Renewable Revolution

The IPCC models (there are 31 approved models in AR5) DO take Methane into account - how else could they arrive at the conclusion that Methane is 32% of Total Net Radiative Forcing? What differs between RCP8.5 and Dutton is the quantity of Methane to be fed in to the models.  But RCP8.5 is already a way too high scenario, even RCP2.6 is way too high, so Dutton is even more way too high.

So, is Woods Hole expert Robert Max Holmes an "alarmist" too. Palloy? 

"It’s essential that policymakers begin to seriously consider the possibility of a substantial permafrost carbon feedback to global warming. If they don’t, I suspect that down the road we’ll all be looking at the 2°C threshold in our rear-view mirror." --  Woods Hole expert Robert Max Holmes


Methane release from melting permafrost could trigger dangerous global warming

 
A policy briefing from the Woods Hole Research Center concludes that the IPCC doesn’t adequately account for a methane warming feedback

SNIPPET:


To put this in perspective, permafrost contains almost twice as much carbon as is present in the atmosphere. In the rapidly warming Arctic (warming twice as fast as the globe as a whole), the upper layers of this frozen soil begin to thaw, allowing deposited organic material to decompose. The plant material, which has accumulated over thousands of years, is concentrated in to upper layers (half of it is in the top 10 feet). There is a network of monitoring stations that are measuring ground temperatures have detected a significant heating trend over the past few decades and so has the active layer thickness.

Methane release from melting permafrost could trigger dangerous global warming | John Abraham

John Abrahm: A policy briefing from the Woods Hole Research Center concludes that the IPCC doesn’t adequately account for a methane warming feedback

the Guardian · theguardian.com