The earth doesn’t care whether you “believe” NOAA’s data. It is what it is, whether you believe it or not. These are what scientists call facts– observable phenomena that simply is. It was going down (slightly), it’s now going up. See? Facts.

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aggi/aggi_2008.fig2.png

And the rate of change in CH4 decreased and went flat, but I don’t see a “continuous decline” in the curve itself.

That curve is probably what would be expected from switching to cleaner burning fuels and all the environmental concerns of the 1980s.

and the new report in Nature on beetle devastation:
http://www.nature.com/ news/ 2008/ 080423/ full/ news.2008.771.html

The boreal forest (burning) and permafrost (melting) are starting to make it feel like the top of the world’s on fire…(maybe because it is)…

The decrease, or flatness, is well documented/explained:
http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/prrl/prrl0640.html

and now largely irrelevant…

I am also surprised they left out flaring of natural gas, which has been scaled back dramatically in the past decade, in part because the big oil companies have made climate commitments, and in part because natural gas has become so darn valuable.

Yes, many of us expected these measures to run out of steam at some point — and expected the tundra to kick in. One year does not prove the case, but it is something to keep a very close eye on.

In general, I think a Siberian Express methane release is probably the scariest single “X factor” in our current situation. I don’t think we know nearly enough to assess how close we are to creating a situation that triggers it or even if it’s starting already.

PNNL, a research arm of DoE, and Washington State University are opening a joint bio-energy research lab in Rishland, WA. They hired a Dane to head the facility. Turns out he also owns and is CEO of a Danish biomethane production company.

biomathane. Maybe not so off-topic here as other threads.

Lucky the industrial revolution didn’t start around the battle of Hastings.

I haven’t seen any discussion on this issue on websites and would like to learn more.

The hydroxyl radical ( OH ). It is a very important compound for us humans.

The hydroxyl radical (OH) is the major oxidizing agent in the atmosphere. Chemical reactions with OH initialize the removal of carbon monoxide (CO), methane (CH4), and volatile organic compounds (VOC).

Start with this link:

http://tinyurl.com/3jtfpl

Any changes in the atmospheric concentration of OH will affect the chemical lifetimes of many chloroflourocarbon (CFC) replacement compounds, because OH is the primary compound involved in the breakdown of the alternative hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs). Knowledge of OH concentration is important in analyzing the global warming potential and ozone depletion potential of HCFCs.

John McCormick

As an approximation, use 300-400 years with about 25% ‘forever’.

Do note the yearly variation is very small compared to the total excess of about 85 ppm.

That said, the stunning loss of the Arctic ice does mean that the top of the northern hemisphere is going to warm the most. The data trackers who best account for the Arctic (NASA GISS) not surprisingly show the greatest warming recently.

Joe

In passing you mentioned the winter increase in Arctic sea ice extent. However, as of now, June 14, 2008, the 700,000 square kilometer lead the 2008 Arctic sea ice extent had over the 2007 Arctic sea ice extent has all melted away, & both years are tied! So the 2008 ice extent lead, that AGW deniers were crowing about & were so eager to tell the world of the vast ice ‘recovery’ of the Arctic….is 0 square kilometers now. So the race to the minimum arctic sea ice extent between 2007 & 2008 is on. Still, its hard to believe that the 2007 ice extent minimum will not remain intact, when one looks at the graph & sees the 2007 long, very steep slope as the 2007 melted so rapidly….but the 2007 ice wasn’t as thin as the 2008 ice either. So it’ll be fun to watch.