> if you look at the Arctic methane you will
> see the jumps and then the decay as it spreads.
> Pretty much the same logic as tracking SO2
Ways of looking:
1) down:
http://www.jaxa.jp/article/special/geo/nakajima_e.html
http://www.jaxa.jp/article/special/geo/nakajima_img02_l.html
2) up:
That coastline must have had among the world’s best hydrophone arrays, if it’s been maintained, plus whatever else the USSR did toward tracking submarine traffic, and likely similar efforts by other countries navigating under the ice.
There’s an acoustic signature for gas bubbling up through water: http://www.theengineer.co.uk/sectors/energy-and-environment/news/project-uses-microphones-to-detect-underwater-gas-leaks/1010584.article
“14 October 2011 | By Sam Shead
Scientists at Southampton University … employing hydrophones to monitor leaks from underwater gas pipelines…. claim that changes in acoustic signals could be used in the future to detect leaks from underwater pipelines and natural methane gas leaks from the seabed.”
Submarine trackers would have arranged to follow closely any indication of any sort, if the gear’s still in operation.
http://202.38.218.53/hggas/paper/2007Use%20of%20electrical%20resistance%20to%20detect%20the%20formation%20and%20decomposition%20of%20methane%20hydrate.pdf
What’s the chance that this research is all being done on a proprietary basis by the fossil fuel companies that want to lance these boils in a commercially profitable fashion?
