scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Jürgen Mienert

Bio: Jürgen Mienert is an academic researcher from University of Tromsø. The author has contributed to research in topics: Clathrate hydrate & Continental margin. The author has an hindex of 54, co-authored 181 publications receiving 8337 citations. Previous affiliations of Jürgen Mienert include University of Kiel & Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors give an overview of the morphology and the processes responsible for the formation of three main groups of morphological features: slides, trough mouth fans and channels.

340 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A review and update from original data and literature reports the current state of knowledge of Storegga, Traenadjupet and Finneidfjord slides from the mid-Norwegian margin, Afen Slide from the Faeroe-Shetland Channel, BIG'95 Slide and Central Adriatic Deformation Belt (CADEB) from continental slope and inner continental shelf settings off the Ebro and Po rivers in the Mediterranean Sea, Canary Slide west of the westernmost, youngest Canary Islands and Gebra Slide off the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula

337 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The detailed mapping of the Storegga Slide morphological elements and the analyses of the slide development are based on high-quality acoustic and sampling data sets acquired through a cooperation between academia and the petroleum industry as discussed by the authors.

336 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, different slope failures events from different parts of the Costa target areas, which reflect diverse triggering mechanisms, were analysed to identify the geotechnical response of the sediment to different external mechanisms (earthquake, rapid sedimentation and gas hydrate melting).

290 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The sensitivity of oceanic gas hydrates and submarine slope stability to the combined forcing of sea level changes and bottom water perturbation is a critical issue for risk assessment in the Storegga Slide area on the mid-Norwegian margin this article.

275 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
20 Nov 2003-Nature
TL;DR: Natural gas hydrates have an important bearing on flow assurance and safety issues in oil and gas pipelines, they offer a largely unexploited means of energy recovery and transportation, and could play a significant role in past and future climate change.
Abstract: Natural gas hydrates are solid, non-stoichiometric compounds of small gas molecules and water. They form when the constituents come into contact at low temperature and high pressure. The physical properties of these compounds, most notably that they are non-flowing crystalline solids that are denser than typical fluid hydrocarbons and that the gas molecules they contain are effectively compressed, give rise to numerous applications in the broad areas of energy and climate effects. In particular, they have an important bearing on flow assurance and safety issues in oil and gas pipelines, they offer a largely unexploited means of energy recovery and transportation, and they could play a significant role in past and future climate change.

2,419 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors construct decadal budgets for methane sources and sinks between 1980 and 2010, using a combination of atmospheric measurements and results from chemical transport models, ecosystem models, climate chemistry models and inventories of anthropogenic emissions.
Abstract: Methane is an important greenhouse gas, responsible for about 20% of the warming induced by long-lived greenhouse gases since pre-industrial times. By reacting with hydroxyl radicals, methane reduces the oxidizing capacity of the atmosphere and generates ozone in the troposphere. Although most sources and sinks of methane have been identified, their relative contributions to atmospheric methane levels are highly uncertain. As such, the factors responsible for the observed stabilization of atmospheric methane levels in the early 2000s, and the renewed rise after 2006, remain unclear. Here, we construct decadal budgets for methane sources and sinks between 1980 and 2010, using a combination of atmospheric measurements and results from chemical transport models, ecosystem models, climate chemistry models and inventories of anthropogenic emissions. The resultant budgets suggest that data-driven approaches and ecosystem models overestimate total natural emissions. We build three contrasting emission scenarios-which differ in fossil fuel and microbial emissions-to explain the decadal variability in atmospheric methane levels detected, here and in previous studies, since 1985. Although uncertainties in emission trends do not allow definitive conclusions to be drawn, we show that the observed stabilization of methane levels between 1999 and 2006 can potentially be explained by decreasing-to-stable fossil fuel emissions, combined with stable-to-increasing microbial emissions. We show that a rise in natural wetland emissions and fossil fuel emissions probably accounts for the renewed increase in global methane levels after 2006, although the relative contribution of these two sources remains uncertain. © 2013 Macmillan Publishers Limited.

1,668 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
28 Mar 2003-Science
TL;DR: Policy-makers should consider expanding research into abrupt climate change, improving monitoring systems, and taking actions designed to enhance the adaptability and resilience of ecosystems and economies.
Abstract: Large, abrupt, and widespread climate changes with major impacts have occurred repeatedly in the past, when the Earth system was forced across thresholds. Although abrupt climate changes can occur for many reasons, it is conceivable that human forcing of climate change is increasing the probability of large, abrupt events. Were such an event to recur, the economic and ecological impacts could be large and potentially serious. Unpredictability exhibited near climate thresholds in simple models shows that some uncertainty will always be associated with projections. In light of these uncertainties, policy-makers should consider expanding research into abrupt climate change, improving monitoring systems, and taking actions designed to enhance the adaptability and resilience of ecosystems and economies.

