Thawing permafrost may release more methane than expected

[John Nissen]

Hi all, 

This is important work by the Leeds team, who Alan may know.

I consider methane release from the Arctic region as a critical tipping process, which will continue to accelerate unless the Arctic temperature is lowered.  Moreover there is an ever increasing risk of a sudden catastrophic outburst at the megaton level, boosting the planet into a hothouse state. 

 Lowering the temperature requires immense cooling power only obtainable from Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) for which I am campaigning.

 Unfortunately MCB,  which I know many of you would much prefer, simply cannot provide the cooling power even at its practical limit.

Fortunately research suggests that SAI could be applied to refreeze the Arctic with minimal and manageable adverse side effects.

Cheers John from mobile 

Thawing permafrost may release more greenhouse gases - Earth.com https://www.earth.com/news/thawing-permafrost-could-release-far-more-climate-warming-gases-than-expected/ 

[Paul Klinkman]

Hi restorers,

Two questions.  

First, does permafrost thaw from the bottom up for the most part?  I'd expect a thermal gradient from the earth's core up through the permafrost to nearly the earth's surface, where temperatures fluctuate seasonally.  If this is true and if the permafrost is warming up, the bottom of the permafrost has released gigatons of methane but the surface is frozen solid, waiting for each region's first crack to release its stored up methane.  

If this model is true, does this explain huge Siberian craters half a kilometer or so in diameter?  Best theory, the pressurized methane finally overwhelmed the frozen section of the permafrost and a blowout occurred.  Is this possibly how gigatons of methane are going to escape?

I'm just asking about possibilities.  If we know how climate change happens, perhaps we'll be more sure of the consequences if we don't take some action.

Yours in Hope,

Paul Klinkman

[PR CARTER]

I have always agreed with John Nissen that the Arctic has to be cooled to stabilize sea ice and permafrost.

“The hypothesis that thawing of permafrost could release sufficient climate forcing gases not only to continue but to accelerate climate change is one step closer to being confirmed by the results we are publishing today.” (permeable permafrost paper)

How much extra emissions, more than expected? There is currently a huge range of estimates, from less than 20 Pg C to more than 200 Pg C 

Jan. 2026, Permafrost and wildfire carbon emissions indicate need for additional action to keep Paris Agreement temperature goals within reach, Christina Schädel  et al

However IPCC AR5 WG1 put emissions up to 350 PcC (CO2 eq) by 2100

Under sustained Arctic warming, modelling studies and expert judgments indicate with medium agreement that a potential combined release totalling up to 350 PgC as CO2 equivalent could occur by the year 2100.

Thawing permafrost is emitting CO2, methane and nitrous oxide.

Permafrost Region Greenhouse Gas Budgets Suggest a Weak CO2 Sink and CH4 and N2O Sources, ..., 26 Oct. 2024,  G. Hugelius et al

The Net GHG Balance and Budget of the Permafrost Region (2000-2020) From Ecosystem Flux Upscaling, 3 April 2024, Justine Ramage et al 

With accelerated global warming today, it can be assumed that permafrost emissions will increase that acceleration through 2100 and beyond. 

I note there never has been more carbon on the planet than today (David Archer) 

Attached is the approach of scientists to increasing permafrost feedback emissions- the kids will have to remove enough CO2. (permafrost budget). 

Note there is no call for urgent action on emissions, which I find general on climate change impacts research.

Global warming and Earth energy imbalance are record high, accelerating (WMO 2026)

Yet scientists are united in insisting that 1.5°C must be determined by a 20-30 year averaging, even though warming and warming divers are increasing, and at accelerating rates. This is a delay that incurrs more irreversible permafrost emissions

The same aplies to overshoot. Scientists say 1.5°C overshoot can be managed by CO2 removal, but which takes decades to develop at scale.

his should be all moot for policy as by IPCC AR6 global emissions had to be in decline by now-2025 

IPCC AR6 says for 1.5°C AND 2°C global emissions peak 2000-2025 at the latest, assuming immediate action

Instead scientists are united on variable cumulative CO2 emissions carbon budgets, which relies on effective carbon sinks (that are weakening- see below)

There are papers on the permafrost effect on the so-called carbon budget of more allowable carbon to burn.

The carbon budget does not account for permafrost nor wetland peat emissions, nor carbon sink weakening (assume sinks hold 50% removal to 2050)

The budget leaves another 3 years of allowable to carbon for the fossil fuel industry to extract and burn, for 1.5°C, and another 25 years for 2°C. 

When the carbon budget is exceeded scientists assume rapid massive CO2 removal- for which there is no capacity and takes decades to develop. 

