Methane Mania: Methane Hydrates and Their Effects
There is no doubt that we live in precarious times. A large part of today’s global interests lie in energy production and consumption. As populations increase, there is a growing need for more and more resources to ensure a somewhat equal quality of life. We rely on large governments and world markets to help provide us with the three modern essentials for sustaining our health: food, clothing, and shelter. This means that food processing centers must be erected to house large numbers of animals. To supply the masses with clothing, we have invented large commercial and industrial factories that can thread their way through a year’s cotton crop in no time at all. Industry has adapted housing development to meet the needs of hot climates and cold climates, creating insulated hot-box units that have temperature control exclusive from the outside environment. Our ever developing modern world is dependent on large quantities of usable energy, but it is also leaving a very heavy carbon foot print in its wake. In our food processing centers, where large numbers of livestock are raised in close relations to one another, scientists find measurably elevated levels of methane gas. Commercial and Industrial factories have historically emitted countless environmental toxins in gaseous form. In our homes we primarily burn carbon-based fuels to keep ourselves warm. These things all add up to very ripe conditions for the greenhouse effect; wherein, Earth’s atmosphere becomes super-saturated with gases that trap heat from the Sun.
As our man-made lifestyles continue to need abundant sources of energy, we are slowly becoming aware of our own addition to the overall stock of greenhouse emissions. Our efforts now drive us towards fuels that burn more efficiently and emit fewer toxins. Of the various gases that fill our atmosphere, methane is currently in the spotlight. Geologists, geophysicists, chemical engineers, ecologists, paleoclimatologists, hydrologists, biogeochemists, and Quaternary anthropologists alike are flocking to their methane testing laboratories. Dennis Archer, from the University of Chicago’s Department of the Geophysical Sciences, spent time with many other scientists conducting methane tests along the Arctic coastline of Siberia (521). However, a desolate and isolated place in world geography doesn’t seem a likely place for studies of possible annihilation due to global warming. Scientists aren’t focusing on the air. There is a goldmine in oceanic and permafrost deposit methane gas research. Although escaping methane gases in the Arctic Ocean does not raise an alarm for some people, it should because the pockets of methane gas under the ocean floor and in the permafrost are vast, the gas can potentially be used as a source of alternative energy, and it may very well mark a climatic doomsday.
A very common idea of methane is related to us in the children’s rhyme, “Beans, beans, the wonderful fruit; the more you eat, the more you toot.” A more technical study of methane gas names this process, “bacterial methanogenesis” (Koh 1639). Koh relates that bacterial methanogenesis is the process by which bacteria break down organic matter, creating methane as an excreted byproduct (1639). All organic matter on Earth degrades over time. Methane occurs in nature in one of two forms, biogenic and thermogenic (Archer 521). Archer states that, “one is biological, mediated by bacteria at low temperatures, and the other is abiological, occurring spontaneously at elevated temperatures” (521). Paul Decker, from the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys says that “the other, thermogenic methane, comes from gas-prone terrestrial kerogen” (51). Kerogen, or shale-oil, forms in many ways, continually confounding researchers. Much like hydrates, kerogen falls out of the spaces between rock sediments. They say it is relatively impossible to find an exact source of kerogen, other than the type of rock it comes from, and the approximate pre-historic time period of the rock it is enclosed within (Decker 51). Geologists know that “folding” of rock formations occurs over millions of years. Shale-oil is most likely trapped during these folding processes. Fissures then occur, and methane gas seeps out from these wells (Decker 47).
There is little any of us can do about it. Gas seeps occur in nature, releasing many toxins into our environment. Long before our recorded presence on Earth, the planet was venting gases. It is because of these venting gases that our atmosphere supports life in general. The life processes of the planet feed on the gases. Methane, when it seeps into the atmosphere, breaks down into carbon dioxide. Plants survive on a diet of carbon dioxide, which they turn into oxygen. Life feeds on life.
Our planet is pouring methane. It is coming out of rocks, and it is coming out of ice. Should we believe that our planet is trying to kill us? Should we believe that we are killing the planet? We produce methane, the planet produces methane, and our atmosphere is said to be able to handle the gas. The real question is what can we do to help ourselves? We start by understanding more about what is trying to kill us.
The current atmospheric methane level is 3 Gtons (gigaton), and outside of human interaction seems to maintain an overall equilibrium with the other atmospheric gases rather well (Archer 523). The worldwide total inventory of methane comes from atmospheric counts, and from deposits of solid methane formations found deep under ocean floors and buried within the Arctic permafrost. These solid methane formations are categorized as hydrates. In their Geophysical Research Letters, Charles Paull et al surmise that, “gas hydrate is a solid phase comprised of water and low-molecular-weight gases, usually methane, that form within sediments under conditions of low temperature, high pressure and adequate gas concentration” (1). Methane hydrates also go by a second name, clathrates, as in Clathrate Gun Hypothesis. The Clathrate Gun Hypothesis theorizes that an increase in global temperature by no more than 2 degrees Celsius will melt the global ice caps, whereby releasing an estimated 700,000 trillion cubic feet of gas world-wide (Koh 1636). The Canadian Broadcasting Company, CNN News, and The Discovery Channel have only recently begun exploring this theory of global heating and consequent methane explosion. They are beginning to dig a very deep hole because many scientific questions are difficult to answer conclusively.
Reporting for Discovery News, Eliza Strickland (“A Monstrous Methane Belch”) explores what many scientists believe occurred on Earth 635 million years ago. “Paleoclimatologists believe the planets prehistoric climate shifts can help predict the effects of present-day global warming” (Strickland). She says that this period is called Snowball Earth because ice sheets extended from the poles to the equator. Methane was trapped in the ice sheets. Collapse of these ice sheets at the equator released trapped methane deposits and drove global temperatures higher. Methane then raised the temperature, leading to more collapsing ice sheets, beginning a massive feedback loop (Strickland). In his Nature Letters, Martin Kennedy analyses terrestrial geologic formations to calculate pre-historic air quantities. His paper attempts to prove that ice sheet melting was caused by permafrost methane clathrate destabilization (644). “The start of the Ediacaran period is defined by one of the most severe climate change events recorded in Earth history – the recovery from the Marinoan ‘snowball’ ice age…methane hydrate destabilization is increasingly suspected as an important positive feedback to climate change that coincides with critical boundaries in the geological record and may represent one particularly important mechanism active during conditions of strong climate change (Kennedy 642).
Articles pertaining to other possible methane explosions also circulate through popular news media. Some suggest there was a 90% loss of sea-life a few tens of thousands of years ago caused by a methane explosion. Another theorizes that a giant meteor struck the Gulf of Mexico, a location that is also considered a carbon hyper-pool. There are many conflicting stories about the origins of methane. And, a great amount of concern over our direct impact on the atmosphere and the environment. Most articles focus on our immanent doom caused by our wasteful societies. They treat the topic as if methane only now had any affect on the planet.
Methane hydrates are old news to scientists. They have been studying hydrates since as early as 1778 (Koh 1636). But, old news or not, for the first two hundred years very little was known about gas hydrates. In the mid-1990s, however, with the advent of neutron and X-ray diffraction, science could mathematically produce the hydrate molecular shapes (Koh 1637). In producing these models scientists can better understand how gas hydrates form and inter-act with the oceans, the atmosphere, and the changing conditions of the Arctic permafrost.
Permafrost is defined as ice that does not melt for two or more years. Jeremy Jacquot, from Discovery Magazine, reports that more than a trillion tons of methane is trapped in permafrost and under frozen lakes in the Arctic. Methane, he says, is 21 times more heat-trapping than carbon dioxide. “Current models of climate change do not take into consideration the potential impact of methane” (Jacquot). The report cites Katey Walter, a researcher at the University of Alaska at Fairbanks. She is reported as saying, “If left unchecked methane release will rise above levels found 10,000 years ago.” Walter’s research has taken her to Siberia where as much as 55 billion tons of methane lay inside of a 386,000 square-mile tract of Siberian permafrost. Walter says that is 10 times the current amount in the atmosphere.
The Arctic permafrost was not always present. At a distant point in planetary history the ground that is now covered in ice was the playground for immeasurable numbers of organic life forms. During formation of the current ice caps, what were once wetlands became frozen sheets of ice. All of the biomass trapped in the ice has slowly decomposed in the low temperatures, forming frozen methane, or methane hydrates. As surrounding temperatures, rise methane hydrates thaw, releasing methane gas into the atmosphere. Charles Paull et al, conducted experiments in the Beaufort Sea to better understand methane hydrates within the offshore permafrost. They studied “mud volcanoes,” “pingo-like features (PLFs)” (1). Their studies found, “more than 1,350 pingos, generally 10-40 meters tall and upwards of 100 meters or more in diameter” (1). Kim Fulton-Bennett, reporting on a Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute expedition with Paull points out that, “the seafloor in the Beaufort Sea area has been gradually warming over the past 10,000 years, after being flooded as sea levels rose at the end of the last ice age; scientists believe that over the course of thousands of years this ‘wave’ of warming moved downward through the sediment” (2). Warming in this way created hills with moat-like formations surrounding them. These features are known to actively expel methane gas. The research group explains that as surface water temperature increases, so does the permafrost lade oceanic subsurface (Paull et al 1). “Warming results in gas hydrate decomposition in a gradually thickening zone, releasing gaseous methane into the sediments. Bubble formation associated with this phase change will create over pressured conditions: material may flow both laterally and vertically in response to overpressure: displaced sediments rise upwards to form the PLF and allow gas to vent” (Paull et al 4). N. Shakhova, in his Siberian Arctic experiments, has concluded that 86.5% of the Arctic Ocean sedimentary basin is a carbon pool; generally referred to as the “Arctic carbon hyper-pool” (1).
Methane gas is trapped within water ice-shells that occupy the spaces between sediments. If these ice-shells melt, all of the methane affected by the warmth will escape. We are assured that most methane release is absorbed and used by the planet. This process is said to be a part of a much longer time cycle that is measured in kilo-years (kYr). According to the data collected by Carolyn Koh and Dendy Sloan at the American Institute of Chemical Engineers, the current methane release rate is measured against its decomposition rate (1641). Etiope et al, have assessed that these numbers show an equilibrium between atmospheric methane release and its decomposition into carbon dioxide, which the planetary wetlands use as food (83).
Scientists remain optimistic about discovering the properties of methane hydrates, and their applications. Industry is listening closely to hydrate researchers. The major obstacle in oceanic hydrate production is that hydrates exist as the cement bond between sediments lying on ocean beds (Archer 528). It is difficult to release that bond and capture the methane before the methane escapes and dissipates into its water environment, where it degrades at a rate of about 3 – 5 meters per day (Archer 528). Archer found that “a surface mixed layer 100 meters deep would approach equilibrium (degas) in about a month” (528).
Eliza Strickland (“Methane Bubbles”) says that researcher Orjan Gustafsson, and his team, found areas off the coast of Siberia showing methane levels 100 times higher than average. Gustafsson is concerned that global warming has melted sub-sea permafrost, allowing methane trapped within the permafrost during the last ice age to be released.
Steven Connor, from The Independent, reports on Orjan Gustafsson’s Siberian expedition in his article, “Exclusive: The Methane Time Bomb”. “Gustafsson found a methane field so intense that the methane did not have time to dissolve into the seawater but was rising as methane bubbles to the sea surface. To find the source of emissions the research team used echo sounder and seismic instruments. Similar anomalies have been found in the East Siberian Sea and the Laptev Sea.” Gustafsson states that nobody knows how many more areas of intense concentration like the one found are in the East Siberian continental shelves.
Steve Connor also reports that Igor Semilitov of the Far-Eastern branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences has led 10 expeditions in the Laptev Sea. “During the 1990s he did not detect any elevated levels of methane” (Connor). Semilitov has reported an increased number of methane “hotspots” have sprung up since 2003. Dr. Semiletov suggests that “relatively warmer water from Siberia’s rivers caused by the permafrost melting on land cold be responsible for the methane release in the Arctic.” The doctor and his research team found, “The Arctic region as a whole has seen a 4C rise in average temperature over recent decades and a dramatic decline in the area of the Arctic Ocean covered by summer sea ice. Open ocean soaks up more heat from the sun than the reflective surface of an ice-covered sea.”
Typically, over a depth of 700 meters, methane gas will degrade completely before reaching the surface, thus creating no sea-to-air transfer of gas. Hydrate formations, PLFs, remain stable with the overall environment at depths of 700 meters or more. It is believed by many scientists that atmospheric conditions cannot effect the ocean environment at those depths because of the very low temperatures and high pressure levels. Also, it takes thousands of years for any surface temperature change to transfer through the ocean depths to the sea floor. Elevated surface temperatures are a likely cause for melting ice caps, but the return of water into the oceans only increases the amount of pressure placed on the seabed. This means that melting ice caps would actually reinforce hydrate deposits in the deep oceans.
