| Submit your comments on this article |
| Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia |
| Latest global environmental threat: Siberian ice farts |
| 2010-11-23 |
 This has never happened before.So be afraid. Very afraid. Unless, of course, the NWO guys can figure out how to redistribute resources and power into their own pockets and away from their opposition's based on this. In which case everything will be just fine. |
| Posted by:gorb |
| #12 The arctic has a low aspect angle to the sun. It really doesn't collect as much heat as say something along the equator. |
| Posted by: gorb 2010-11-23 23:33 |
| #11 And the solution is carbon credits, yada, yada. No, the real problem in the Arctic is soot. It reduces reflection from snow, and gets trapped in the shallow ice-melt lakes and warms them. If you are concerned about this problem, and it may be real, go after particulate emissions. |
| Posted by: KBK 2010-11-23 23:14 |
| #10 until the trees fought back... oh wait, that was just another bad M. Night Shyamalan movie |
| Posted by: Frank G 2010-11-23 21:19 |
| #9 I read a study yesterday that claimed Wi-Fi is killing th trees. |
| Posted by: Deacon Blues 2010-11-23 16:30 |
| #8 Yeah, come see me when Siberia melts... |
| Posted by: tu3031 2010-11-23 16:03 |
| #7 Or the UN. |
| Posted by: gorb 2010-11-23 14:58 |
| #6 but only if there is enough fixed nitrogen for the plants to take advantage of it. Which could come from methane ice. Or chicken and pig farms... |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2010-11-23 13:11 |
| #5 tw: Interesting agricultural twists. To fix additional CO2, plants need additional nitrogen. Which happens to be in worldwide shortage right now. Ironically, methane is a good source for ammonia, the simplest nitrogen fertilizer, as is petroleum. But ammonia needs to be stabilized, typically with either oxygen, as ammonium nitrate; or the far more stable mix with sulfur, producing ammonium sulfate. But at the same time, with more CO2 and nitrogen, plants need to open their respiratory pores less, which means they lose less water due to evaporation, leaving more moisture in the soil so that more plants can grow. The bottom line is that more atmospheric CO2 may result in de-desertification, and much more abundant flora and crops, but only if there is enough fixed nitrogen for the plants to take advantage of it. Which could come from methane ice. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2010-11-23 11:18 |
| #4 sounds like the source of "the pillars of fire" in Revealations |
| Posted by: 746 2010-11-23 09:42 |
| #3 How about piping the CO2 into orchards and corn fields, so the plants grow bigger and stronger faster? We need to be creative to make up for crop failures around the world, lest the poor actually starve, instead of merely going to bed hungry. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2010-11-23 09:39 |
| #2 There is not a dang thing that can be done with Siberia. However, there are enormous methane ice (clathrates) deposits under the northern oceans, that need to be "mined down", with the methane used for fuel, to reduce their significant hazard of blowing up in a big way. There are some big craters in the ocean floor from previous methane ice explosions, and having a dense, continent sized cloud of poison gas could be unpleasant. Especially if it ignites. Such undersea mining needs to be done robotically, removing methane ice, pipelining it to the surface, then incinerating it to produce energy. This produces CO2 and water. Some of the energy can be used to lower the temperature of the CO2 until it freezes, then using the dry ice both as replacement mass, and to cool the methane ice far below ignition temperature. As the dry ice sublimates, it is replaced with water ice. The energy produced could at least fractionally offset the high price of the mining. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2010-11-23 09:06 |
| #1 How did methane ever get trapped in permafrost when it was causing all that warming before the ice age? |
| Posted by: European Conservative 2010-11-23 05:01 |