3 ms·
This seems like a potentially good idea. Get it straight to CO2 as soon as possible. Otherwise I believe the half-life in the atmosphere is on the order of 10 y
by macawfish 7y ago
This seems like a potentially good idea. Get it straight to CO2 as soon as possible. Otherwise I believe the half-life in the atmosphere is on the order of 10 years.
The problem I could see though is that it would likely speed up the melting of the Arctic. I'm sure there are really complex tradeoffs and someone would have to study them very carefully.
Intuitively I expect the gas to dilute very quickly, making it hard to burn efficiently over large surface areas... how much energy do you put into the fires vs. the amount of gas that is actually converted to CO2. It doesn't help that the methane will rise. All that energy will just go into quickening the melting of the Arctic. Which will also hasten climate change.
Like yeah if you could visualise methane pockets and target them with lasers to the point of combustion as they erupted, sure that could maybe work and much more efficient at converting the gas. Still seems far fetched though.