For the methane deposits to be released in a way that would threaten surface life there would have to be a large scale disruption of the seafloor. Geologists agree there is evidence of an ancient landslide in the Arctic Ocean that stretched half the distance from Norway to Greenland. Evidence shows this landslide might have caused a massive release of methane by disturbing the hydrates along the entire rift. They do not have conclusive evidence, but they find it a plausible cause for a prehistoric mass extinction. It is believed by many that the decaying biomass from that extinction period has formed into today’s methane hydrates. Apart from landslides, scientists believe that an already growing ice age, which will relieve pressure on the ocean floors by causing a drop in the overall sea-level by turning water into ice, will be the most likely trigger of a methane release massive enough to cause another mass extinction period.
Scientists see this as a natural process that has been occurring for eons, and will continue long after our time on Earth ends. Doomsday activists see this all as evidence of a coming global catastrophe that action needs to be taken against. Some people have become apprehensive, not about ocean bound hydrates, but land bound hydrates trapped within permafrost. Climatologists disagree as to whether or not global warming is affecting permafrost in the way described by media groups. CNN and Discovery calculate that global warming is melting the polar ice caps - to include permafrost - which releases land bound hydrates. At least one area of the Siberian Arctic has land bound permafrost hundreds of meters thick that vents methane gas. Land bound hydrates have been found within the North Slope of Alaska, and inside Canada’s North West Territory. Global warming could heat the planet enough to melt the land bound permafrost, and expose the methane hydrates. If this happened very quickly there would be a very steep rise in the atmospheric methane count, creating further global warming. Gwynne Dyer from Fast Forward News found in his report, “Time for Action: Arctic Ocean Methane Signals Catastrophe,” that methane “stays in the atmosphere around 12 years, compared to 100 years for CO2.” We are assured that there is only enough methane hydrate within the land bound permafrost to affect our daily lives for a few decades (Archer 536). It is not believed that this sort of melting would significantly damage the human population; nor is it believed to be able to trigger further methane explosions from deep under the oceans.
However, there are contingent plans. Documents show that some scientists are finding ways to reverse the feedback process. “The leading idea for doing this, suggested by Nobel Prize-winning atmospheric chemist Paul Crutzen in 2006, is to inject sulphur dioxide into the stratosphere in order to reflect some of the incoming sunlight. This mimics the action of a large volcanic eruption, which also lower the global temperature temporarily by putting huge amounts of sulphur dioxide into the upper atmosphere. Another, less intrusive approach, proposed by Prof. Stephen Salter of Edinburgh University, is to launch fleets of unmanned, wind-powered vessels, controlled by satellite, that would spray seawater up into low-lying marine clouds in order to increase the amount of sunlight that they reflect” (Dyer, Gwynne. “Time for Action: Arctic Ocean Methane Signals Catastrophe”). “However,” says Dyer, “these ideas are considered taboo in the scientific community because there is a held belief that if the public knows you can hold the global temperature down by direct intervention, people will not do the harder job of cutting their emissions.”
Rather than brood in doom and gloom, industry is searching for ways of better utilizing what is known to be a usable energy source. Technology has netted us the ability to use methane gas as a combustion fuel. Since we can make fire with it we know that it has further energy applications: applications such as heating our homes, powering our factories, and possibly fueling our vehicles. What was once thought to be ice buildup inside deep oil wells is now known to be hydrate formation and accumulation within the pipe. Oil companies had previously mixed glycol into the pipes to stop supposed ice buildup because glycol transferred higher temperature levels throughout the well depth – melting the ice. Now that they know the buildup is not ice, they are looking for ways of extracting the hydrates intact, and using the methane gas trapped within. The Aurora Research Institute in Inuvik, N.W.T has found Mallik Bay oil production units are finding ways of bringing up frozen methane trapped within sediments (CBC News). “The frozen methane is trapped within sediments, and recovery of the methane without clogging machinery with the sediments has been challenging to the research team” (CBC News). The goal is to bring hydrates to the surface without degrading the methane content (Koh 1642). They would like to retain as much methane gas as possible. Oil companies who hope to capitalize on methane hydrate production are also testing ways of recovering hydrates that form within existing production wells, taking them away from the traditional method of using glycol. They are using the hydrate mathematical models to create gas storage packets for commercial transfer (Koh 1641). It is hoped that by knowing what shapes the hydrates take, production units can systematically extract the full value of methane from sediments.
The CBC News report tells that Japan and Canada are funding the Aurora Research Project in the N.W.T. Russia, the United States, and the European Union are conducting experiments in Siberia. Australia, China, India, Korea, and several other countries have begun showing greater and greater interest in methane production; bringing CNN News to ask the question: Is the debate over global warming, or national security? By way of “depleting caches of oil, coal, and gas,” CNN suggests that world markets view methane hydrates as a needful energy resource. They also quote the Chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkel, as saying, “Even if Europe were to cut its CO2 emissions to zero, this would still fail to prevent a rise in temperature of at least two degrees.” Once global warming is stripped to its simplest components it is being realized that we still need to move forward. CNN reports suggest that a greater threat might be, “That countries’ infrastructure will grind to a halt if, through scarcity, natural disaster or terrorism, their fuel supplies are cut off.” They also report President George W. Bush as saying, during his 2006 State of the Union address, “The U.S should wean its dependence on imported oil, with a national goal of replacing more than 75 % of American oil imports from the Middle East by 2025.” There is debate that global warming will not prevail; instead, energy resources will become ever diminishing, causing world posers to compete against each other for resource recovery.
Methane hydrates have proven to be of great importance. Some believe our lives are balanced by them. Many within the science community have found the Arctic Ocean to be the best indicator of which way the methane pendulum will swing. At the same time, infrastructure suitable to methane hydrate exploitation already exists in the form of Arctic oil production. Old techniques of extraction are being reworked to accommodate methane hydrates. Mathematical models for large scale storage and transportation are being tested on sit,e at wells. Economic markets are opening up world wide to accept a new natural gas. World governments are backing the research, and consumers need the product. It is environmentally deadly, but once used as an energy resource becomes 21 times less lethal. The probability of economic boom caused by utilizing these natural energy deposits is higher than that of environmental doom. If we must act, we must act in a fiscally responsible manner, as well as an environmentally friendly one. Although science cannot agree - about the future of methane hydrates, the likelihood of a Clathrate Gun, or much of the endogenic origins of known hydrate deposits - they all view methane gas research to be valuable. Science understands the need for methane hydrate exploration. It is their research that will bring energy savings into the homes of millions of people.
Methane is more than just a foul smelling gas. It is an essential component in the life cycle of our planet. Earth expels methane, breaks it down in the atmosphere, and then uses what is left as the planets own energy source. Even though there is enough methane hydrate to destroy all life on Earth, it is not probable for all of the methane to be released at once. In the mean time it makes sense to use this natural resource, and study its formations more closely. We can not alter the fate of our planet, we can only continue. It should be one of our goals, to live as ecologically friendly as possible. We should also aim to be aware of what we are doing to our planet, and what it is doing to us. Because it seems certain that humanity will continue on past our own life times it is important to lay solid foundations of energy resource exploration, production, and distribution.
--Works Cited--
Archer, D. “Methane Hydrate Stability and Anthropogenic Climate Change.” European Geosciences Union 4 (2008): 522-44. Biogeosciences. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.biogeosciences.net>.
“The Big Debate: Global Warming or National Security?” CNN Technology News 10 May 2007. 31 Oct. 2008 http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/08/30/energy.debate/index.html?iref=newssearch.
Connor, Steve. “Exclusive: The Methane Time Bomb.” The Independent (23 Sep. 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/exclusive-the-methane-time-bomb-938932.html.
Decker, Paul L; Wartes, Marwan A. “Geochemistry of the Aupuk Gas Seep along the Colville River — Evidence for a Thermogenic Origin.” Alaska Department of Natural Resources: Geological and Geophysical Surveys PIR 2008-1E 47-54 (2008): Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.dggs.dnr.state.ak.us>.
Dyer, Gwynne. “Time for Action: Arctic Ocean Methane Signals Catastrophe.” Fast Forward Weekly (Oct. 2 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://www.ffwdweekly.com/article/news-views/international/time-for-action-2637/.
Etiope, G; Milkov, A. V; Derbyshire, E. “Did Geologic Emissions of Methane Play Any Role in Quaternary Climate Change.” Global and Planetary Change 61 (2008): 79-88. ScienceDirect Freedom Collection. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.sciencedirect.com>.
Fulton-Bennett, Kim. "Methane Bubbling Through Seafloor Creates Undersea Hills." Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute 5 Feb. 2007. 31 Oct. 2008 http://www.mbari.org/news/news_releases/2007/paull-plfs.html.
Jacquot, Jeremy. "If Life Gives You Methane, Make Methane Energy." Discover Magazine (31 Jan. 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://discovermagazine.com/2008/feb/if-life-gives-you-methane-make-methane-energy.
Kennedy, Martin; David, Mrofka; von der Borch, Chris. "Snowball Earth Termination by Destabilization of Equatorial Permafrost Methane Clathrate." Letters 453.29 (2008): 642-45. Nature. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK.31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.nature.com/nature>.
Koh, Carolyn A; Sloan, E. Dendy. “Natural Gas Hydrates: Recent Advances and Challenges in Energy and Environmental Applications.” American Institute of Chemical Engineers 53.7 (2007): 1636-43. Wiley InterScience. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.interscience.wiley.com>.
Paull, Charles K; Ussler, W; Dallimore, Scott R; Blasco, Steve M; Lorenson, Thomas D; Melling, Humfrey;Medioli, Barbara E; Nixon, F. Mark; McLaughlin, Fiona A. “Origin of Pingo-Like Features on the Beaufort Sea Shelf and Their Possible Relationship to Decomposing Methane Gas Hydrates.” Geophysical Research Letters 34 (2007): 1-5. American Geophysical Union. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.agu.org>.
“Scientists Tapping Arctic Ocean Methane as Potential Cleaner Energy Source.” CBC News 27 Feb. 2007. 31 Oct. 2008 http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/02/27/nwt-methane.html.
Shakhova, N; “Methane Release on the Arctic East Siberian Shelf.” Geophysical Research Abstracts 9 (2007): 1-2. INK"http://www.egu.eu/"European Geosciences Union. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.egu.eu>.
Strickland, Eliza. "Methane Bubbles in the Arctic Ocean Give Climate Scientists the Willies." Discover Magazine (24 Sept. 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/09/24/methane-bubbles-in-the-arctic-ocean-give-climate-scientists-the-willies/.
--- "A Monstrous Methane Belch Once Warmed the Earth." Discover Magazine (29 May 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/05/29/a-monstrous-methane-belch/.
13 December 2008
07 December 2008
ESSAY 3: ARGUMENT OF CAUSE - Final Draft
Where Are You and What Are You Doing There?
History teaches us that there is no escape from life. As humans on planet earth we are born into a family, a clan, a tribe, a culture; we are born into a heritage and an ancestry, a world of social order that has worked to achieve perfection for millennia. We have built the world up around us, and we assume that everything is in its right place. Plodding along day after day, we become accustom to routine and a sameness that dusts over everything. In a world that has become so small with our growing population it is difficult to “slow down and smell the roses.” Then, when a person does that they might think they can kick through a rock. Why do we think the way we think? How come when I want to be happy I get upset? What can I do to help set my own mind at ease? We are not just playing simple mind games with ourselves. There is a real cause behind our actions. Although most of us rarely take stock of our surroundings, we are affected by our set and setting because we are a product of our environment, we become a part of the situation around us, and we are influenced by our senses.
In his voluminous philosophical account, Being and Time, Martin Heidegger categorically explores the experiences of one’s Self. Inside the section titled, “Analysis of Environmentality and Worldhood in General,” he steps inside the cause of set and settings effects (95). Under the same heading, and within the sub-section, “How the worldy Character of the Environment Announces itself in Entities Within-the-world,” he asks the crucial questions, “But in what way ‘is there’ a world? Does not something like the world show itself for concernful Being-in-the-world? Do we not have a pre-phenomenological glimpse of this phenomena? Do we not have such a glimpse of it, without having to take it as a theme for ontological Interpretation?” (102) Heidegger goes on to explain that as we perceive and use things in the world around us we are constantly relegating these things into mental groupings: Usable, and unusable. It is revealed that when we experience a thing relegated as unusable, “the helpless way in which we stand before it is a deficient mode of concern, and as such it uncovers the Being-just-present-at-hand-and-no-more of something ready-to-hand” (103). To sum up the idea of our perception of things in our environment Heidegger states that, “In conspicuousness, obtrusiveness, and obstinancy, that which is ready-to-hand loses its readiness-to-hand in a certain way” (104).
