News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Permafrost ‘bubbles’ are leaking methane 200 times above the norm. Parent comment

Re:Permafrost ‘bubbles’ are leaking methane 200 times above ... by dozzie on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @07:36AM (#12442434)
> Methane has a greenhouse potential 25 times that of CO2.

Where does this number come from? Heat capacity is almost the same for CH4 and CO2 (and half of that of H2O).

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Permafrost ‘bubbles’ are leaking methane 200 times above ... by phaemon on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @08:02AM (#12442584)
Wikipedia has an explanation of the calculation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_potential#Calcu...
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Permafrost ‘bubbles’ are leaking methane 200 times above ... by dozzie on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @09:58AM (#12443398)
And where does this calculation come from? How was it determined that this is a valid approximation of a physical process? This "global warming potential" seems to assume that a wave of certain length can be reflected and absorbed at the same time, which idea is somewhat unexpected if you dig through optics handbooks.

Not to mention that the formulas are incomplete.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Permafrost ‘bubbles’ are leaking methane 200 times above ... by phaemon on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @10:28AM (#12443659)
The calculation comes from the physicists who came up with it of course. Are you saying they were wrong? Do you have a link to a paper showing this?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Permafrost ‘bubbles’ are leaking methane 200 times above ... by dozzie on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @11:12AM (#12444040)
> The calculation comes from the physicists who came up with it of course.

This is the part I'm not so sure about. Physicists tend to not bother with climatology.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Permafrost ‘bubbles’ are leaking methane 200 times above ... by phaemon on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @11:28AM (#12444171)
What gave you that idea? Radiative transfer is physics. That doesn't change because we're talking about planet earth. I would guess that most scientists involved in climatology have a physics background.

Edit: for example, Radiative Forcing in the AR5 http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/climdyn2013/IPCC/IPCC_WGI1...

The main author is Drew Shindell, Professor of Climate Studies, PhD in Physics.

[ Parent | on HN ]