84] In addition, land use change contributed 0.87 GtC in 2010, compared to 1.45 GtC in 1990.[84]


Now, according to the science, the major CO2 emitter is the oceans. With a warming world, for whatever reason, that means warmer oceans will outgas more. And yet these estimates aren't updated. How bizarre is that?

"Warmer oceans release CO2 faster than thought"

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20413-warmer-oceans-release-co2-faster-th...

Captain Nemo wrote on Apr 9th, 2019 at 12:12am:
In 1997, human-caused Indonesian peat fires were estimated to have released between 13% and 40% of the average carbon emissions caused by the burning of fossil fuels around the world in a single year.[85][86][87] In the period 1751 to 1900, about 12 GtC were released as CO2 to the atmosphere from burning of fossil fuels, whereas from 1901 to 2013 the figure was about 380 GtC.[88]


So tell us are peat fires something new or something old. There are even stories of coal seam fires where there has been no exploration/excavation.

Captain Nemo wrote on Apr 9th, 2019 at 12:12am:
Anthropogenic carbon emissions exceed the amount that can be taken up or balanced out by natural sinks.[89]


From the paper [89] -

"Here we use global-scale atmospheric CO2 measurements, CO2 emission inventories and their full range of uncertainties to calculate changes in global CO2 sources and sinks during the past 50 years. Our mass balance analysis shows that net global carbon uptake has increased significantly by about 0.05 billion tonnes of carbon per year and that global carbon uptake doubled, from 2.4 ± 0.8 to 5.0 ± 0.9 billion tonnes per year, between 1960 and 2010. Therefore, it is very unlikely that both land and ocean carbon sinks have decreased on a global scale. "

Captain Nemo wrote on Apr 9th, 2019 at 12:12am:
Excess CO2 emitted since the pre-industrial era is projected to remain in the atmosphere for centuries to millennia,[91] even after emissions stop.


"We present a carbon cycle with an uptake proportional to the CO2 concentration.

• Temperature dependent natural emission and absorption rates are considered.

• The average residence time of CO2 in the atmosphere is found to be 4 years.

• Paleoclimatic CO2 variations and the actual CO2 growth rate are well reproduced.

• Human emissions only contribute 15 % to the CO2 increase over the Industrial Era."

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818116304787

Wiki is most unreliable as a source. Wink
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Captain Nemo
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16810
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Methane production/emissions in trees and forests
Reply #11 - Apr 9th, 2019 at 1:25pm
 



Direct CO2 Measurements 1958-2009
...


Burning 1 Ton of Coal makes 2.86 Tons of Carbon Dioxide


C + O2 =
CO2
(greenhouse gas) 
BAD

CO2 - C =
O2
(non-greenhouse gas)
GOOD

Back to top
« Last Edit: Apr 9th, 2019 at 1:32pm by Captain Nemo »  

Fire the LIAR in 2028!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21563
Gender: male
Re: Methane production/emissions in trees and forests
Reply #12 - Apr 9th, 2019 at 4:48pm
 
Yes petal. Now that coal provides heat in winter, light all year round, power for universities and hospitals. It makes for learning after dark. All those technological breakthroughs in science generally, medicine specifically that without good artificial light may not have happened.

Can you definitively say how much is anthro? That is total. How much is natural?

BTW - You do know that not only do oceans outgas CO2 they also emit H2O it is part of the hydrological cycle.

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
DonDeeHippy
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Cool Stuff

Posts: 2782
Australia
Gender: male
Re: Methane production/emissions in trees and forests
Reply #13 - Apr 10th, 2019 at 6:29am
 
Captain Nemo wrote on Apr 9th, 2019 at 1:25pm:



Direct CO2 Measurements 1958-2009
http://skepticalscience.com/pics/Mauna_Loa_Carbon_Dioxide.png


Burning 1 Ton of Coal makes 2.86 Tons of Carbon Dioxide


C + O2 =
CO2
(greenhouse gas) 
BAD

CO2 - C =
O2
(non-greenhouse gas)
GOOD


im sorry Nemo but how can 1 ton of coal make 2.86 tons of CO2...…. maybe 2.86 cubic metres of CO2 Wink
Back to top
 

I am me
 
IP Logged
 
Captain Nemo
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16810
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Methane production/emissions in trees and forests
Reply #14 - Apr 10th, 2019 at 10:19am
 
DonDeeHippy wrote on Apr 10th, 2019 at 6:29am:
Captain Nemo wrote on Apr 9th, 2019 at 1:25pm:



Direct CO2 Measurements 1958-2009
http://skepticalscience.com/pics/Mauna_Loa_Carbon_Dioxide.png


Burning 1 Ton of Coal makes 2.86 Tons of Carbon Dioxide


C + O2 =
CO2
(greenhouse gas) 
BAD

CO2 - C =
O2
(non-greenhouse gas)
GOOD


im sorry Nemo but how can 1 ton of coal make 2.86 tons of CO2...…. maybe 2.86 cubic metres of CO2 Wink


The Oxygen atoms combine with the Carbon atoms to form CO2

Some people don't realise that gasses actually have mass and weight, hence the combination of two atoms of Oxygen to one of Carbon in the process of combustion causes the extra mass / weight of CO2 to form.

Scary isn't it?  Shocked
Back to top
 

Fire the LIAR in 2028!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print