Early in his discourse Martin Heidegger defines only a particular sense of Self. As a segue to his conclusions of Time and Temporality he analyzes the point that, “whenever we encounter anything, the world has already been previously discovered, though not thematically" (114). Through the explorations of themes, emotions, and context he brings to question our temporality. In the section of his book, “The Temporal Meaning of the Way in which Circumspective Concern becomes Modified into the Theoretical Discovery of the Present-at-hand Within-the-world,” he points out a very curious relationship between ourselves and our set and setting (408). He states that, “this formulation of the question is aimed at an existential conception of science” (408). This is not the typical association of science, as an existential concept. But, Heidegger assures us that “it is by no means patent where the ontological boundary between ‘theoretical’ and ‘atheoretical’ behavior really runs! What is essential to it is that one should have a primary understanding of the totality of involvements within which factical concern always takes its start” (409-10). He shows us, in a scientifically existential way, just how we become affected by the world around us.
But perhaps Heidegger’s message becomes washed out with language, and is taken as confusing philosophy. Rather than pouring over philosophical manuscripts, it is common to look for inner peace through religion or some form of meditation. Bhante Henepola Gunaratana describes, in detail, the methods of vipassana meditation in his book, Mindfulness: In Plain English. In discussing faith and morality as basic tenants of meditation he says, “it [Faith] is knowing that something is true because you have seen it work, because you have observed that very thing within yourself. In the same way, morality is not a ritualistic obedience code of behavior imposed by an external authority. It is rather a healthy habit pattern that you have consciously and voluntarily chosen to impose upon yourself because you recognize its superiority to your present behavior” (16). Gunaratana describes meditation in loose terms stating that “probably every culture on earth has produced some sort of mental practice that could be termed meditation” (29). He says, “the thinking process operates by association, and all sorts of ideas are associated with the word “meditation”...in fact, unless your life is immoral and chaotic, you can probably get started right away and make some progress” (17).
Set and setting are primary factors when meditating, or attempting to meditate. “Zen meditation uses two separate tacks. The first is the direct plunge into awareness by sheer force of will. You sit down and you just sit, meaning that you toss out of your mind everything except pure awareness of sitting. The second Zen approach, used in the Rinzai school, is that of tricking the mind out of conscious thought and into pure awareness. This is done by giving a student an unsolvable riddle, which he (or she) must solve nonetheless, and by placing him in a horrendous training situation. Since he cannot escape from the pain of the situation, he must flee into a pure experience of the moment: there is nowhere else to go” (Gunaratana 30). Gunaratana believes that our need for meditation arises from the fact that “we are simply not paying enough attention to notice that we are not paying attention” (32). “It could be anything,” he says, “an attractive woman, a handsome guy, a speedboat, the aroma of fresh baked bread, a truck tailgating you, anything. Whatever it is, the very next thing we do is to react to stimulus with a feeling about it” (Gunaratana 36).
In ways that are difficult to objectively identify we make choices and act in response to our surroundings. Most people go through their days without taking a mindful inventory of what is occurring around them. It is important to be mindful because our decisions are based on our surroundings. The choices and decisions we make stretch beyond ourselves and begin outside of ourselves. We couldn’t have come as far as we have if humankind took a flying leap every time chaos closed in around us. We seek out shelter and succor to protect not only our bodies, but our minds from the harms in the world. Our mental protection can begin with situational awareness, and knowing the effects our surroundings have on us. A good day begins with a light breakfast. A bad day begins with no heat in the middle of winter. In both instances we woke up as usual; but our set and setting make for very different outcomes.
--Works Cited--
Gunaratana, Bhante. Mindfulness: In Plain English. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2002.
Heidegger, Martin. Being and Time. Trans. John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson. San Francisco. Harper Collins Publishers, 1962.
History teaches us that there is no escape from life. As humans on planet earth we are born into a family, a clan, a tribe, a culture; we are born into a heritage and an ancestry, a world of social order that has worked to achieve perfection for millennia. We have built the world up around us, and we assume that everything is in its right place. Plodding along day after day, we become accustom to routine and a sameness that dusts over everything. In a world that has become so small with our growing population it is difficult to “slow down and smell the roses.” Then, when a person does that they might think they can kick through a rock. Why do we think the way we think? How come when I want to be happy I get upset? What can I do to help set my own mind at ease? We are not just playing simple mind games with ourselves. There is a real cause behind our actions. Although most of us rarely take stock of our surroundings, we are affected by our set and setting because we are a product of our environment, we become a part of the situation around us, and we are influenced by our senses.
In his voluminous philosophical account, Being and Time, Martin Heidegger categorically explores the experiences of one’s Self. Inside the section titled, “Analysis of Environmentality and Worldhood in General,” he steps inside the cause of set and settings effects (95). Under the same heading, and within the sub-section, “How the worldy Character of the Environment Announces itself in Entities Within-the-world,” he asks the crucial questions, “But in what way ‘is there’ a world? Does not something like the world show itself for concernful Being-in-the-world? Do we not have a pre-phenomenological glimpse of this phenomena? Do we not have such a glimpse of it, without having to take it as a theme for ontological Interpretation?” (102) Heidegger goes on to explain that as we perceive and use things in the world around us we are constantly relegating these things into mental groupings: Usable, and unusable. It is revealed that when we experience a thing relegated as unusable, “the helpless way in which we stand before it is a deficient mode of concern, and as such it uncovers the Being-just-present-at-hand-and-no-more of something ready-to-hand” (103). To sum up the idea of our perception of things in our environment Heidegger states that, “In conspicuousness, obtrusiveness, and obstinancy, that which is ready-to-hand loses its readiness-to-hand in a certain way” (104).
Early in his discourse Martin Heidegger defines only a particular sense of Self. As a segue to his conclusions of Time and Temporality he analyzes the point that, “whenever we encounter anything, the world has already been previously discovered, though not thematically" (114). Through the explorations of themes, emotions, and context he brings to question our temporality. In the section of his book, “The Temporal Meaning of the Way in which Circumspective Concern becomes Modified into the Theoretical Discovery of the Present-at-hand Within-the-world,” he points out a very curious relationship between ourselves and our set and setting (408). He states that, “this formulation of the question is aimed at an existential conception of science” (408). This is not the typical association of science, as an existential concept. But, Heidegger assures us that “it is by no means patent where the ontological boundary between ‘theoretical’ and ‘atheoretical’ behavior really runs! What is essential to it is that one should have a primary understanding of the totality of involvements within which factical concern always takes its start” (409-10). He shows us, in a scientifically existential way, just how we become affected by the world around us.
But perhaps Heidegger’s message becomes washed out with language, and is taken as confusing philosophy. Rather than pouring over philosophical manuscripts, it is common to look for inner peace through religion or some form of meditation. Bhante Henepola Gunaratana describes, in detail, the methods of vipassana meditation in his book, Mindfulness: In Plain English. In discussing faith and morality as basic tenants of meditation he says, “it [Faith] is knowing that something is true because you have seen it work, because you have observed that very thing within yourself. In the same way, morality is not a ritualistic obedience code of behavior imposed by an external authority. It is rather a healthy habit pattern that you have consciously and voluntarily chosen to impose upon yourself because you recognize its superiority to your present behavior” (16). Gunaratana describes meditation in loose terms stating that “probably every culture on earth has produced some sort of mental practice that could be termed meditation” (29). He says, “the thinking process operates by association, and all sorts of ideas are associated with the word “meditation”...in fact, unless your life is immoral and chaotic, you can probably get started right away and make some progress” (17).
Set and setting are primary factors when meditating, or attempting to meditate. “Zen meditation uses two separate tacks. The first is the direct plunge into awareness by sheer force of will. You sit down and you just sit, meaning that you toss out of your mind everything except pure awareness of sitting. The second Zen approach, used in the Rinzai school, is that of tricking the mind out of conscious thought and into pure awareness. This is done by giving a student an unsolvable riddle, which he (or she) must solve nonetheless, and by placing him in a horrendous training situation. Since he cannot escape from the pain of the situation, he must flee into a pure experience of the moment: there is nowhere else to go” (Gunaratana 30). Gunaratana believes that our need for meditation arises from the fact that “we are simply not paying enough attention to notice that we are not paying attention” (32). “It could be anything,” he says, “an attractive woman, a handsome guy, a speedboat, the aroma of fresh baked bread, a truck tailgating you, anything. Whatever it is, the very next thing we do is to react to stimulus with a feeling about it” (Gunaratana 36).
In ways that are difficult to objectively identify we make choices and act in response to our surroundings. Most people go through their days without taking a mindful inventory of what is occurring around them. It is important to be mindful because our decisions are based on our surroundings. The choices and decisions we make stretch beyond ourselves and begin outside of ourselves. We couldn’t have come as far as we have if humankind took a flying leap every time chaos closed in around us. We seek out shelter and succor to protect not only our bodies, but our minds from the harms in the world. Our mental protection can begin with situational awareness, and knowing the effects our surroundings have on us. A good day begins with a light breakfast. A bad day begins with no heat in the middle of winter. In both instances we woke up as usual; but our set and setting make for very different outcomes.
--Works Cited--
Gunaratana, Bhante. Mindfulness: In Plain English. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2002.
Heidegger, Martin. Being and Time. Trans. John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson. San Francisco. Harper Collins Publishers, 1962.
28 November 2008
Part 4: Rough Draft #2
Methane Mania: Methane Hydrates and Their Effects
There is no doubt that we live in precarious times. A large part of today’s global interests lie in energy production and consumption. As populations increase there is a growing need for more and more resources to ensure a somewhat equal quality of life. We rely on large governments and world markets to help provide us with the three modern essentials for sustaining our health: food, clothing, and shelter. This means that food processing centers must be erected to house large numbers of animals. To supply the masses with clothing we have invented large commercial and industrial factories that can thread their way through a year’s cotton crop in no time at all. Industry has adapted housing development to meet the needs of hot climates and cold climates, creating insulated hot-box units that have temperature control exclusive from the outside environment. Our ever developing modern world is dependent on large quantities of usable energy, but it is also leaving a very heavy carbon foot print in its wake. In our food processing centers, where large numbers of livestock are raised in close relations to one another, scientists find measurably elevated levels of methane gas. Commercial and Industrial factories have historically emitted countless environmental toxins in gaseous form. In our homes we primarily burn carbon-based fuels to keep ourselves warm. These things all add up to very ripe conditions for the greenhouse effect; wherein, Earth’s atmosphere becomes super-saturated with gases that trap heat from the Sun.
As our man-made lifestyles continue to need abundant sources of energy we are slowly becoming aware of our own addition to the overall stock of greenhouse emissions. Our efforts now drive us towards fuels that burn more efficiently and less toxically. Of the various gases that fill our atmosphere, methane is currently in the spotlight. Geologists, geophysicists, chemical engineers, ecologists, paleoclimatologists, hydrologists, biogeochemists, and Quaternary anthropologists alike are flocking to their methane testing laboratories. D. Archer, from the University of Chicago’s Department of the Geophysical Sciences, spent time conducting methane tests along the Arctic coastline of Siberia (521). However, a desolate and isolated place in world geography doesn’t seem a likely place for studies of possible annihilation due to heavy amounts of methane. Scientists aren’t focusing on the air. There is a goldmine in oceanic and permafrost deposit methane gas research. Although escaping methane gases in the Arctic Ocean does not raise an alarm for some people, it should because the pockets of methane gas under the ocean floor and in the permafrost are vast, the gas can potentially be used as a source of alternative energy, and it may very well mark a climactic doomsday.
A very common idea of methane is related to us in the children’s rhyme, “Beans, beans, the wonderful fruit; the more you eat, the more you toot.” A more technical study of methane gas names this process “bacterial methanogenesis” (Koh & Sloan 1639). Koh and Sloan relate that bacterial methanogenesis is the process by which bacteria breakdown organic matter, creating methane as an excreted byproduct (1639). All organic matter on Earth degrades over time. Methane occurs in nature in one of two forms, biogenic and thermogenic (Archer 521). Archer states that, “one is biological, mediated by bacteria at low temperatures, and the other is abiological, occurring spontaneously at elevated temperatures” (521). The current atmospheric methane level is 3 Gtons (gigaton), and outside of human interaction seems to maintain an overall equilibrium with the other atmospheric gases rather well (Archer 523).