Scientists remain united in silence - that by IPCC AR6 emissions had to be in decline by now, and the imperative of immediate action (IPCC, AR6), which includes Arctic permafrost and other +ve (amplifying) Arctic feedbacks)

Carbon sink weakening and switching 

o The Arctic has switched from carbon sink to source - by permafrost emissions (1st detected NOAA 2016 Arctic Report Card).

o Eastern Amazon has switched.

o Bolivia's forests have switched

o Australia's rain forest has switched. 

o Canada's managed forests have switched. 

o Loss of coral reefs

 

The land and ocean carbon sinks are weakening progressively (Global Carbon Project, past 4 years of reports)

Best regards

Peter C

---

From: "John Nissen" <johnnis...@gmail.com>
To: "Arctic Methane Google Group" <arctic...@googlegroups.com>, "peter wadhams" <peter....@gmail.com>, "Paul Beckwith" <paulhenr...@gmail.com>, "Peter R Carter" <peterc...@shaw.ca>, "Alan Gadian" <ala...@gmail.com>
Cc: "Planetary Restoration" <planetary-...@googlegroups.com>, "Sir David King" <d...@camkas.co.uk>, "Wouter van Dieren | Inis Vitrin" <wouter.v...@inisvitrin.nl>, "Hans van der Loo" <hans.va...@iier.eu>
Sent: Sunday, April 5, 2026 7:31:46 AM
Subject: Thawing permafrost may release more methane than expected

--

Director Climate Emergency Institute
IPCC expert reviewer
Co-author2018 Unprecedented Crime: Climate Science Denial and Game Changers for Survival

[Alan Gadian]

John and I will always disagree about this. Personally i think we may have to do both MCB and SAI; MCB will in my opinion provide sufficient cooling but it is dangerous to put all egged in one basket. The corn with SAI is how it will reduce the ozone layer , cause animal cancers and reduction crop production … but perhaps not as much as Mr Trump is currently doing.  

I keep emphasising that it is the hot equatorial regions that are the problem.  The atmospheric meridional heat transfer of energy ( latent and sensible) has to be reduced. Cooling the poles is not enough .

It is becoming abundantly clear that Lovelocks 2036 prediction will happen. It is only a matter of time before the AMOC collapses causing massive changes too . 

To emphasise , the string of papers I have been involved with show the significant cooling ( double CO2) can achieved with mCB, but whether that is enough to overcome the larger feed back from water vapour, remains to be seen. 

Thanks

Alan 

T ---

Alan Gadian, UK

Tel: +44 / 0  775 451 9009 

T ---

On 6 Apr 2026, at 20:04, PR CARTER <peterc...@shaw.ca> wrote:



<UNFCCC permafrost budget.png>

<Permeable permfrost.png>

[John Nissen]

Hi Paul,

Your fear corresponds to one of ours.

If this model is true, does this explain huge Siberian craters half a kilometer or so in diameter?  Best theory, the pressurized methane finally overwhelmed the frozen section of the permafrost and a blowout occurred.  Is this possibly how gigatons of methane are going to escape?

This is one way we think gigatons of methane could escape.  But it's not just permafrost under land, but also undersea.  There are pockmarks, called pingos, on the seabed of the vast Siberian continental shelf where it is thought there were outbursts of methane.  A combination of heating from above and heating from below leads inevitably to release of free methane and methane trapped in clathrates.

Our other fear is from submarine landslides, such as the Storegga landslide which is thought to be responsible for a huge tsunami hitting the NW coast of Scotland about 8 kya.  There is a huge amount of methane trapped on continental shelf margins.

An outburst of 50 gigatons of methane, sudden or over a few decades, is feasible and would be enough to boost the planet into a hot-house state, according to the Arctic methane expert, Natalia Shakhova.  

Refreezing the Arctic, considered still just possible using SAI, would stave off methane catastrophe and well as catastrophes from other tipping processes in the Arctic.

Cheers, John

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Planetary Restoration" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to planetary-restor...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/planetary-restoration/0b8e4993-e83f-4196-a723-94d0425341e7n%40googlegroups.com.

[John Nissen]

Hi Peter,

Good to hear from you.

You comment on the CO2 side with an AR5 forecast of up to 350 GtCO2e by 2100.  I could only find a forecast from AR6, and that was for up to 100 GtCO2e by 2100 in the worst case scenario of around 4C warming by 2100 (which we believe is where we are heading).  Apparently emissions were 59 GtCO2e in 2019.  We believe that, using techniques to boost life in soils and oceans, it will be possible to reduce the atmospheric greenhouse content to 380 ppm CO2e, within 50 years except for the worst case emissions scenario.  But this assumes the Arctic is refrozen and global temperature reduced to around 0.5C, as per conditions in 1980.

The above greenhouse gas removal/reduction (GGR) would largely deal with the greenhouse effect, which is reducing thermal/IR/longwave radiation from the planet.  But the Earth's Energy Imbalance indicates more heat is being trapped by the reduction in reflected sunlight (solar/visible/shortwave radiation) than by the greenhouse gases.  Thus priority has to be on the albedo side, particularly for the Arctic, hence the extreme urgency for refreezing the Arctic.  Only SAI has a cooling power sufficient to refreeze the Arctic with the urgency required.

