Carolyn D. Ruppel

Dr. Carolyn D. Ruppel

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

39Years (1988-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
8 February 2017 in Reviews of Geophysics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CRCarolyn D. Ruppel
Carolyn D. Ruppel
JKJohn D. Kessler
John D. Kessler
Gas hydrate, a frozen, naturally‐occurring, and highly‐concentrated form of methane, sequesters significant carbon in the global system and is stable only over a range of low‐temperature and moderate‐pressure conditions. Gas hydrate is widespread in the sediments of marine continental margins and permafrost areas, locations where ocean and atmospheric warming may perturb the hydrate stability field and lead to release of the sequestered methane into the overlying sediments and soils. Methane and methane‐derived carbon that escape from sediments and soils and reach the atmosphere could exacerbate greenhouse warming. The synergy between warming climate and gas hydrate dissociation feeds a popular perception that global warming could drive catastrophic methane releases from the contemporary gas hydrate reservoir. Appropriate evaluation of the two sides of the climate‐methane hydrate synergy requires assessing direct and indirect observational data related to gas hydrate dissociation phenomena and numerical models that track the interaction of gas hydrates/methane with the ocean and/or atmosphere. Methane hydrate is likely undergoing dissociation now on global upper continental slopes and on continental shelves that ring the Arctic Ocean. Many factors—the depth of the gas hydrates in sediments, strong sediment and water column sinks, and the inability of bubbles emitted at the seafloor to deliver methane to the sea‐air interface in most cases—mitigate the impact of gas hydrate dissociation on atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations though. There is no conclusive proof that hydrate‐derived methane is reaching the atmosphere now, but more observational data and improved numerical models will better characterize the climate‐hydrate synergy in the future.

10 March 1999 in Journal of Geophysical Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
WXWenyue Xu
Wenyue Xu
CRCarolyn D. Ruppel
Carolyn D. Ruppel

17 April 2007 in Journal of Geophysical Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
TYT. S. Yun
T. S. Yun
JSJ. C. Santamarina
J. C. Santamarina
CRCarolyn D. Ruppel
Carolyn D. Ruppel

24 August 2014 in Nature Geoscience
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
ASA. Skarke
A. Skarke
CRCarolyn D. Ruppel
Carolyn D. Ruppel
MKM. Kodis
M. Kodis
DBD. Brothers
D. Brothers
ELE. Lobecker
E. Lobecker

20 May 2005 in Geophysical Research Letters
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TYTae Sup Yun
Tae Sup Yun
FFF. M. Francisca
F. M. Francisca
JSJ.Carlos Santamarina
J.Carlos Santamarina
CRCarolyn D. Ruppel
Carolyn D. Ruppel
The competing hypotheses for gas hydrate formation at the particle scale in sediments describe processes of pore‐filling, frame‐building, or cementation. New measurements of compressional (VP) and shear wave (VS) velocities in fine‐grained sands subjected to low confinement and monitored during formation of tetrahydrofuran hydrate indicate that hydrate nucleates in the pore space (presumably at grain boundaries) and grows with limited impact on the sediment shear stiffness, VP, and VS until crystals begin to interact with the granular skeleton at ∼40% hydrate concentration. VS increases significantly more than VP at higher hydrate concentrations, reflecting larger changes in the specimen's shear stiffness than its bulk stiffness. The results indicate that seismic velocities and/or their ratio (VP/VS) have limited capability for locating hydrate or constraining hydrate concentrations.

10 December 1995 in Journal of Geophysical Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
CRCarolyn D. Ruppel
Carolyn D. Ruppel