The total inventory of methane comes from atmospheric counts, and from deposits of solid methane formations found deep under ocean floors and buried within the Arctic permafrost. These solid methane formations are categorized as hydrates. In their Geophysical Research Letters, Charles Paull et al surmise that, “gas hydrate is a solid phase comprised of water and low-molecular-weight gases, usually methane, that forms within sediments under conditions of low temperature, high pressure and adequate gas concentration” (1). Methane hydrates also go by a second name, clathrates, as in Clathrate Gun Hypothesis. The Clathrate Gun Hypothesis theorizes that an increase in global temperature by no more than 2 degrees Celsius will melt the global ice caps, whereby releasing an estimated 700,000 trillion cubic feet of gas world-wide (Koh & Sloan 1636). The Canadian Broadcasting Company, CNN News, and The Discovery Channel have only recently begun exploring this theory of global heating and consequent methane explosion. Scientists aren’t perturbed by the news. According to them science has known about gas hydrates since as early as 1778 (Koh & Sloan 1636).
Old news or not, for two hundred years very little was known about gas hydrates. It wasn’t until the mid-1990s and the advent of neutron and X-ray diffraction that science could mathematically produce the hydrate molecular shapes (Koh & Sloan 1637). In producing these models scientists can better understand how gas hydrates, and clathrates form and inter-act with the environment.
The Arctic permafrost was not always present. At a distant point in planetary history the ground that is now covered in ice was the playground for immeasurable numbers of organic life forms. During formation of the current ice caps, what were once wetlands became frozen ice sheets (Eliza Strickland). All of the biomass trapped in the ice has slowly decomposed in the low temperatures, forming frozen methane, or methane hydrates. As surrounding temperatures rise methane hydrates thaw releasing methane gas into the atmosphere. Charles Paull, et al. conducted experiments in the Beaufort Sea to better understand methane hydrates within the offshore permafrost. They studied “mud volcanoes,” “pingo-like features (PLFs)” (1). Their studies found, “more than 1,350 pingos, generally 10-40 meters tall and upwards of 100 meters or more in diameter” (1). These features are known to actively expel methane gas. The research group explains that as surface water temperature increases, so does the permafrost laden oceanic subsurface (Paull, et al. 1). “Warming results in gas hydrate decomposition in a gradually thickening zone, releasing gaseous methane into the sediments. Bubble formation associated with this phase change will create overpressured conditions: material may flow both laterally and vertically in response to overpressure: displaced sediments rise upwards to form the PLF and allow gas to vent” (Paull, et al. 4). N. Shakhova, in his Siberian Arctic experiments, has concluded that 86.5% of the Arctic Ocean sedimentary basin is a carbon pool; generally referred to as the “Arctic carbon hyper-pool” (1).
Methane gas is trapped within ice-shells that occupy the spaces between sediments. If these ice-shells melt, all of the methane affected by the warmth will escape. We are assured that most methane release is absorbed and used by the planet. This process is said to be a part of a much longer time cycle that is measured in kilo-years (kYr). According to the data collected by Koh and Sloan the current methane release rate is measured against its decomposition rate (1641). Etiope, at al. have assessed that these numbers show an equilibrium between atmospheric methane release and its decomposition into carbon dioxide, which the planetary wetlands use as food (83).
Scientists remain optimistic about discovering the properties of methane hydrates, and their uses. The major obstacle in hydrate production is that hydrates exist as the cement bond between sediments lying on ocean beds (D. Archer 528). It is difficult to release that bond and capture the methane before the methane escapes into its water environment, where it degrades at a rate of about 3 – 5 meters per day (D. Archer 528). Archer found that “a surface mixed layer 100 meters deep would approach equilibrium (degas) in about a month” (528). Typically, over a depth of 700 meters, methane gas will degrade completely before reaching the surface, thus creating no sea-to-air transfer of gas. Hydrate formations remain stable with the overall environment at depths of 700 meters or more. It is believed that atmospheric conditions cannot effect the ocean environment at those depths because of the temperature constants and high pressure levels. This means that global melting would actually reinforce hydrate deposits in the deep oceans by raising pressure levels on the sea floor. Geologists agree there is evidence of an ancient landslide in the Arctic Ocean that stretched half the distance from Norway to Greenland. Evidence shows this landslide might have caused a massive release of methane by disturbing the hydrates along the entire rift. They do not have conclusive evidence, but they find it a plausible cause for prehistoric mass extinction. The decaying biomass from that extinction period has formed into today’s methane hydrates.
Doomsday activists see this as evidence of a coming global catastrophe. Scientists, however, see this as a natural process that has been occurring for eons, and will continue long after our time on Earth ends. Some people have become apprehensive, not about ocean bound hydrates, but land bound hydrates trapped within permafrost. Climatologists disagree as to whether or not global warming is affecting permafrost in the way described by media groups. CNN and Discovery calculate that global warming is melting the polar ice caps - to include permafrost - which releases land bound hydrates. Permafrost is defined as ice that forms and does not melt for a period of two years or more. One area of the Siberian Arctic has land bound permafrost hundreds of meters thick that vents methane gas. Land bound hydrates have been found within the North Slope of Alaska. Global warming could heat the planet enough to melt the land bound permafrost, and expose the methane hydrates. If this happened very quickly there would be a very steep rise in the atmospheric methane count, creating further global warming. We are assured though that there is only enough methane hydrate within the land bound permafrost to affect our daily lives for a few decades (D. Archer 536). It is not believed that this sort of melting would significantly damage the human population; nor is it believed to be able to trigger further methane explosions further under the oceans. Apart from landslides, scientists believe that a growing ice age, which would relieve pressure from the ocean floors, would be the most likely trigger of a methane release massive enough to cause another mass extinction period.
Rather than brood in doom and gloom, industry is searching for ways of better utilizing what is known to be a usable energy source. Technology has netted us the ability to use methane gas as a combustion fuel. Since we can make fire with it we know that it has further energy applications: applications such as heating our homes, powering our factories, and possibly fueling our vehicles. What was once thought to be ice buildup inside deep oil wells is now known to be hydrate formation and accumulation within the pipe. Oil companies had previously mixed glycol into the pipes to stop supposed ice buildup because glycol transferred higher temperature levels throughout the well depth. Now they are looking for ways of extracting the hydrates intact, and using the methane gas trapped within. The challenge is in bringing the hydrates to the surface without degrading the methane content (Koh and Sloan 1642). There is also excitement about using the hydrate models to create gas storage packets for commercial transfer (Koh and Sloan 1641)).
Methane hydrates have proven to be of great importance. Some believe our lives are balanced by them. There are many within the science community who have found the Arctic Ocean coasts to be the best indicator of which way the methane pendulum will swing. At the same time, infrastructure suitable to methane hydrate exploitation already exists in the form of Arctic oil production. The probability of economic boom caused by utilizing these natural energy deposits is higher than that of environmental doom. Although science cannot agree about the future of methane hydrates, the likelihood of a Clathrate Gun, or much of the endogenic origins of known hydrate deposits, they all view methane gas research through core sampling to be valuable. It is this research that will bring energy savings into the homes of many people.
Methane is more than just a foul smelling gas. It is an essential component in the life cycle of our planet. Earth expels methane, breaks it down in the atmosphere, and then uses what is left as the planets own energy source. Even though there exists enough methane hydrate to destroy all life on Earth, it is not possible for all of the methane to be released at once. In the mean time it only makes sense to use this natural resource, and study its formations more closely.
--Works Cited--
Archer, D. “Methane Hydrate Stability and Anthropogenic Climate Change.” European Geosciences Union 4 (2008): 522-44. Biogeosciences. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.biogeosciences.net>.
Etiope, G; Milkov, A. V; Derbyshire, E. “Did Geologic Emissions of Methane Play Any Role in Quaternary Climate Change.” Global and Planetary Change 61 (2008): 79-88. ScienceDirect Freedom Collection. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.sciencedirect.com>.
Jacquot, Jeremy. "If Life Gives You Methane, Make Methane Energy." Discover Magazine (31 Jan. 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://discovermagazine.com/2008/feb/if-life-gives-you-methane-make-methane-energy.
Koh, Carolyn A; Sloan, E. Dendy. “Natural Gas Hydrates: Recent Advances and Challenges in Energy and Environmental Applications.” American Institute of Chemical Engineers 53.7 (2007): 1636-43. Wiley Interscience. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.interscience.wiley.com>.
Paull, Charles K; Ussler, W; Dallimore, Scott R; Blasco, Steve M; Lorenson, Thomas D; Melling, Humfrey;Medioli, Barbara E; Nixon, F. Mark; McLaughlin, Fiona A. “Origin of Pingo-Like Features on the Beaufort Sea Shelf and Their Possible Relationship to Decomposing Methane Gas Hydrates.” Geophysical Research Letters 34 (2007): 1-5. American Geophysical Union. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.agu.org>.
Shakhova, N; “Methane Release on the Arctic East Siberian Shelf.” Geophysical Research Abstracts 9 (2007): 1-2. European Geosciences Union. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.egu.eu>.
Strickland, Eliza. "A Monstrous Methane Belch Once Warmed the Earth." Discover Magazine (29 May 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/05/29/a-monstrous-methane-belch/.
Strickland, Eliza. "Methane Bubbles in the Arctic Ocean Give Climate Scientists the Willies." Discover Magazine (24 Sept. 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/09/24/methane-bubbles-in-the-arctic-ocean-give-climate-scientists-the-willies/.
“The Big Debate: Global Warming or National Security?” CNN Technology News 10 May 2007. 31 Oct. 2008 http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/08/30/energy.debate/index.html?iref=newssearch.
“Scientists Tapping Arctic Ocean Methane as Potential Cleaner Energy Source.” CBC News 27 Feb. 2007. 31 Oct. 2008 http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/02/27/nwt-methane.html.
There is no doubt that we live in precarious times. A large part of today’s global interests lie in energy production and consumption. As populations increase there is a growing need for more and more resources to ensure a somewhat equal quality of life. We rely on large governments and world markets to help provide us with the three modern essentials for sustaining our health: food, clothing, and shelter. This means that food processing centers must be erected to house large numbers of animals. To supply the masses with clothing we have invented large commercial and industrial factories that can thread their way through a year’s cotton crop in no time at all. Industry has adapted housing development to meet the needs of hot climates and cold climates, creating insulated hot-box units that have temperature control exclusive from the outside environment. Our ever developing modern world is dependent on large quantities of usable energy, but it is also leaving a very heavy carbon foot print in its wake. In our food processing centers, where large numbers of livestock are raised in close relations to one another, scientists find measurably elevated levels of methane gas. Commercial and Industrial factories have historically emitted countless environmental toxins in gaseous form. In our homes we primarily burn carbon-based fuels to keep ourselves warm. These things all add up to very ripe conditions for the greenhouse effect; wherein, Earth’s atmosphere becomes super-saturated with gases that trap heat from the Sun.
As our man-made lifestyles continue to need abundant sources of energy we are slowly becoming aware of our own addition to the overall stock of greenhouse emissions. Our efforts now drive us towards fuels that burn more efficiently and less toxically. Of the various gases that fill our atmosphere, methane is currently in the spotlight. Geologists, geophysicists, chemical engineers, ecologists, paleoclimatologists, hydrologists, biogeochemists, and Quaternary anthropologists alike are flocking to their methane testing laboratories. D. Archer, from the University of Chicago’s Department of the Geophysical Sciences, spent time conducting methane tests along the Arctic coastline of Siberia (521). However, a desolate and isolated place in world geography doesn’t seem a likely place for studies of possible annihilation due to heavy amounts of methane. Scientists aren’t focusing on the air. There is a goldmine in oceanic and permafrost deposit methane gas research. Although escaping methane gases in the Arctic Ocean does not raise an alarm for some people, it should because the pockets of methane gas under the ocean floor and in the permafrost are vast, the gas can potentially be used as a source of alternative energy, and it may very well mark a climactic doomsday.
A very common idea of methane is related to us in the children’s rhyme, “Beans, beans, the wonderful fruit; the more you eat, the more you toot.” A more technical study of methane gas names this process “bacterial methanogenesis” (Koh & Sloan 1639). Koh and Sloan relate that bacterial methanogenesis is the process by which bacteria breakdown organic matter, creating methane as an excreted byproduct (1639). All organic matter on Earth degrades over time. Methane occurs in nature in one of two forms, biogenic and thermogenic (Archer 521). Archer states that, “one is biological, mediated by bacteria at low temperatures, and the other is abiological, occurring spontaneously at elevated temperatures” (521). The current atmospheric methane level is 3 Gtons (gigaton), and outside of human interaction seems to maintain an overall equilibrium with the other atmospheric gases rather well (Archer 523).
