December 12, 2019



Climate Restoration

Program Video Link

Who: Peter Wadhams is the author of ‘A Farewell to Ice:  A Report from the Arctic’, professor of Ocean Physics, and Head of the Polar Ocean Physics Group in the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge. He is best known for his work on sea ice.  He will be joined by MIT-trained physicist and founder of the Climate Restoration Alliance, Peter Fiekowsky.

What: ‘Climate Restoration’ is the proverbial ‘third leg of the stool’ along with mitigation and adaptation. We need to get our heads around the idea that it’s not enough to aim at reducing emissions and adapting the the changes already ‘dialed in’ to the climate system. We must establish a goal of getting atmospheric carbon levels down to a point where human survival with conditions resembling those in which civilization developed and flourished.

Enjoy this intriguing discussion of Climate Restoration recorded live at the UN-sponsored COP-25 climate negotiations in Madrid, Spain in December 2019.

Where: Press Conference Room Mocha, COP25, Madrid, Spain

When: Thursday, December 12, 15:00 (3:00 pm)

Scientists’ Warning Programs

We have an exciting line-up of SW programs for this year’s COP. They were recorded and uploaded to the SW Youtube channel which has since been rebranded as FacingFuture.TV:

Dec. 12: Climate Restoration Dr. Peter Wadhams & Peter Fiekowsky
Dec. 13 TBD

Website: FacingFuture.Earth
Youtube: FacingFuture.TV
Twitter: Stuart Scott @StuartGaia

5 Replies to “Climate Restoration”

  1. I am sorry, but I must react.

    Which carbon is intended to be pulled from atmosphere? How will you pull the air from the stratosphere?

    No pulling carbon from atmosphere can be successful, if we simultaneously leave the huge Arctic methane emissions into the air. Three years ago Shakhova published maximal 3 kg of methane through 1 m3 in 1 day. They also measured almost 1 kg during testing of their equipment. They estimated 10 % of so much damaged seafloor in East Siberian Arctic seas. Dr. Wadhams in an interview accentuates the statement of Shakhova that they don’t dare to extrapolate these measured emissions to the entire sea region. Why? Because the extrapolation gives the enormous huge annual quantity and it will cause panic… But do you think that the same geological structure of the entire sea floor can behave differently as observed in certain regions and points??

    We did this extrapolation, for we are not scientists and we cannot lose our positions and glory and founding in case of some errors in estimation. But only such estimation gives us the actual size of the problem. And we took the realistic only the most vulnerable surface of shallow sea in size of 600.000 km2 and 10 % of most active and degraded seafloor permafrost 60.000 km2.

    Multiply these numbers and you will get 22 Gtons of the annual Arctic emissions (only from ESS). 4 times of the official methane quantity in the atmosphere… Where does it go, if the troposphere concentrations rise much slower ?? The Arctic low concentration degradation processes are certainly not able to decompose it.

    Two new Russian expedition have been led since 2017 and every time they report only about increasing methane emissions in surfaces and power of fluxes. Without the exact numeric measurements. Why? In whose interest? In the interest of the planet survival? But Semiletov already appeals to all world’s science and common sense…

    The only possible geoengineering is covering these regions to:
    Capture this methane and USE IT instead all today’s fossil fuels. 20 Gtons mean 2 fold human energy consumption !! Burning the rest into CO2 if no other solution. 22 Gtons are already half of annual CO2 emissions, but as the greenhouse gas powerful as the entire CO2 quantity in atmosphere !!! But maybe producing also resistant plastic material to cover further the biggest eruptions, to make huge containers and store the captured gas for future. We can also leave captured methane later slowly into atmosphere, but only in such quantities, which can be degradable by natural processes. Connected with this, DO NOT FORCE the alternative technologies !!!
    Covering the bottom tightly with so strong plastic that it will sustain the gas pressures of about 3 MPa (30 bars). This pressure will be the same as before under the undamaged permafrost. Only this pressure was able to keep the hydrates stable because the temperatures there don’t enable that and the pressure of the water and sediment weight are also to small. The tightly covering plastic surfaces will not be sensitive to the degradation from the bottom side, as the permafrost in last decade with the energy of the free gas below.

    After years long following the Russian research and all other information, connected with this problem, I am finishing in these months the book “Arctic Methane”. My own translation from original Slovene to English is ready for proof-read, but because of the importance of this information I am publishing this e-version free on the website link below. One more chapter is going to be added about the real degradation of methane in the troposphere, where the concentration of hydroxyl and the speed of process repetition are far too low to enable degradation of the generally accepted quantities…

    Regards, Milan

  2. To Milan Malej.
    Your comment is very interesting and I would like to contact you and discuss your book.
    Would appreciate your sending me your email and the e-version of your book.
    Regards Peter Wadhams

  3. Dear Dr. Wadhams!

    Thank you for the interest for my work. Your comment was the most beautiful gift I got already for some time ago. In the total opposition of the ignorance, which I am experiencing from the most people in my country, even the environmentalists…

    But things slowly change. I am trying to present these things to the young, who are also in Slovenia protesting for climate, following the Greta Thunberg. They are listening, reading and show the serious interest to the things, which are being hidden off Greta herself, I think. It is promissing that some politics don’t look aside them any more and have given some promises, too. But they still don’r aware of the Arctic methane problem… I visited the protesting students today and we have built a protesting snow man in front of our parliament 🙂

    My e-mail is: [email protected]

    The link at my e-mail drive, where you can find four PDFs of the book is:

    I already left these both links in my contact data for the first comment and probably they should be available from the side of Mr. Scott’s administrators. I repeat them in this form once again, too.

    The text was translated and electronically checked from my side and a fiend, a journalist from Solihul is willing to proof-read it, as the English in not my native language. With colleagues we started to talk also about German and Italian translations…

    In this occassion, I would also ask you personally and Mr. Scott to allow publishing of your interview in this book, while in English version it is practically the copy of your video transcription. In Slovene original the interview was translated as all others (with Shakhova and McPherson) too. The interview is part of the Chapter 3.3 in the last file.

    Till one more chapter I mentioned is finished and the text cheched again, this multi-file form will probably remain… Currently I am in middle of calculations of molecule concentrations, speeds, collisions and probable reaction times in the troposphere and I want to repeat it for stratosphere, with assumption too that Arctic methane is being lifted because of really very poor OH concentrations in polar troposphere regions (almost) totally to that heights… It is not very scientific, because I want to make it understandable to the people, but it includes many power factors and every mistake can lead also to the entirely false interpretations… When available in an acceptable form I’ll send you (into a control :-)…

    Thanks again and for any question I am available anytime.

    Regards, Milan Malej

    1. Dear Milan,
      Thank you very much for the four components of your book. I will read it carefully and get back to you with comments.
      You may certainly use my interview in it if you wish,
      Best wishes
      Peter Wadhams

  4. I was surprised to hear Peter Wadhams saying that the methane release would be a smaller problem than Co2 because of its short life. It breaks down into CO2 which adds thousands of years of extra time to the life of its carbon, plus methane itself is a very powerful (28xCO2) greenhouse gas. The potential release of Arctic methane runs into about 1.8 trillion tons, I believe, and although a lot of it is way below the ice, in solid form, as you know only too well, the ice and permafrost are melting at an exponential rate. So are we heading for an extinction like the Great Permian Extinction, when vulcanism etc began a catastrophic release of methane and the majority of species on land and oceans became extinct and it took 10 million years for the biosphere to recover?

    Milan’s concern is very real, and is being neglected. His work would be a great contribution to examination of the methane question. Please let Facing Future know about your work. I am also on the team.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *