emissions of methane from plants

[jean63]

Another methane which adds to that of human pollution!

Source = our-planete.info

environment - 13/01/2006, 11:49 am Plants emit greenhouse gases
Receive each of our news by email by creating a Google Alert

The forests emit methane in significant quantities. An unexpected discovery places plants as emitters of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas ...

Methane (CH4) is mainly (since 1990) emitted by intensive cattle breeding, animal excrement, crops (such as rice), fermentation of organic waste, forest fires, the use of wood for heating and cooking, the flooding of valleys during the impoundment of dams (with the decomposition of drowned biomass) and during the transport and exploitation of gas and oil (firedamp leaks in coal mines , gas with gas pipelines, flares ...).
Methane is a major greenhouse gas whose global warming power is 23 times more powerful than carbon dioxide. While its proportion in the atmosphere has increased by more than 150% since the start of the industrial era, methane would also be emitted directly by plants, via the leaves and dry grasses, without the presence of bacteria.

Methane is known to be produced by microorganisms in an anaerobic environment, that is to say poor or even devoid of oxygen. However, Franck Keppler, from the Max Planck Institute (Germany), and his colleagues have just discovered that plant debris studied in the laboratory, in the presence of oxygen, also emitted methane, in significant quantities.
Several experiments were carried out in an air deprived of methane or even by sterilizing the plants to be sure that there were no bacteria, in order to confirm their results.
Likewise, tests on living plants have shown that methane emissions increase with temperature and sunshine.

These results, still inexplicable, upset the current knowledge on the functioning of plants and the methane cycle. They will not fail to stimulate the scientists note in the journal Nature the New Zealander David Lowe, specialist in atmospheric chemistry.
At the same time, they confirm the presence of large concentrations of methane recently observed by satellite over tropical forests. And they could in particular explain the drop observed in global methane emissions (- 20 million tonnes per year) observed between 1990 and 2000, a period when more than 12% of the tropical forest disappeared in deforestation.

The first estimates, fruit of the extrapolation of these new results, consider that the methane emitted by plants would be between 62 to 236 million tonnes per year, or 10 to 30% of current production.

The consequences in taking greenhouse gases into account in the evolution of the Earth's climate are significant and it will now be necessary to integrate these new data into computer simulations.
Finally, forests that have long been considered as carbon sinks could see their balance sheet greatly affect their capacity to store greenhouse gases.

Learn More
Our dossier on climate change
Author: notre-planete.info (Christophe Magdelaine)

[Rabbit]

If it continues like this, you will have to come to the conclusion that
the best solution to continue polishing quietly and without
remors is to level the forests which are useless (since
not content not to store CO, but in addition
produce, worse still expire methane), eliminate all
rambunctious (under their placid appearance cows are the most
dangerous), put the wheat on the menu of Asian menus and
if possible disinfect this planet full of microbes
methane generators.

Ultimately it consoles to see that our pollution is becoming more
in addition negligible as the good news from
research reach us.

[krissg29]

Not better

in short everything is the cause of everything and above all you have to do nothing.

it's still really practical

and the groundhog puts the chocolate in the aluminum foil it made with an enormous expenditure of energy: what a polluting one there, then!

[jean63]

I will not go so far, but I heard yesterday again the Bogdanov brothers talking about the position of the earth relative to the sun (the distance varies between 140 million km and 165 million); moreover the inclination of the axis also, which makes that according to this position the functioning of the climate on earth is completely modified. It was very well explained in 10 minutes, last night on FR2 in their broadcast at around 20pm.
This explains the periods of glaciation and warming.
But at the time there were no satellites monitoring the earth and the oceans ..... the only trace is the ice of the polar caps which speak and it was done over millions of years, although in the 16th century (yesterday) the glaciers of the Alps were descending very low (see Madame Carles' meadow in the Massif des Ecrins).
There was therefore a temporary phenomenon at that time and it was not due to pollution by humans !!
So the speed of melting glaciers has accelerated quickly, it's a fact, but do we have enough perspective to integrate all the parameters?

[Woodcutter]

I do not see how discovering that plants emit more methane than we thought could exempt us from the fact that human industrial activity has led to the highest CO2 content in the atmosphere of the last 650.000 years (+ 25% increase in about 150 years), even though the "natural" variations of the components of our atmosphere are done on a time scale that is not ours.

The "Little Ice Age" of the High Middle Ages is only a variation within an interglacial period.

[yahi]

If before there were more plants and moreover we are convinced that this is the cause of methane, then why are there 150% more with 80% less vegetation? (see elimination of the forests of Europe from Asia, Africa and the Americas.)

pff this is number faking! journalist's work for 2 francs which does not give the elements which are attached to his remarks!

indeed if we isolate the forest and we measure the evolution of its species, it is obvious that it will change with the health of the forest!
but if we take the proportions and compare them to the level of a century ago, we know very well that it is not the forest that is responsible for the difference with the rest of the world!
it's really about taking people ... and infusing them with deception!

example: The human breathes, by its increasing number of individuals, it rejects a large amount of CO2 but it also consumes all the oxygen necessary for the life of its species (creation of desert and dust ..), fortunately the human breathes a lot and it purifies the air thanks to the deposit of dust in its body (deposit bcp more important than on the shelves of its habitat). we can therefore be reassured of the evolution of the number of individuals, because thanks to humans the air is purer, less toxic and allows better visibility in case of wind. We can therefore affirm that even if the oxygen reduced and the CO2 increases, the human species will live longer and move more because it is good for him!

it's easy to take a problem and reverse the rational sense of thought but it's really maso for the rest of the world of life.

yahi



Ps: for the ice age of the Middle Ages, you have to take a step back and stop looking only at your nose (French) because not very far from there in Europe, in Ireland, a big volcano erupted and caused a big cloud of dust at altitude which caused over several years a more intense cold etc etc ...
There have been several at different times in history, and each time mm cinema, harsh winters, famine, drought, epidemic ...

ps 2: and the earth's cycle is po well speed, then an astronomical oddity over 5 years I don't believe it, on the other hand for qqs thousands of years oky no pb!
but what we live is not of the order of the stars!

[Christine]

humans breathe a lot and they purify the air thanks to the deposit of dust in their body (bcp deposit more important than on the shelves of their habitat).

Name di diou! More than on month shelves?

More seriously, yahi, I applaud with both hands for your intervention. We must be very vigilant because this kind of speech is very widespread and is sometimes extremely subtle. And then it's in human nature to like to hear yourself say what you want to believe.

[Woodcutter]

A small development who may be able to avoid the virtual proliferation of real nonsense ...

[Christophe]

A small development who may be able to avoid the virtual proliferation of real nonsense ...

I quote :

"But the climatic benefits gained by carbon sequestration far exceed the negative effect of methane emission. According to these researchers, for each kilogram of CO2 assimilated by a plant, 0,25 to 1 gram of methane is released."

All is said....

In the same kind of stupid hypothesis to exculpate the oil tankers and their accomplices (all of us!), The solar system would currently pass in a warmer zone of our galaxy ... No matter Nawak, but this study undoubtedly cost a few million ... not so expensive to buy back the image of oil tankers ...