1,218 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
29 Apr 1999-Nature
TL;DR: Studies of sediments related to a decomposing methane hydrate provide strong evidence that methane is being consumed by archaebacteria that are phylogenetically distinct from known methanogens.
Abstract: Large amounts of methane are produced in marine sediments but are then consumed before contacting aerobic waters or the atmosphere1. Although no organism that can consume methane anaerobically has ever been isolated, biogeochemical evidence indicates that the overall process involves a transfer of electrons from methane to sulphate and is probably mediated by several organisms, including a methanogen (operating in reverse) and a sulphate-reducer (using an unknown intermediate substrate)2. Here we describe studies of sediments related to a decomposing methane hydrate. These provide strong evidence that methane is being consumed by archaebacteria that are phylogenetically distinct from known methanogens. Specifically, lipid biomarkers that are commonly characteristic of archaea are so strongly depleted in carbon-13 that methane must be the carbon source, rather than the metabolic product, for the organisms that have produced them. Parallel gene surveys of small-subunit ribosomal RNA (16S rRNA) indicate the predominance of a new archael group which is peripherally related to the methanogenic orders Methanomicrobiales and Methanosarcinales.

1,170 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Marielle Saunois1, Ann R. Stavert2, Ben Poulter3, Philippe Bousquet1, Josep G. Canadell2, Robert B. Jackson4, Peter A. Raymond5, Edward J. Dlugokencky6, Sander Houweling7, Sander Houweling8, Prabir K. Patra9, Prabir K. Patra10, Philippe Ciais1, Vivek K. Arora, David Bastviken11, Peter Bergamaschi, Donald R. Blake12, Gordon Brailsford13, Lori Bruhwiler6, Kimberly M. Carlson14, Mark Carrol3, Simona Castaldi15, Naveen Chandra9, Cyril Crevoisier16, Patrick M. Crill17, Kristofer R. Covey18, Charles L. Curry19, Giuseppe Etiope20, Giuseppe Etiope21, Christian Frankenberg22, Nicola Gedney23, Michaela I. Hegglin24, Lena Höglund-Isaksson25, Gustaf Hugelius17, Misa Ishizawa26, Akihiko Ito26, Greet Janssens-Maenhout, Katherine M. Jensen27, Fortunat Joos28, Thomas Kleinen29, Paul B. Krummel2, Ray L. Langenfelds2, Goulven Gildas Laruelle, Licheng Liu30, Toshinobu Machida26, Shamil Maksyutov26, Kyle C. McDonald27, Joe McNorton31, Paul A. Miller32, Joe R. Melton, Isamu Morino26, Jurek Müller28, Fabiola Murguia-Flores33, Vaishali Naik34, Yosuke Niwa26, Sergio Noce, Simon O'Doherty33, Robert J. Parker35, Changhui Peng36, Shushi Peng37, Glen P. Peters, Catherine Prigent, Ronald G. Prinn38, Michel Ramonet1, Pierre Regnier, William J. Riley39, Judith A. Rosentreter40, Arjo Segers, Isobel J. Simpson12, Hao Shi41, Steven J. Smith42, L. Paul Steele2, Brett F. Thornton17, Hanqin Tian41, Yasunori Tohjima26, Francesco N. Tubiello43, Aki Tsuruta44, Nicolas Viovy1, Apostolos Voulgarakis45, Apostolos Voulgarakis46, Thomas Weber47, Michiel van Weele48, Guido R. van der Werf7, Ray F. Weiss49, Doug Worthy, Debra Wunch50, Yi Yin1, Yi Yin22, Yukio Yoshida26, Weiya Zhang32, Zhen Zhang51, Yuanhong Zhao1, Bo Zheng1, Qing Zhu39, Qiuan Zhu52, Qianlai Zhuang30 
Université Paris-Saclay1, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation2, Goddard Space Flight Center3, Stanford University4, Yale University5, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration6, VU University Amsterdam7, Netherlands Institute for Space Research8, Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology9, Chiba University10, Linköping University11, University of California, Irvine12, National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research13, New York University14, Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli15, École Polytechnique16, Stockholm University17, Skidmore College18, University of Victoria19, National Institute of Geophysics and Volcanology20, Babeș-Bolyai University21, California Institute of Technology22, Met Office23, University of Reading24, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis25, National Institute for Environmental Studies26, City University of New York27, University of Bern28, Max Planck Society29, Purdue University30, European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts31, Lund University32, University of Bristol33, Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory34, University of Leicester35, Université du Québec à Montréal36, Peking University37, Massachusetts Institute of Technology38, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory39, Southern Cross University40, Auburn University41, Joint Global Change Research Institute42, Food and Agriculture Organization43, Finnish Meteorological Institute44, Technical University of Crete45, Imperial College London46, University of Rochester47, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute48, Scripps Institution of Oceanography49, University of Toronto50, University of Maryland, College Park51, Hohai University52
