El Nino Fires A Key Source Of Greenhouse Gases

core plexus writes "Science Daily has an interesting article suggesting that El Nino-related fires may be a significant source of 'Greenhouse Gases.' By combining satellite data and measurements of atmospheric gases, they have quantified for the first time the amount of greenhouse gases, like carbon dioxide and methane, emitted by these fires. In addition, the scientists determined that almost all of the increased levels of methane measured during 1997 and 1998 can be attributed to the worldwide fires at the time, underscoring the impact El Nino has on methane emissions."

More evidence on the pile

[Spamalamadingdong]

I recall reading some years ago that the forest/peat fires in Indonesia (which created a pall of smoke over much of the region and reduced visibility to a few feet over wide areas) dumped more CO2 into the atmosphere than all of the vehicles of Britain in the same year. Here's a paper [ff.org] which cites estimates of 0.6 to 3.5 gigatons from the 1994-5 fires and a similar figure for 1997-8.

Just goes to show that Kyoto isn't the solution, because it ignores emissions by "developing countries" regardless of origin.

Re:I thought it was the gas guzzling 4x4s

[Anonymous Coward]

A quick search says transportation is the top producer of green house gasses, with a few anti-global warming people saying it's agriculture.

I guess anti-global warming isn't really a good name for the people who believe there's no danger in climate change.

Re:I'd like to see you support those assertions

[fluffy666]

We can boil some of the atmosphere away.

False. This does not happen naturally (at least for O2, N2 and CO2), and there is no 'new atmosphere' waiting in the rocks.

We can trap some of the heat beneath the surface. The earth naturally draws heat out of the atmosphere and absorbs it below the surface.

False. The natural heat flux is out of the planet into the oceans/atmosphere.

We can convert some of the heat into energy stored in molecular bonds.

In order to do useful work (such as make molecular bonds as you describe) you need a (high temperature) source and a (low temperature) sink. If the atmosphere was your source, what would your sink be (Hint: the atmosphere is currently used as a sink for practically everything). Making hydrocarbons from CO2 and water is a trivial challenge compared to this!

There are certain gasses that naturally reflect sunlight away from out planet.

Any in particular, or are you just making more stuff up?

How can we possibly predict the weather one hundred years from now?

We're not trying to.