The total inventory of methane comes from atmospheric counts, and from deposits of solid methane formations found deep under ocean floors and buried within the Arctic permafrost. These solid methane formations are categorized as hydrates. In their Geophysical Research Letters, Charles Paull et al surmise that, “gas hydrate is a solid phase comprised of water and low-molecular-weight gases, usually methane, that forms within sediments under conditions of low temperature, high pressure and adequate gas concentration” (1). Methane hydrates also go by a second name, clathrates, as in Clathrate Gun Hypothesis. The Clathrate Gun Hypothesis theorizes that an increase in global temperature by no more than 2 degrees Celsius will melt the global ice caps, whereby releasing an estimated 700,000 trillion cubic feet of gas world-wide (Koh & Sloan 1636). The Canadian Broadcasting Company, CNN News, and The Discovery Channel have only recently begun exploring this theory of global heating and consequent methane explosion. Scientists aren’t perturbed by the news. According to them science has known about gas hydrates since as early as 1778 (Koh & Sloan 1636).
Old news or not, for two hundred years very little was known about gas hydrates. It wasn’t until the mid-1990s and the advent of neutron and X-ray diffraction that science could mathematically produce the hydrate molecular shapes (Koh & Sloan 1637). In producing these models scientists can better understand how gas hydrates, and clathrates form and inter-act with the environment.
The Arctic permafrost was not always present. At a distant point in planetary history the ground that is now covered in ice was the playground for immeasurable numbers of organic life forms. During formation of the current ice caps, what were once wetlands became frozen ice sheets (Eliza Strickland). All of the biomass trapped in the ice has slowly decomposed in the low temperatures, forming frozen methane, or methane hydrates. As surrounding temperatures rise methane hydrates thaw releasing methane gas into the atmosphere. Charles Paull, et al. conducted experiments in the Beaufort Sea to better understand methane hydrates within the offshore permafrost. They studied “mud volcanoes,” “pingo-like features (PLFs)” (1). Their studies found, “more than 1,350 pingos, generally 10-40 meters tall and upwards of 100 meters or more in diameter” (1). These features are known to actively expel methane gas. The research group explains that as surface water temperature increases, so does the permafrost laden oceanic subsurface (Paull, et al. 1). “Warming results in gas hydrate decomposition in a gradually thickening zone, releasing gaseous methane into the sediments. Bubble formation associated with this phase change will create overpressured conditions: material may flow both laterally and vertically in response to overpressure: displaced sediments rise upwards to form the PLF and allow gas to vent” (Paull, et al. 4). N. Shakhova, in his Siberian Arctic experiments, has concluded that 86.5% of the Arctic Ocean sedimentary basin is a carbon pool; generally referred to as the “Arctic carbon hyper-pool” (1).
Methane gas is trapped within ice-shells that occupy the spaces between sediments. If these ice-shells melt, all of the methane affected by the warmth will escape. We are assured that most methane release is absorbed and used by the planet. This process is said to be a part of a much longer time cycle that is measured in kilo-years (kYr). According to the data collected by Koh and Sloan the current methane release rate is measured against its decomposition rate (1641). Etiope, at al. have assessed that these numbers show an equilibrium between atmospheric methane release and its decomposition into carbon dioxide, which the planetary wetlands use as food (83).
Scientists remain optimistic about discovering the properties of methane hydrates, and their uses. The major obstacle in hydrate production is that hydrates exist as the cement bond between sediments lying on ocean beds (D. Archer 528). It is difficult to release that bond and capture the methane before the methane escapes into its water environment, where it degrades at a rate of about 3 – 5 meters per day (D. Archer 528). Archer found that “a surface mixed layer 100 meters deep would approach equilibrium (degas) in about a month” (528). Typically, over a depth of 700 meters, methane gas will degrade completely before reaching the surface, thus creating no sea-to-air transfer of gas. Hydrate formations remain stable with the overall environment at depths of 700 meters or more. It is believed that atmospheric conditions cannot effect the ocean environment at those depths because of the temperature constants and high pressure levels. This means that global melting would actually reinforce hydrate deposits in the deep oceans by raising pressure levels on the sea floor. Geologists agree there is evidence of an ancient landslide in the Arctic Ocean that stretched half the distance from Norway to Greenland. Evidence shows this landslide might have caused a massive release of methane by disturbing the hydrates along the entire rift. They do not have conclusive evidence, but they find it a plausible cause for prehistoric mass extinction. The decaying biomass from that extinction period has formed into today’s methane hydrates.
Doomsday activists see this as evidence of a coming global catastrophe. Scientists, however, see this as a natural process that has been occurring for eons, and will continue long after our time on Earth ends. Some people have become apprehensive, not about ocean bound hydrates, but land bound hydrates trapped within permafrost. Climatologists disagree as to whether or not global warming is affecting permafrost in the way described by media groups. CNN and Discovery calculate that global warming is melting the polar ice caps - to include permafrost - which releases land bound hydrates. Permafrost is defined as ice that forms and does not melt for a period of two years or more. One area of the Siberian Arctic has land bound permafrost hundreds of meters thick that vents methane gas. Land bound hydrates have been found within the North Slope of Alaska. Global warming could heat the planet enough to melt the land bound permafrost, and expose the methane hydrates. If this happened very quickly there would be a very steep rise in the atmospheric methane count, creating further global warming. We are assured though that there is only enough methane hydrate within the land bound permafrost to affect our daily lives for a few decades (D. Archer 536). It is not believed that this sort of melting would significantly damage the human population; nor is it believed to be able to trigger further methane explosions further under the oceans. Apart from landslides, scientists believe that a growing ice age, which would relieve pressure from the ocean floors, would be the most likely trigger of a methane release massive enough to cause another mass extinction period.
Rather than brood in doom and gloom, industry is searching for ways of better utilizing what is known to be a usable energy source. Technology has netted us the ability to use methane gas as a combustion fuel. Since we can make fire with it we know that it has further energy applications: applications such as heating our homes, powering our factories, and possibly fueling our vehicles. What was once thought to be ice buildup inside deep oil wells is now known to be hydrate formation and accumulation within the pipe. Oil companies had previously mixed glycol into the pipes to stop supposed ice buildup because glycol transferred higher temperature levels throughout the well depth. Now they are looking for ways of extracting the hydrates intact, and using the methane gas trapped within. The challenge is in bringing the hydrates to the surface without degrading the methane content (Koh and Sloan 1642). There is also excitement about using the hydrate models to create gas storage packets for commercial transfer (Koh and Sloan 1641)).
Methane hydrates have proven to be of great importance. Some believe our lives are balanced by them. There are many within the science community who have found the Arctic Ocean coasts to be the best indicator of which way the methane pendulum will swing. At the same time, infrastructure suitable to methane hydrate exploitation already exists in the form of Arctic oil production. The probability of economic boom caused by utilizing these natural energy deposits is higher than that of environmental doom. Although science cannot agree about the future of methane hydrates, the likelihood of a Clathrate Gun, or much of the endogenic origins of known hydrate deposits, they all view methane gas research through core sampling to be valuable. It is this research that will bring energy savings into the homes of many people.
Methane is more than just a foul smelling gas. It is an essential component in the life cycle of our planet. Earth expels methane, breaks it down in the atmosphere, and then uses what is left as the planets own energy source. Even though there exists enough methane hydrate to destroy all life on Earth, it is not possible for all of the methane to be released at once. In the mean time it only makes sense to use this natural resource, and study its formations more closely.
--Works Cited--
Archer, D. “Methane Hydrate Stability and Anthropogenic Climate Change.” European Geosciences Union 4 (2008): 522-44. Biogeosciences. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.biogeosciences.net>.
Etiope, G; Milkov, A. V; Derbyshire, E. “Did Geologic Emissions of Methane Play Any Role in Quaternary Climate Change.” Global and Planetary Change 61 (2008): 79-88. ScienceDirect Freedom Collection. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.sciencedirect.com>.
Jacquot, Jeremy. "If Life Gives You Methane, Make Methane Energy." Discover Magazine (31 Jan. 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://discovermagazine.com/2008/feb/if-life-gives-you-methane-make-methane-energy.
Koh, Carolyn A; Sloan, E. Dendy. “Natural Gas Hydrates: Recent Advances and Challenges in Energy and Environmental Applications.” American Institute of Chemical Engineers 53.7 (2007): 1636-43. Wiley Interscience. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.interscience.wiley.com>.
Paull, Charles K; Ussler, W; Dallimore, Scott R; Blasco, Steve M; Lorenson, Thomas D; Melling, Humfrey;Medioli, Barbara E; Nixon, F. Mark; McLaughlin, Fiona A. “Origin of Pingo-Like Features on the Beaufort Sea Shelf and Their Possible Relationship to Decomposing Methane Gas Hydrates.” Geophysical Research Letters 34 (2007): 1-5. American Geophysical Union. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.agu.org>.
Shakhova, N; “Methane Release on the Arctic East Siberian Shelf.” Geophysical Research Abstracts 9 (2007): 1-2. European Geosciences Union. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.egu.eu>.
Strickland, Eliza. "A Monstrous Methane Belch Once Warmed the Earth." Discover Magazine (29 May 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/05/29/a-monstrous-methane-belch/.
Strickland, Eliza. "Methane Bubbles in the Arctic Ocean Give Climate Scientists the Willies." Discover Magazine (24 Sept. 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/09/24/methane-bubbles-in-the-arctic-ocean-give-climate-scientists-the-willies/.
“The Big Debate: Global Warming or National Security?” CNN Technology News 10 May 2007. 31 Oct. 2008 http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/08/30/energy.debate/index.html?iref=newssearch.
“Scientists Tapping Arctic Ocean Methane as Potential Cleaner Energy Source.” CBC News 27 Feb. 2007. 31 Oct. 2008 http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/02/27/nwt-methane.html.
23 November 2008
Workshop for Sarah Newman
Cause/Effect Workshop
Thesis:
Although social networking websites such as MySpace and Facebook appear benign, they have negative effects on teenagers because teens may rely on Internet friends more than real friends, they might become involved with groups that encourage dangerous habits, and sexual predators lurk on websites like these.
1. Restate the thesis in your own words. If the thesis is a question and not an assertion, make it an assertion. Make sure the words “although” and "because" are in it.
Although social networking websites may seem harmless, they negatively effect teenagers because teens invest unhealthy levels of trust in the people they "meet", they become exposed to dangerous habits inappropriate for their age, and teenagers are a typical prey for sexual predators.
2. Does the thesis argue a link between a cause(s) and effect(s)? Is it at the end of the first paragraph?
Yes, social websites have dangerous effects on teenagers. It is at the end of the thesis paragraph.
3. List the cause(s).
Social websites appear safe for all users.
4. List the effect(s).
-- Teens rely on Internet friends more than real friends.
-- They might become involved with groups that encourage dangerous habits.
-- Sexual predators lurk on websites like MySpace and Facebook.
Audience:
Who is the author's audience? Will the audience already agree with the author, or is the author writing to the opposition? How can you tell? Give specific examples.
The audience might be parents of teenagers or social workers. The audience would agree, I think. The paper deals with a current problem our society is facing.
Counterargument:
List the counterarguments (arguments of the author’s oppositions) used in the paper (there should be at least three). Does the author adequately address these arguments? Do you think there are other arguments that could be addressed? Do you see any logical fallacies?
1. Teens that rely on Internet friends feel that they are faithful
2. Sites where people make pacts with other people to commit suicide on the same day and time.
3. They are able to transform themselves into the person they want to be.
They are used to support her argument.
Title:
Does the paper have an interesting title? If not, help author come up with one.
It isn't a very interesting title. Maybe something like: Teens! Teens!! and More Teens!!!
Introduction:
Is there a catchy lead sentence? What is it? If there isn't one, what would you suggest?
Not an interesting lead-in. Maybe incorporate the idea of your current lead-in with a personable anecdote.
Conclusion:
How does the author conclude the paper? What do you think of it?
Good closing paragraph, a few mechanics problems early on. The last sentence feels kind of globbed together.
Flow/Transitions:
Does each paragraph expand upon the thesis? Do the paragraphs flow? Which paragraphs have bumpy transitions?
Really good transitions, kept the context together. Watch for redundancies, "anyone can sign up for these sights."
Thesis:
Although social networking websites such as MySpace and Facebook appear benign, they have negative effects on teenagers because teens may rely on Internet friends more than real friends, they might become involved with groups that encourage dangerous habits, and sexual predators lurk on websites like these.
1. Restate the thesis in your own words. If the thesis is a question and not an assertion, make it an assertion. Make sure the words “although” and "because" are in it.
Although social networking websites may seem harmless, they negatively effect teenagers because teens invest unhealthy levels of trust in the people they "meet", they become exposed to dangerous habits inappropriate for their age, and teenagers are a typical prey for sexual predators.
2. Does the thesis argue a link between a cause(s) and effect(s)? Is it at the end of the first paragraph?
Yes, social websites have dangerous effects on teenagers. It is at the end of the thesis paragraph.