TL;DR: The second version of the living review paper dedicated to the decadal methane budget, integrating results of top-down studies (atmospheric observations within an atmospheric inverse-modeling framework) and bottom-up estimates (including process-based models for estimating land surface emissions and atmospheric chemistry, inventories of anthropogenic emissions, and data-driven extrapolations) as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: Understanding and quantifying the global methane (CH4) budget is important for assessing realistic pathways to mitigate climate change. Atmospheric emissions and concentrations of CH4 continue to increase, making CH4 the second most important human-influenced greenhouse gas in terms of climate forcing, after carbon dioxide (CO2). The relative importance of CH4 compared to CO2 depends on its shorter atmospheric lifetime, stronger warming potential, and variations in atmospheric growth rate over the past decade, the causes of which are still debated. Two major challenges in reducing uncertainties in the atmospheric growth rate arise from the variety of geographically overlapping CH4 sources and from the destruction of CH4 by short-lived hydroxyl radicals (OH). To address these challenges, we have established a consortium of multidisciplinary scientists under the umbrella of the Global Carbon Project to synthesize and stimulate new research aimed at improving and regularly updating the global methane budget. Following Saunois et al. (2016), we present here the second version of the living review paper dedicated to the decadal methane budget, integrating results of top-down studies (atmospheric observations within an atmospheric inverse-modelling framework) and bottom-up estimates (including process-based models for estimating land surface emissions and atmospheric chemistry, inventories of anthropogenic emissions, and data-driven extrapolations). For the 2008–2017 decade, global methane emissions are estimated by atmospheric inversions (a top-down approach) to be 576 Tg CH4 yr−1 (range 550–594, corresponding to the minimum and maximum estimates of the model ensemble). Of this total, 359 Tg CH4 yr−1 or ∼ 60 % is attributed to anthropogenic sources, that is emissions caused by direct human activity (i.e. anthropogenic emissions; range 336–376 Tg CH4 yr−1 or 50 %–65 %). The mean annual total emission for the new decade (2008–2017) is 29 Tg CH4 yr−1 larger than our estimate for the previous decade (2000–2009), and 24 Tg CH4 yr−1 larger than the one reported in the previous budget for 2003–2012 (Saunois et al., 2016). Since 2012, global CH4 emissions have been tracking the warmest scenarios assessed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Bottom-up methods suggest almost 30 % larger global emissions (737 Tg CH4 yr−1, range 594–881) than top-down inversion methods. Indeed, bottom-up estimates for natural sources such as natural wetlands, other inland water systems, and geological sources are higher than top-down estimates. The atmospheric constraints on the top-down budget suggest that at least some of these bottom-up emissions are overestimated. The latitudinal distribution of atmospheric observation-based emissions indicates a predominance of tropical emissions (∼ 65 % of the global budget, < 30∘ N) compared to mid-latitudes (∼ 30 %, 30–60∘ N) and high northern latitudes (∼ 4 %, 60–90∘ N). The most important source of uncertainty in the methane budget is attributable to natural emissions, especially those from wetlands and other inland waters. Some of our global source estimates are smaller than those in previously published budgets (Saunois et al., 2016; Kirschke et al., 2013). In particular wetland emissions are about 35 Tg CH4 yr−1 lower due to improved partition wetlands and other inland waters. Emissions from geological sources and wild animals are also found to be smaller by 7 Tg CH4 yr−1 by 8 Tg CH4 yr−1, respectively. However, the overall discrepancy between bottom-up and top-down estimates has been reduced by only 5 % compared to Saunois et al. (2016), due to a higher estimate of emissions from inland waters, highlighting the need for more detailed research on emissions factors. Priorities for improving the methane budget include (i) a global, high-resolution map of water-saturated soils and inundated areas emitting methane based on a robust classification of different types of emitting habitats; (ii) further development of process-based models for inland-water emissions; (iii) intensification of methane observations at local scales (e.g., FLUXNET-CH4 measurements) and urban-scale monitoring to constrain bottom-up land surface models, and at regional scales (surface networks and satellites) to constrain atmospheric inversions; (iv) improvements of transport models and the representation of photochemical sinks in top-down inversions; and (v) development of a 3D variational inversion system using isotopic and/or co-emitted species such as ethane to improve source partitioning.

1,047 citations