Methane in the East Siberian Arctic Shelf (2017): Natalia Shakhova & Igor Semiletov / Seemorerocks

Methane in the East Siberian Arctic Shelf (2017)

Monday, 19 June 2017
A new scientific paper from Natalia Shakhova and Igor Semiletov

Climate State

Published on May 23, 2017
The East Siberian Arctic Shelf has received more attention in recent years in regards to a potential contribution of the greenhouse gas methane, for the global methane budget, from several different sources. However, more studies are required to better constrain this potential accelerator of ongoing climate change.

Natalia Shakhova (2014), via Max Wilbert…
Natalia Shakhova (2010), .. methane stores destabilizing, venting…
Study: The origin of methane in the East Siberian Arctic Shelf unraveled (2017)…
Review: The interaction of climate change and methane hydrates (2017)… and…
Rune Pettersen, burn under ice methane in the dark…
Methane seep from lake (2012)…
New Source Of Methane Discovered In The Arctic Ocean…
Figure of 300 GTn of fossil fuel emissions via An Arctic methane worst-case scenario…
Image 800,000 years of methane (EPA)…
Images Methane bubbles collect under the ice (Natalia Shakhova)
Underwater bubble sounds…
Water bubble video clip…
Sound effects via and
Related: Ocean Waters Above Methane Seeps Absorb Large Amounts Of Co2…
Blooming Algae Could Accelerate Arctic Warming…
SEAMOREROCKS: In their discussion Paul Beckwith and Alex Smith of Radio Eco Shock made reference to a paper being released in June that talks of an eightfold increase in methane emissions in Siberia.

Have methane emissions in
East Siberian Shelf increased 800%?  Here is the discussion: 

Eight times higher is like an 800% increase. Natalia Shakhova and Igor Semiletov will release a paper soon detailing this explosive data. This duo have been studying methane emission in the arctic for nearly 20 years. They first brought this to our attention in 2011, and were roundly poo pooed by computer model jocks, Gavin Schmidt and Michael Man. Thanks dylanoliver233.

((( Siberian Methane 8X Higher Than Just Last Year ))) from collapse

Thanks to Robert Leisure for finding what looks like the latest paper.
These are his notes-
Is this it?
Published: 9 June 2017 , Natalia Shakhova, and Igor Semiletov
The East Siberian Arctic Shelf, the world’s largest and shallowest shelf (covering 2.1 × 106 km2) containing the largest area of sub-merged permafrost, contains vast CH4 deposits as subsea permafrost, CH4 hydrates, and natural gas reservoirs. Reservoir estimates are ∼ 10 000 Gt (1 Gt = 1015 g) of CH4 hydrates.
Atmospheric release of just 0.5 % of the Arctic shelf hydrate CH4 will cause abrupt climate change.…/tc-11-1333-2017-supplement.pdf

Sonar gas flux estimation by bubble insonification: application to methane bubble flux from seep areas in the outer Laptev Sea

Ira Leifer1,Denis Chernykh2,3, Natalia Shakhova3,4, and Igor Semiletov2,3,4
1 Bubbleology Research International, Solvang, CA 93463, USA
2 Russian Academy of Science, Pacific Oceanological Institute, Vladivostok, Russia
3 Tomsk Polytechnic University, Tomsk, Russia
4 University Alaska Fairbanks, International Arctic Research Center, Fairbanks, AK 99775, USA
Received: 23 Jun 2016 – Discussion started: 07 Jul 2016
Revised: 06 Feb 2017 – Accepted: 06 Feb 2017 – Published: 09 Jun 2017

Abstract. Sonar surveys provide an effective mechanism for mapping seabed methane flux emissions, with Arctic submerged permafrost seepage having great potential to significantly affect climate. We created in situ engineered bubble plumes from 40 m depth with fluxes spanning 0.019 to 1.1 L s−1 to derive the in situ calibration curve (Q(σ)). These nonlinear curves related flux (Q) to sonar return (σ) for a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and a single-beam echosounder (SBES) for a range of depths. The analysis demonstrated significant multiple bubble acoustic scattering – precluding the use of a theoretical approach to derive Q(σ) from the product of the bubble σ(r) and the bubble size distribution where r is bubble radius. The bubble plume σ occurrence probability distribution function (Ψ(σ)) with respect to Q found Ψ(σ) for weak σ well described by a power law that likely correlated with small-bubble dispersion and was strongly depth dependent. Ψ(σ) for strong σ was largely depth independent, consistent with bubble plume behavior where large bubbles in a plume remain in a focused core. Ψ(σ) was bimodal for all but the weakest plumes.

Q(σ) was applied to sonar observations of natural arctic Laptev Sea seepage after accounting for volumetric change with numerical bubble plume simulations. Simulations addressed different depths and gases between calibration and seep plumes. Total mass fluxes (Qm) were 5.56, 42.73, and 4.88 mmol s−1 for MBES data with good to reasonable agreement (4–37 %) between the SBES and MBES systems. The seepage flux occurrence probability distribution function (Ψ(Q)) was bimodal, with weak Ψ(Q) in each seep area well described by a power law, suggesting primarily minor bubble plumes. The seepage-mapped spatial patterns suggested subsurface geologic control attributing methane fluxes to the current state of subsea permafrost.

Citation: Leifer, I., Chernykh, D., Shakhova, N., and Semiletov, I.: Sonar gas flux estimation by bubble insonification: application to methane bubble flux from seep areas in the outer Laptev Sea, The Cryosphere, 11, 1333-1350,, 2017.

Published on May 3, 2017
“Chemtrails” is the term given to what is scientifically known as geoengineering. Most people believe it is just a conspiracy theory but the government is openly discussing these programs. They are acting as if they have not used them yet, but the data indicates that these programs have been taking place for almost 70 years now. The toxic assault of our skies is devastating the entire planet, from the ozone layer to the manipulated weather phenomena. These programs need to be brought to the light of day or else we face a truly dark horizon.

The ARCTIC / June 14 2017 (above) 

Antarctica east of New Zealand / April 4, 2017

Scotland & Northern Ireland / Massive RF?


I have no idea what this (above) in fact means…


This entry was posted in Current News & Events, Geoengineering. Bookmark the permalink.