3. List the cause(s).
Social websites appear safe for all users.
4. List the effect(s).
-- Teens rely on Internet friends more than real friends.
-- They might become involved with groups that encourage dangerous habits.
-- Sexual predators lurk on websites like MySpace and Facebook.
Audience:
Who is the author's audience? Will the audience already agree with the author, or is the author writing to the opposition? How can you tell? Give specific examples.
The audience might be parents of teenagers or social workers. The audience would agree, I think. The paper deals with a current problem our society is facing.
Counterargument:
List the counterarguments (arguments of the author’s oppositions) used in the paper (there should be at least three). Does the author adequately address these arguments? Do you think there are other arguments that could be addressed? Do you see any logical fallacies?
1. Teens that rely on Internet friends feel that they are faithful
2. Sites where people make pacts with other people to commit suicide on the same day and time.
3. They are able to transform themselves into the person they want to be.
They are used to support her argument.
Title:
Does the paper have an interesting title? If not, help author come up with one.
It isn't a very interesting title. Maybe something like: Teens! Teens!! and More Teens!!!
Introduction:
Is there a catchy lead sentence? What is it? If there isn't one, what would you suggest?
Not an interesting lead-in. Maybe incorporate the idea of your current lead-in with a personable anecdote.
Conclusion:
How does the author conclude the paper? What do you think of it?
Good closing paragraph, a few mechanics problems early on. The last sentence feels kind of globbed together.
Flow/Transitions:
Does each paragraph expand upon the thesis? Do the paragraphs flow? Which paragraphs have bumpy transitions?
Really good transitions, kept the context together. Watch for redundancies, "anyone can sign up for these sights."
16 November 2008
Essay # 3 -- Rough Draft
Where Are You and What Are You Doing There?
During the middle ages there lived a wise priest. He was a noted theologian and philosopher. One day he kicked a boulder. His training and study brought him to the conclusion that the boulder was not really there. He believed that through using all of his mental capacities he could transcend physical reality. So he kicked the boulder as hard as he could, then he broke his foot.
History teaches us that there is no escape from life. As humans on planet earth we are born into a family, a clan, a tribe, a culture; we are born into a heritage and an ancestry, a world of social order that has worked to achieve perfection for millennia. We have built the world up around us, and we assume that everything is in its right place. Plodding along day after day we become accustom to routine and a sameness that dusts over everything. In a world that has become so small with our growing population it is difficult to “slow down and smell the roses.” Then, when a person does that they might think they can kick through a rock. Why do we think the way we think? How come when I want to be happy I get upset? What can I do to help set my own mind at ease. We are not just playing simple mind games with ourselves. There is a real cause behind our actions. Although most of us rarely take stock of our surroundings, we are affected by set and setting because we are a product of our environment, we become a part of the situation around us, and we are influenced by our senses.
If we need deep focus or concentration we do things like find a quiet place, or some place we feel is peaceful. We do this so that there aren’t distractions. Dr. Timothy Leary, in his studies, proved this. In his book, Flashbacks, Leary holds sessions with leading psychiatrists which attempted to unlock mysteries of human perception. During their studies, and with the aid of the powerful psychoactive drug LSD, they showed that the subconscious reacts according to perception. Leary and his group were testing theories of set of and setting. They found that a person feels less vulnerable and is more apt to find inner-peace when their surroundings are warm and inviting. They used low lighting, warm colors, and a guide to sit with, talk to, and who would document the patients’ reactions. Conversely, when they introduced bright lights, astringent smells, and chaotic sounds their patients showed varied levels of anger and frustration.
At about the same time, Tom Wolfe was writing a story about the Merry Pranksters called The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test. Tom Wolfe and the Merry Pranksters held very similar views about the effects of set and setting even though they were searching for different results. Where Leary and his crew wanted to show a path to man’s inner well-being, Wolfe and the Pranksters were seeking to unite the conscientiousness of mankind. Though when the two groups met up one night at Leary’s Millbrook estate they clashed wildly against one another, they were both achieving the same goal. The Pranksters, with help from people like Ken Keasy and the Grateful Dead, were able to create a society in the Sierra-Nevada Mountains where hippies danced alongside members of the Hell’s Angels. Only by creating appropriate settings and having useful items set about in ideal locations could something like a peaceful conference with the Hell’s Angels be possible.
In ways that are difficult to objectively identify we make choices and act in response to our surroundings. Most people go through their days without taking a mindful inventory of what is occurring around them. It is important to be mindful because our decisions are based on our surroundings. The choices and decisions we make stretch beyond ourselves and begin outside of ourselves. We couldn’t have come as far as we have if humankind took a flying leap every time chaos closed in around us. We seek out shelter and succor to protect not only our bodies, but our minds from the harm in the world. Our mental protection can begin with situational awareness, and knowing the effects our surroundings have on us. A good day begins with a light breakfast. A bad day begins with no heat in the middle of winter. In both instances we woke up as usual; but our set and setting make for very different outcomes.
During the middle ages there lived a wise priest. He was a noted theologian and philosopher. One day he kicked a boulder. His training and study brought him to the conclusion that the boulder was not really there. He believed that through using all of his mental capacities he could transcend physical reality. So he kicked the boulder as hard as he could, then he broke his foot.
History teaches us that there is no escape from life. As humans on planet earth we are born into a family, a clan, a tribe, a culture; we are born into a heritage and an ancestry, a world of social order that has worked to achieve perfection for millennia. We have built the world up around us, and we assume that everything is in its right place. Plodding along day after day we become accustom to routine and a sameness that dusts over everything. In a world that has become so small with our growing population it is difficult to “slow down and smell the roses.” Then, when a person does that they might think they can kick through a rock. Why do we think the way we think? How come when I want to be happy I get upset? What can I do to help set my own mind at ease. We are not just playing simple mind games with ourselves. There is a real cause behind our actions. Although most of us rarely take stock of our surroundings, we are affected by set and setting because we are a product of our environment, we become a part of the situation around us, and we are influenced by our senses.
If we need deep focus or concentration we do things like find a quiet place, or some place we feel is peaceful. We do this so that there aren’t distractions. Dr. Timothy Leary, in his studies, proved this. In his book, Flashbacks, Leary holds sessions with leading psychiatrists which attempted to unlock mysteries of human perception. During their studies, and with the aid of the powerful psychoactive drug LSD, they showed that the subconscious reacts according to perception. Leary and his group were testing theories of set of and setting. They found that a person feels less vulnerable and is more apt to find inner-peace when their surroundings are warm and inviting. They used low lighting, warm colors, and a guide to sit with, talk to, and who would document the patients’ reactions. Conversely, when they introduced bright lights, astringent smells, and chaotic sounds their patients showed varied levels of anger and frustration.
At about the same time, Tom Wolfe was writing a story about the Merry Pranksters called The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test. Tom Wolfe and the Merry Pranksters held very similar views about the effects of set and setting even though they were searching for different results. Where Leary and his crew wanted to show a path to man’s inner well-being, Wolfe and the Pranksters were seeking to unite the conscientiousness of mankind. Though when the two groups met up one night at Leary’s Millbrook estate they clashed wildly against one another, they were both achieving the same goal. The Pranksters, with help from people like Ken Keasy and the Grateful Dead, were able to create a society in the Sierra-Nevada Mountains where hippies danced alongside members of the Hell’s Angels. Only by creating appropriate settings and having useful items set about in ideal locations could something like a peaceful conference with the Hell’s Angels be possible.
In ways that are difficult to objectively identify we make choices and act in response to our surroundings. Most people go through their days without taking a mindful inventory of what is occurring around them. It is important to be mindful because our decisions are based on our surroundings. The choices and decisions we make stretch beyond ourselves and begin outside of ourselves. We couldn’t have come as far as we have if humankind took a flying leap every time chaos closed in around us. We seek out shelter and succor to protect not only our bodies, but our minds from the harm in the world. Our mental protection can begin with situational awareness, and knowing the effects our surroundings have on us. A good day begins with a light breakfast. A bad day begins with no heat in the middle of winter. In both instances we woke up as usual; but our set and setting make for very different outcomes.
05 November 2008
Reading Response -- Sewage Sludge in Oilweek
Sludge You Buddy, and Sludge Your Friends Too!
Recent news at Oilweek reports that Canadian Agriculture will probably see a decline in Ontario’s agriculture stock trading points. Reported illnesses associated with their methods of crop fertilization have been growing in numbers. When one farmer was asked about the illnesses that her and her family were experiencing she expressed concern for her livestock that were exhibiting similar illnesses including blood, bladder and urinary tract infections, chronic coughing, vomiting, and diarrhea. Another medical case associated with Ontario’s agriculture includes dairy cows producing milk that contains high levels of Valium.
Oilweek found that Canada’s crop fertilizers are to blame. To alleviate the high costs of using commercial fertilizers, the Canadian government has been giving city sewage sludge to farmers, free of cost, for use as crop fertilizer. The sludge is a combination of household and industrial waste. 120,000 tons of it is spread across 150 square kilometers of Canadian farmland. The government stresses that using sewage sludge in this way is economically beneficial to farmers. They also stress that as long as their standards are met there should be no hazardous toxins in the sludge.
The rash of medical reports linking several different illnesses to one source is evidence that standards are not being met. Oilweek’s writer brings an important issue to light by determining that the current practice of using sewage sludge as fertilizer is toxic to farmers, animals, and plant life. The evidence they present focuses on using government to ban the practice until better controls are put into place. However, they do not give us their opinion. Instead we are lead through the evidence and asked to make our own determinations. Overwhelming evidence supports a ban, but as reported the government believes industry will regulate itself.
Recent news at Oilweek reports that Canadian Agriculture will probably see a decline in Ontario’s agriculture stock trading points. Reported illnesses associated with their methods of crop fertilization have been growing in numbers. When one farmer was asked about the illnesses that her and her family were experiencing she expressed concern for her livestock that were exhibiting similar illnesses including blood, bladder and urinary tract infections, chronic coughing, vomiting, and diarrhea. Another medical case associated with Ontario’s agriculture includes dairy cows producing milk that contains high levels of Valium.
Oilweek found that Canada’s crop fertilizers are to blame. To alleviate the high costs of using commercial fertilizers, the Canadian government has been giving city sewage sludge to farmers, free of cost, for use as crop fertilizer. The sludge is a combination of household and industrial waste. 120,000 tons of it is spread across 150 square kilometers of Canadian farmland. The government stresses that using sewage sludge in this way is economically beneficial to farmers. They also stress that as long as their standards are met there should be no hazardous toxins in the sludge.
The rash of medical reports linking several different illnesses to one source is evidence that standards are not being met. Oilweek’s writer brings an important issue to light by determining that the current practice of using sewage sludge as fertilizer is toxic to farmers, animals, and plant life. The evidence they present focuses on using government to ban the practice until better controls are put into place. However, they do not give us their opinion. Instead we are lead through the evidence and asked to make our own determinations. Overwhelming evidence supports a ban, but as reported the government believes industry will regulate itself.
Step 3: Research Draft 1
Methane Mania: Methane Hydrates and Their Effects
There is no doubt that we live in precarious times. A large part of today’s global interests lie in energy production and consumption. As populations increase there is a growing need for more and more resources to ensure a somewhat equal quality of life. We rely on large governments and world markets to help provide us with the three modern essentials for sustaining life: food, clothing, and shelter. This means that food processing centers must be erected to house large numbers of animals. To supply the masses with clothing we have invented large commercial and industrial factories that can thread their way through a year’s cotton crop in no time at all. Industry has adapted housing development to meet the needs of hot climates and cold climates, creating insulated hot-box units that have temperature control exclusive from the outside environment. Our ever developing modern world is dependent on large quantities of usable energy, but it is also leaving a very heavy carbon foot print in its wake. In our food processing centers, where large numbers of livestock are raised in close relations to one another, scientists find measurably elevated levels of methane gas. Commercial and Industrial factories have historically emitted countless environmental toxins in gaseous form. In our homes we primarily burn carbon-based fuels to keep ourselves warm. These things all add up to very ripe conditions for the greenhouse effect; wherein, Earth’s atmosphere becomes super-saturated with gases that trap heat from the Sun.