We appreciate that the support of the Canadian government would be vital in any effort to refreeze the Arctic, especially with the current US government's position.  Could we approach them for support?

Cheers, John 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AMEG" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to arcticmethan...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/arcticmethane/474005986.29690582.1775502276005.JavaMail.zimbra%40shaw.ca.

[PR CARTER]

 He John, Here is a recent reference- up to 300Gt  (IPCC AR5 is below)

Obviously reinforces the urgent imperative of Arctic cooling

Permafrost Thawing and Estimates of Vulnerable Carbon in the Northern High Latitudes, 18 Nov. 2024, Imran Nadeem et al

...we estimate the ensemble mean of decomposable carbon stocks in thawed permafrost to be approximately 115 GtC (gigatons of carbon in the form of CO2 and CH4) under SSP1-2.6, 180 GtC under SSP2-4.5, 260 GtC under SSP3-7.0, and 300 GtC under SSP5-8.5 by the end of the century.   

IPCC AR5 WG1, FAQ 6.1

 Could Rapid Release of Methane and Carbon Dioxide from Thawing Permafrost or Ocean Warming Substantially Increase Warming?

The Arctic domain presently represents a net sink of CO2—sequestering around 0.4 ± 0.4 PgC yr–1 in growing vegetation representing about 10% of the current global land sink. It is also a modest source of methane (CH4): between 15 and 50 Tg(CH4) yr–1 are emitted mostly from seasonally unfrozen wetlands corresponding to about 10% of the global wetland methane source. There is no clear evidence yet that thawing contributes significantly to the current global budgets of these two greenhouse gases. However, under sustained Arctic warming, modelling studies and expert judgments indicate with medium agreement that a potential combined release totalling up to 350 PgC as CO2 equivalent could occur by the year 2100.

---

From: "John Nissen" <johnnis...@gmail.com>
To: "arcticmethane" <arctic...@googlegroups.com>
Cc: "peter wadhams" <peter....@gmail.com>, "Paul Beckwith" <paulhenr...@gmail.com>, "Alan Gadian" <ala...@gmail.com>, "Planetary Restoration" <planetary-...@googlegroups.com>, "Sir David King" <d...@camkas.co.uk>, "Wouter van Dieren | Inis Vitrin" <wouter.v...@inisvitrin.nl>, "Hans van der Loo" <hans.va...@iier.eu>
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2026 7:12:58 AM
Subject: Re: [AMEG 14092] Re: Thawing permafrost may release more methane than expected

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/arcticmethane/CACS_FxqS1H_-aWNbD4yCLTXuR%3DhToj6pv5CtZ83rgq1hep0T%3Dw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Veli Albert Kallio]

Both Putin and Trump have been looking into use of nuclear bombs against their perceived enemies. I take it so that the volumes of the nuclear bombs to be used are not at levels to induce nuclear winter. I am not at liberty to disclose details due to unsecure Internet. Any negative forcing (global dimming removal) may give even stronger positive forcing from meltdown of global economy and lack of the oil supplies. The psychological damage materialises if the leaders prove themselves reckless by going for use of nuclear weaponry in any extent.

City dwellings and offices rapidly begin to lose value and home working companies and Internet sales firms will reap benefits. Electric cars will sell. China is now moving to retool all car factories for electric vehicles and in process already to ban further sales of combustion engine vehicles. BYD and Tesla are the greatest beneficiaries and Volkswagen group the likely biggest loser (they lobbied EU to delay clean vehicles.)

The current wars appear contributory factors for rising amounts of atmospheric hydrocarbons and carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide. CO2 level has reached 432 ppm, the highest recording of CO2 made. Conspicuously and steadily advancing the 450 ppm crossing point, just 18 ppm below at some days in March 2026. This is a rather dim view considering that everything appears entirely in order, no major weather events.

Imagine what our great political leaders then are capable of doing - like Putin, Trump and Netanyahu - when there is a strong climatic stresses applying. We all were going about ordinary business like every other day and even them they are capable of launching such a destructive wars and talk about wiping out 90 million Iranian to oblivion and reduce ordinary lives of Gazans to  eke out within piles of rubble of their houses.

---

From: arctic...@googlegroups.com <arctic...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of PR CARTER <peterc...@shaw.ca>
Sent: 07 April 2026 22:38
To: arcticmethane <arctic...@googlegroups.com>
Cc: peter wadhams <peter....@gmail.com>; Paul Beckwith <paulhenr...@gmail.com>; Alan Gadian <ala...@gmail.com>; Planetary Restoration <planetary-...@googlegroups.com>; Sir David King <d...@camkas.co.uk>; Wouter van Dieren | Inis Vitrin <wouter.v...@inisvitrin.nl>; Hans van der Loo <hans.va...@iier.eu>
Subject: Re: [AMEG 14093] Re: Thawing permafrost may release more methane than expected

 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/arcticmethane/750167599.32941911.1775597908340.JavaMail.zimbra%40shaw.ca.