Russian Scientists have recently published findings on subsea permafrost in the Arctic

[sue4e3]

Last edited Fri Aug 18, 2017, 09:17 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.sciencenewsline.com/news/2017081614280065.html
The rate of vertical degradation of subsea permafrost in the East Siberian Arctic Shelf (ESAS) is 18 cm a year over the past 30 years, which is greater than previously thought. Scientists from Tomsk Polytechnic University received this data after the comprehensive study of subsea permafrost not only in the Russian Arctic but also in the Arctic as a whole.

TPU scientists and co-authors from Russia and Sweden have recently published findings of the study in Nature Communications.

Earlier it was believed that the bulk of subsea permafrost in the ESAS is continuous that eliminates the destabilization of a giant pool of lower-laying methane hydrates. According to the model estimates of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), until the end of the 21st century the degradation of permafrost in the ESAS cannot exceed several meters and the formation of through taliks will take hundreds or thousands of years that eliminates the opportunity of massive methane (CH4) emissions from the bottom sediments of the ESAS into water column - atmosphere system due to the destruction of hydrates. Thus the IPCC considers the potential contribution of the ESAS into the emissions of CH4 as insignificant. The paper shows that the model is not really correct.

Basing on the repeated drilling of four wells performed by the Institute of Permafrost Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences in 1982-1983, scientists have proved that the rates of vertical degradation of subsea permafrost amount to18 cm a year over the last 30 years (the average is 14 cm a year) which is greater than it was assumed before.

[DavidDvorkin]

1. Unfortunate headline

I can imagine climate change denialists reading just the headline and claiming that Russian scientists have invalidated the model, whereas in fact (if I'm understanding it) they're saying the situation is worse than the model predicts.

[sue4e3]

2. I agree. I was thinking about changing it here

[StevieM]

3. I think you should. The headline definitely gives off the wrong impression.

And with Putin being Putin it is easy to imagine something is happening here with climate change denial.