As our man-made lifestyles continue to need abundant sources of energy we are slowly becoming aware of our own addition to the overall stock of greenhouse emissions. Our efforts now drive us towards fuels that burn more efficiently and less toxically. Of the various gases that fill our atmosphere, methane is currently in the spotlight. Geologists, geophysicists, chemical engineers, ecologists, paleoclimatologists, hydrologists, biogeochemists, and Quaternary anthropologists alike are flocking to their methane testing laboratories. D. Archer, from the University of Chicago’s Department of the Geophysical Sciences, spent time conducting methane tests along the Arctic coastline of Siberia (521). However, a desolate and isolated place in world geography doesn’t seem a likely place for studies of possible annihilation due to heavy amounts of methane. Scientists aren’t focusing on the air. There is a goldmine in oceanic and permafrost deposit methane gas research. Although escaping methane gases in the Arctic Ocean does not raise an alarm for some people, it should because the pockets of methane gas under the ocean floor and in the permafrost are vast, the gas can potentially be used as a source of alternative energy, and it may very well mark a climactic doomsday.
A very common idea of methane is related to us in the children’s rhyme, “Beans, beans, the wonderful fruit; the more you eat, the more you toot.” A more technical study of methane gas names this process “bacterial methanogenesis” (Koh & Sloan 1639). Koh and Sloan relate that bacterial methanogenesis is the process by which bacteria breakdown organic matter, creating methane as an excreted byproduct (1639). All organic matter on Earth degrades over time. Methane occurs in nature in one of two forms, biogenic and thermogenic (Archer 521). Archer states that, “one is biological, mediated by bacteria at low temperatures, and the other is abiological, occurring spontaneously at elevated temperatures” (521). The current atmospheric methane level is 3 Gtons (gigaton), and outside of human interaction seems to maintain an overall equilibrium with the other atmospheric gases rather well (Archer 523).
The total inventory of methane comes from atmospheric counts, and from deposits of solid methane formations found deep under ocean floors and buried within the Arctic permafrost. These solid methane formations are categorized as hydrates. In their Geophysical Research Letters, Charles Paull et al surmise that, “gas hydrate is a solid phase comprised of water and low-molecular-weight gases, usually methane, that forms within sediments under conditions of low temperature, high pressure and adequate gas concentration” (1). Methane hydrates also go by a second name, clathrates, as in Clathrate Gun Hypothesis (Wikipedia). The Clathrate Gun Hypothesis theorizes that an increase in global temperature by at least 5 degrees Celsius will melt the global ice caps, whereby releasing an estimated 700,000 trillion cubic feet of gas world-wide (Koh & Sloan 1636). The Canadian Broadcasting Company, CNN News, and The Discovery Channel have only recently begun exploring this theory of global heating and consequent methane explosion. Scientists aren’t perturbed by the news. According to them science has known about gas hydrates since as early as 1778 (Koh & Sloan 1636).
Old news or not, for two hundred years very little was known about gas hydrates. It wasn’t until the mid-1990s and the advent of neutron and X-ray diffraction that science could mathematically produce the hydrate molecular shapes (Koh & Sloan 1637). In producing these models scientists can better understand how gas hydrates, and clathrates form and inter-act with the environment.
The Arctic permafrost was not always present. At a distant point in planetary history the ground that is now covered in ice was the playground for immeasurable numbers of organic life forms. During formation of the
current ice caps, what were once wetlands became frozen ice sheets. All of the biomass trapped in the ice has slowly decomposed in the low temperatures, forming frozen methane, or methane hydrates. As surrounding temperatures rise methane hydrates thaw releasing methane gas into the atmosphere. Charles Paull et al conducted experiments in the Beaufort Sea to better understand methane hydrates within the offshore permafrost. They studied “mud volcanoes,” “pingo-like features (PLFs)” (1). Their studies found, “more than 1,350 pingos, generally 10-40 meters tall and upwards of 100 meters or more in diameter” (1). These features are known to actively expel methane gas. The research group explains that as surface water temperature increases, so does the permafrost laden oceanic subsurface. “Warming results in gas hydrate decomposition in a gradually thickening zone, releasing gaseous methane into the sediments. Bubble formation associated with this phase change will create overpressured conditions: material may flow both laterally and vertically in response to overpressure: displaced sediments rise upwards to form the PLF and allow gas to vent” (Paull et al 4).
Methane gas is trapped within ice-shells that occupy the spaces between sediments. If these ice-shells melt, all of the methane effected by the warmth will escape. We are assured that most methane release is absorbed and used by the planet. This process is said to be a part of a much longer time cycle that is measured in kilo-years (kYr). According to the data collected by ……. (??? ##). The current methane release rate is measured against its decomposition rate. ……. have assessed that these numbers show an equilibrium between atmospheric methane release and its decomposition into carbon dioxide, which the planetary wetlands use as food (??? ##).
Scientists remain optimistic about discovering the properties of methane hydrates, and their uses. The major obstacle in hydrate production is that hydrates exist as the cement bond between sediments lying on ocean beds (??? ##). It is difficult to release that bond and capture the methane before the methane escapes into its water environment, where it degrades as quickly as …….m/s (??? ##). Typically, over a depth of 700 meters, methane gas will degrade completely before reaching the surface, thus creating no sea-to-air transfer of gas. Hydrate formations remain stable with the overall environment at depths of 700 meters or more. It is believed that atmospheric conditions cannot effect the ocean environment at those depths because of the temperature constants and high pressure levels. This means that global melting would actually reinforce hydrate deposits in the deep oceans by raising pressure levels on the sea floor. Geologists agree there is evidence of an ancient landslide in the Arctic Ocean that was half the distance of
Norway to Greenland in length that evidence shows might have caused a massive release of methane by disturbing the hydrates along the entire rift. They do not have conclusive evidence, but they find it a plausible cause for prehistoric mass extinction. The decaying biomass from that extinction period has formed into today’s methane hydrates.
Doomsday activists see this as evidence of a coming global catastrophe. Scientists, however, see this as a natural process that has been occurring for eons, and will continue long after our time on Earth ends. Some people have become apprehensive, not about ocean bound hydrates, but land bound hydrates trapped within permafrost. Climatologists disagree as to whether or not global warming is affecting permafrost in the way described by media groups. CNN and Discovery calculate that global warming is melting the polar ice caps - to include permafrost - which releases land bound hydrates. Permafrost is defined as ice that forms and does not melt for a period of two years or more. One area of the Siberian Arctic has land bound permafrost hundreds of meters thick that vents methane gas. Land bound hydrates have been found within the North Slope of Alaska. Global warming could heat the planet enough to melt the land bound permafrost, and expose the methane hydrates. If this happened very quickly there would be a very steep rise in the atmospheric methane count, creating further global warming. We are assured though that there is only enough methane hydrate within the land bound permafrost to affect our daily lives for a few decades. It is not believed that this sort of melting would significantly damage the human population; nor is it believed to be able to trigger further methane explosions further under the oceans. Apart from landslides, sciences believes that an ice age, which would relieve pressure from the ocean floors, would be the most likely trigger of a methane release massive enough to cause another mass extinction period.
Rather than brood in doom and gloom, industry is searching for ways of better utilizing what is known to be a usable energy source. Technology has netted us the ability to use methane gas as a combustion fuel. Since we can
make fire with it we know that it has further energy applications: applications such as heating our homes, powering our factories, and possibly
fueling our vehicles. What was once thought to be ice buildup inside deep oil wells is now known to be hydrate formation and accumulation within the pipe. Oil companies had previously mixed glycol into the pipes to stop supposed ice buildup because it transferred higher temperature levels throughout the well depth. Now they are looking for ways of extracting the hydrates intact, and using the methane gas trapped within. The challenge is in bringing the hydrates to the surface without degrading the methane
content (??? ##). There is also excitement about using the hydrate models to create gas storage packets for commercial transfer (??? ##).
Methane hydrates have proven to be of great importance. Some believe our lives are balanced by them. There are many within the science community who have found the Arctic Ocean coasts to be the best indicator of which way the methane pendulum will swing. At the same time, infrastructure suitable to methane hydrate exploitation already exists in the form of Arctic oil production. The probability of economic boom caused by utilizing these natural energy deposits is higher than that of environmental doom. Although science cannot agree about the future of methane hydrates, the likelihood of a Clathrate Gun, or much of the endogenic origins of known hydrate deposits they all view methane gas research through core sampling to be valuable. It is this research that will bring savings in energy into the homes of many people.
Methane is more than just a foul smelling gas. It is an essential component in the life cycle of our planet. Earth expels methane, breaks it down in the atmosphere, and then uses what is left as the planets own energy source. Even though there exists enough methane hydrate to destroy all life on Earth, it is not possible for all of the methane to be released at once. In the mean time it only makes sense to use this natural resource, and study its formations more closely.
--Works Cited--
Archer, D. “Methane Hydrate Stability and Anthropogenic Climate Change.” European Geosciences Union 4 (2008): 522-44. Biogeosciences. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.biogeosciences.net>.
Connor, Steve. “Exclusive: The Methane Time Bomb.” The Independent (23 Sep. 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/exclusive-the-methane-time-bomb-938932.html.
Decker, Paul L; Wartes, Marwan A. “Geochemistry of the Aupuk Gas Seep Along the Colville River — Evidence for a Thermogenic Origin.” Alaska Department of Natural Resources: Geological and Geophysical Surveys PIR 2008-1E 47-54 (2008): Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.dggs.dnr.state.ak.us>.
Dyer, Gwynne. “Time for Action: Arctic Ocean Methane Signals Catastrophe.” Fast Forward Weekly (Oct. 2 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://www.ffwdweekly.com/article/news-views/international/time-for-action-2637/.
Etiope, G; Milkov, A. V; Derbyshire, E. “Did Geologic Emissions of Methane Play Any Role in Quaternary Climate Change.” Global and Planetary Change 61 (2008): 79-88. ScienceDirect Freedom Collection. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.sciencedirect.com>.
Fulton-Bennett, Kim. "Methane Bubbling Through Seafloor Creates Undersea Hills." Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute 5 Feb. 2007. 31 Oct. 2008 http://www.mbari.org/news/news_releases/2007/paull-plfs.html.
Jacquot, Jeremy. "If Life Gives You Methane, Make Methane Energy." Discover Magazine (31 Jan. 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://discovermagazine.com/2008/feb/if-life-gives-you-methane-make-methane-energy.
Kennedy, Martin; David, Mrofka; von der Borch, Chris. "Snowball Earth Termination by Destabilization of Equitorial Permafrost Methane Clathrate." Letters 453.29 (2008): 642-45. Nature. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.nature.com/nature>.
Koh, Carolyn A; Sloan, E. Dendy. “Natural Gas Hydrates: Recent Advances and Challenges in Energy and Environmental Applications.” American Institute of Chemical Engineers 53.7 (2007): 1636-43. Wiley Interscience. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.interscience.wiley.com>.
Paull, Charles K; Ussler, W; Dallimore, Scott R; Blasco, Steve M; Lorenson, Thomas D; Melling, Humfrey;Medioli, Barbara E; Nixon, F. Mark; McLaughlin, Fiona A. “Origin of Pingo-Like Features on the Beaufort Sea Shelf and Their Possible Relationship to Decomposing Methane Gas Hydrates.” Geophysical Research Letters 34 (2007): 1-5. American Geophysical Union. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.agu.org>.
Shakhova, N; “Methane Release on the Arctic East Siberian Shelf.” Geophysical Research Abstracts 9 (2007): 1-2. European Geosciences Union. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.egu.eu>.
Strickland, Eliza. "A Monstrous Methane Belch Once Warmed the Earth." Discover Magazine (29 May 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/05/29/a-monstrous-methane-belch/.
Strickland, Eliza. "Methane Bubbles in the Arctic Ocean Give Climate Scientists the Willies." Discover Magazine (24 Sept. 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/09/24/methane-bubbles-in-the-arctic-ocean-give-climate-scientists-the-willies/.
“The Big Debate: Global Warming or National Security?” CNN Technology News 10 May 2007. 31 Oct. 2008 http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/08/30/energy.debate/index.html?iref=newssearch.
“Scientists Tapping Arctic Ocean Methane as Potential Cleaner Energy Source.” CBC News 27 Feb. 2007. 31 Oct. 2008 http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/02/27/nwt-methane.html.
There is no doubt that we live in precarious times. A large part of today’s global interests lie in energy production and consumption. As populations increase there is a growing need for more and more resources to ensure a somewhat equal quality of life. We rely on large governments and world markets to help provide us with the three modern essentials for sustaining life: food, clothing, and shelter. This means that food processing centers must be erected to house large numbers of animals. To supply the masses with clothing we have invented large commercial and industrial factories that can thread their way through a year’s cotton crop in no time at all. Industry has adapted housing development to meet the needs of hot climates and cold climates, creating insulated hot-box units that have temperature control exclusive from the outside environment. Our ever developing modern world is dependent on large quantities of usable energy, but it is also leaving a very heavy carbon foot print in its wake. In our food processing centers, where large numbers of livestock are raised in close relations to one another, scientists find measurably elevated levels of methane gas. Commercial and Industrial factories have historically emitted countless environmental toxins in gaseous form. In our homes we primarily burn carbon-based fuels to keep ourselves warm. These things all add up to very ripe conditions for the greenhouse effect; wherein, Earth’s atmosphere becomes super-saturated with gases that trap heat from the Sun.
