4.8 Article

A model for orbital pacing of methane hydrate destabilization during the Palaeogene

Journal

NATURE GEOSCIENCE
Volume 4, Issue 11, Pages 775-778

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1266

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. UK Natural Environment Research Council [NE/F001622/1, NE/F021941/1]
  2. Royal Society [NE/F002408/1, NE/I006443/1]
  3. Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) [863.07.001]
  4. European Research Council under the European Community [259627]
  5. NSF [OCE-0903014]
  6. NERC [NE/J005290/1, NE/I006443/1, NE/F021941/1, NE/F001622/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  7. Natural Environment Research Council [NE/F001622/1, NE/I006443/1, ncas10009, NE/J005290/1] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A series of transient global warming events(1,2) occurred during the late Palaeocene and early Eocene, about 59 to 50 million years ago. The events, although variable in magnitude, were apparently paced by orbital cycles(2-4) and linked to massive perturbations of the global carbon cycle(5,6). However, a causal link between orbital changes in insolation and the carbon cycle has yet to be established for this time period. Here we present a series of coupled climate model simulations that demonstrate that orbitally induced changes in ocean circulation and intermediate water temperature can trigger the destabilization of methane hydrates. We then use a simple threshold model to show that progressive global warming over millions of years, in combination with the increasing tendency of the ocean to remain in a more stagnant state, can explain the decreasing magnitude and increasing frequency of hyperthermal events throughout the early Eocene. Our work shows that nonlinear interactions between climate and the carbon cycle can modulate the effect of orbital variations, in this case producing transient global warming events with varying timing and magnitude.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available