this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2024
261 points (98.2% liked)

World News

39096 readers
2317 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Thorry84@feddit.nl 22 points 10 months ago (1 children)

There are more feedback mechanisms as well. For example permafrost melting, releasing huge amounts of methane from rotting organics which were previously frozen. Methane is way more powerful a greenhouse gas compared to co2. We are just finding out about a lot of this stuff in the past decade, which is accelerating global warming compared to models from 20+ years ago. Global warming isn't uniform as well, some parts like for example the arctic and parts of Western Europe are warming a lot faster.

Long story short, we need to be doing a LOT more than we are currently doing. And we seem to be doing very little, except pump all our money in large corporations and rich folks.

[–] MisterD@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I know this probably a bad idea but what would happen if we tried to burn the methane as it comes out of the permafrost? Would it reduce the greenhouse gases?

[–] Shampoo_Bottle@lemmy.ca 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

It could backfire if it's anything like what happened in Turkmenistan.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darvaza_gas_crater

Apparently it's been burning since the 80's

[–] Thorry84@feddit.nl 1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

This has been looked at and methane pockets are burned sometimes. When extracting oil for example there is often a lot of methane, which is burned to turn it into co2. The problem is, we are talking about a huge area with not many people or infrastructure in them. Sometimes the methane builds up in pockets which then can be burned easily, but most of the time it's out gassing over a big area with very little methane per square meter. Capturing that methane is not practically possible.

Maybe some combination of sheets which are reflective to reflect sunlight instead of absorbing it and at the same time direct the methane to a place where it can be burned off. But doing this across a large area would be hard and would also have an impact on the environment, so it would be a hard calculation to find out if it's worth it. And getting funding for something like that is pretty hard. Plus a big chance of failure, what if the sheets crack after a couple of years and get fouled up, then the methane isn't captured, the sunlight isn't reflected and a lot of time and energy has been lost. Plus you have a big patch of nature filled with plastics to clean up.

Methane does naturally get destroyed due to uv radiation, so it isn't long term like co2. But it's way more potent in terms of greenhouse and we've been releasing a lot more than gets broken down. Levels of methane are at a all time high and rising. On a human timescale the methane will take a very long time to get broken down, even if we would stop releasing any right now.

There are satellites specifically made to detect large releases of methane, to identify human sources of methane which could be captured and burned instead of being released. Especially in industrial processes this is often an option.

Large scale meat production is also a large source of methane, which is also hard to capture. Especially when we want the cows to have somewhat of a acceptable state of living, so going outside. The only way to fix this one is for people to eat less meat, however the trend has been for more and more meat consumption instead of less.

[–] Shampoo_Bottle@lemmy.ca 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Burning natural gases from the ground has backfired before:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darvaza_gas_crater

It didn't happen to save the environment, but there was too much natural gas stored to burn off.

[–] MisterD@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 months ago

How fast does methane breakdown with UV? Is that a practical way to deal with the permafrost methane?