As our man-made lifestyles continue to need abundant sources of energy we are slowly becoming aware of our own addition to the overall stock of greenhouse emissions. Our efforts now drive us towards fuels that burn more efficiently and less toxically. Of the various gases that fill our atmosphere, methane is currently in the spotlight. Geologists, geophysicists, chemical engineers, ecologists, paleoclimatologists, hydrologists, biogeochemists, and Quaternary anthropologists alike are flocking to their methane testing laboratories. D. Archer, from the University of Chicago’s Department of the Geophysical Sciences, spent time conducting methane tests along the Arctic coastline of Siberia (521). However, a desolate and isolated place in world geography doesn’t seem a likely place for studies of possible annihilation due to heavy amounts of methane. Scientists aren’t focusing on the air. There is a goldmine in oceanic and permafrost deposit methane gas research. Although escaping methane gases in the Arctic Ocean does not raise an alarm for some people, it should because the pockets of methane gas under the ocean floor and in the permafrost are vast, the gas can potentially be used as a source of alternative energy, and it may very well mark a climactic doomsday.
A very common idea of methane is related to us in the children’s rhyme, “Beans, beans, the wonderful fruit; the more you eat, the more you toot.” A more technical study of methane gas names this process “bacterial methanogenesis” (Koh & Sloan 1639). Koh and Sloan relate that bacterial methanogenesis is the process by which bacteria breakdown organic matter, creating methane as an excreted byproduct (1639). All organic matter on Earth degrades over time. Methane occurs in nature in one of two forms, biogenic and thermogenic (Archer 521). Archer states that, “one is biological, mediated by bacteria at low temperatures, and the other is abiological, occurring spontaneously at elevated temperatures” (521). The current atmospheric methane level is 3 Gtons (gigaton), and outside of human interaction seems to maintain an overall equilibrium with the other atmospheric gases rather well (Archer 523).
The total inventory of methane comes from atmospheric counts, and from deposits of solid methane formations found deep under ocean floors and buried within the Arctic permafrost. These solid methane formations are categorized as hydrates. In their Geophysical Research Letters, Charles Paull et al surmise that, “gas hydrate is a solid phase comprised of water and low-molecular-weight gases, usually methane, that forms within sediments under conditions of low temperature, high pressure and adequate gas concentration” (1). Methane hydrates also go by a second name, clathrates, as in Clathrate Gun Hypothesis (Wikipedia). The Clathrate Gun Hypothesis theorizes that an increase in global temperature by at least 5 degrees Celsius will melt the global ice caps, whereby releasing an estimated 700,000 trillion cubic feet of gas world-wide (Koh & Sloan 1636). The Canadian Broadcasting Company, CNN News, and The Discovery Channel have only recently begun exploring this theory of global heating and consequent methane explosion. Scientists aren’t perturbed by the news. According to them science has known about gas hydrates since as early as 1778 (Koh & Sloan 1636).
Old news or not, for two hundred years very little was known about gas hydrates. It wasn’t until the mid-1990s and the advent of neutron and X-ray diffraction that science could mathematically produce the hydrate molecular shapes (Koh & Sloan 1637). In producing these models scientists can better understand how gas hydrates, and clathrates form and inter-act with the environment.
The Arctic permafrost was not always present. At a distant point in planetary history the ground that is now covered in ice was the playground for immeasurable numbers of organic life forms. During formation of the
current ice caps, what were once wetlands became frozen ice sheets. All of the biomass trapped in the ice has slowly decomposed in the low temperatures, forming frozen methane, or methane hydrates. As surrounding temperatures rise methane hydrates thaw releasing methane gas into the atmosphere. Charles Paull et al conducted experiments in the Beaufort Sea to better understand methane hydrates within the offshore permafrost. They studied “mud volcanoes,” “pingo-like features (PLFs)” (1). Their studies found, “more than 1,350 pingos, generally 10-40 meters tall and upwards of 100 meters or more in diameter” (1). These features are known to actively expel methane gas. The research group explains that as surface water temperature increases, so does the permafrost laden oceanic subsurface. “Warming results in gas hydrate decomposition in a gradually thickening zone, releasing gaseous methane into the sediments. Bubble formation associated with this phase change will create overpressured conditions: material may flow both laterally and vertically in response to overpressure: displaced sediments rise upwards to form the PLF and allow gas to vent” (Paull et al 4).
Methane gas is trapped within ice-shells that occupy the spaces between sediments. If these ice-shells melt, all of the methane effected by the warmth will escape. We are assured that most methane release is absorbed and used by the planet. This process is said to be a part of a much longer time cycle that is measured in kilo-years (kYr). According to the data collected by ……. (??? ##). The current methane release rate is measured against its decomposition rate. ……. have assessed that these numbers show an equilibrium between atmospheric methane release and its decomposition into carbon dioxide, which the planetary wetlands use as food (??? ##).
Scientists remain optimistic about discovering the properties of methane hydrates, and their uses. The major obstacle in hydrate production is that hydrates exist as the cement bond between sediments lying on ocean beds (??? ##). It is difficult to release that bond and capture the methane before the methane escapes into its water environment, where it degrades as quickly as …….m/s (??? ##). Typically, over a depth of 700 meters, methane gas will degrade completely before reaching the surface, thus creating no sea-to-air transfer of gas. Hydrate formations remain stable with the overall environment at depths of 700 meters or more. It is believed that atmospheric conditions cannot effect the ocean environment at those depths because of the temperature constants and high pressure levels. This means that global melting would actually reinforce hydrate deposits in the deep oceans by raising pressure levels on the sea floor. Geologists agree there is evidence of an ancient landslide in the Arctic Ocean that was half the distance of
Norway to Greenland in length that evidence shows might have caused a massive release of methane by disturbing the hydrates along the entire rift. They do not have conclusive evidence, but they find it a plausible cause for prehistoric mass extinction. The decaying biomass from that extinction period has formed into today’s methane hydrates.
Doomsday activists see this as evidence of a coming global catastrophe. Scientists, however, see this as a natural process that has been occurring for eons, and will continue long after our time on Earth ends. Some people have become apprehensive, not about ocean bound hydrates, but land bound hydrates trapped within permafrost. Climatologists disagree as to whether or not global warming is affecting permafrost in the way described by media groups. CNN and Discovery calculate that global warming is melting the polar ice caps - to include permafrost - which releases land bound hydrates. Permafrost is defined as ice that forms and does not melt for a period of two years or more. One area of the Siberian Arctic has land bound permafrost hundreds of meters thick that vents methane gas. Land bound hydrates have been found within the North Slope of Alaska. Global warming could heat the planet enough to melt the land bound permafrost, and expose the methane hydrates. If this happened very quickly there would be a very steep rise in the atmospheric methane count, creating further global warming. We are assured though that there is only enough methane hydrate within the land bound permafrost to affect our daily lives for a few decades. It is not believed that this sort of melting would significantly damage the human population; nor is it believed to be able to trigger further methane explosions further under the oceans. Apart from landslides, sciences believes that an ice age, which would relieve pressure from the ocean floors, would be the most likely trigger of a methane release massive enough to cause another mass extinction period.
Rather than brood in doom and gloom, industry is searching for ways of better utilizing what is known to be a usable energy source. Technology has netted us the ability to use methane gas as a combustion fuel. Since we can
make fire with it we know that it has further energy applications: applications such as heating our homes, powering our factories, and possibly
fueling our vehicles. What was once thought to be ice buildup inside deep oil wells is now known to be hydrate formation and accumulation within the pipe. Oil companies had previously mixed glycol into the pipes to stop supposed ice buildup because it transferred higher temperature levels throughout the well depth. Now they are looking for ways of extracting the hydrates intact, and using the methane gas trapped within. The challenge is in bringing the hydrates to the surface without degrading the methane
content (??? ##). There is also excitement about using the hydrate models to create gas storage packets for commercial transfer (??? ##).
Methane hydrates have proven to be of great importance. Some believe our lives are balanced by them. There are many within the science community who have found the Arctic Ocean coasts to be the best indicator of which way the methane pendulum will swing. At the same time, infrastructure suitable to methane hydrate exploitation already exists in the form of Arctic oil production. The probability of economic boom caused by utilizing these natural energy deposits is higher than that of environmental doom. Although science cannot agree about the future of methane hydrates, the likelihood of a Clathrate Gun, or much of the endogenic origins of known hydrate deposits they all view methane gas research through core sampling to be valuable. It is this research that will bring savings in energy into the homes of many people.
Methane is more than just a foul smelling gas. It is an essential component in the life cycle of our planet. Earth expels methane, breaks it down in the atmosphere, and then uses what is left as the planets own energy source. Even though there exists enough methane hydrate to destroy all life on Earth, it is not possible for all of the methane to be released at once. In the mean time it only makes sense to use this natural resource, and study its formations more closely.
--Works Cited--
Archer, D. “Methane Hydrate Stability and Anthropogenic Climate Change.” European Geosciences Union 4 (2008): 522-44. Biogeosciences. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.biogeosciences.net>.
Connor, Steve. “Exclusive: The Methane Time Bomb.” The Independent (23 Sep. 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/exclusive-the-methane-time-bomb-938932.html.
Decker, Paul L; Wartes, Marwan A. “Geochemistry of the Aupuk Gas Seep Along the Colville River — Evidence for a Thermogenic Origin.” Alaska Department of Natural Resources: Geological and Geophysical Surveys PIR 2008-1E 47-54 (2008): Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.dggs.dnr.state.ak.us>.
Dyer, Gwynne. “Time for Action: Arctic Ocean Methane Signals Catastrophe.” Fast Forward Weekly (Oct. 2 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://www.ffwdweekly.com/article/news-views/international/time-for-action-2637/.
Etiope, G; Milkov, A. V; Derbyshire, E. “Did Geologic Emissions of Methane Play Any Role in Quaternary Climate Change.” Global and Planetary Change 61 (2008): 79-88. ScienceDirect Freedom Collection. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.sciencedirect.com>.
Fulton-Bennett, Kim. "Methane Bubbling Through Seafloor Creates Undersea Hills." Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute 5 Feb. 2007. 31 Oct. 2008 http://www.mbari.org/news/news_releases/2007/paull-plfs.html.
Jacquot, Jeremy. "If Life Gives You Methane, Make Methane Energy." Discover Magazine (31 Jan. 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://discovermagazine.com/2008/feb/if-life-gives-you-methane-make-methane-energy.
Kennedy, Martin; David, Mrofka; von der Borch, Chris. "Snowball Earth Termination by Destabilization of Equitorial Permafrost Methane Clathrate." Letters 453.29 (2008): 642-45. Nature. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.nature.com/nature>.
Koh, Carolyn A; Sloan, E. Dendy. “Natural Gas Hydrates: Recent Advances and Challenges in Energy and Environmental Applications.” American Institute of Chemical Engineers 53.7 (2007): 1636-43. Wiley Interscience. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.interscience.wiley.com>.
Paull, Charles K; Ussler, W; Dallimore, Scott R; Blasco, Steve M; Lorenson, Thomas D; Melling, Humfrey;Medioli, Barbara E; Nixon, F. Mark; McLaughlin, Fiona A. “Origin of Pingo-Like Features on the Beaufort Sea Shelf and Their Possible Relationship to Decomposing Methane Gas Hydrates.” Geophysical Research Letters 34 (2007): 1-5. American Geophysical Union. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.agu.org>.
Shakhova, N; “Methane Release on the Arctic East Siberian Shelf.” Geophysical Research Abstracts 9 (2007): 1-2. European Geosciences Union. ILLiad. Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks Lib., Fairbanks, AK. 31 Oct. 2008 <http://www.egu.eu>.
Strickland, Eliza. "A Monstrous Methane Belch Once Warmed the Earth." Discover Magazine (29 May 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/05/29/a-monstrous-methane-belch/.
Strickland, Eliza. "Methane Bubbles in the Arctic Ocean Give Climate Scientists the Willies." Discover Magazine (24 Sept. 2008). 31 Oct. 2008 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/09/24/methane-bubbles-in-the-arctic-ocean-give-climate-scientists-the-willies/.
“The Big Debate: Global Warming or National Security?” CNN Technology News 10 May 2007. 31 Oct. 2008 http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/08/30/energy.debate/index.html?iref=newssearch.
“Scientists Tapping Arctic Ocean Methane as Potential Cleaner Energy Source.” CBC News 27 Feb. 2007. 31 Oct. 2008 http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/02/27/nwt-methane.html.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)