Given the scary situation in the Arctic, I would apportion parts of the $10 million to methods that promise immediate results:
- R&D and testing of SRM methods such as surface brightening and marine cloud brightening.
- R&D and testing of ways to ignite or break down methane from the sky, i.e. from airplanes or satellites. Laser beams spring to mind. Another technology that could be looked at further is to focus short, amplified pulses of light on water vapor, hydrogen peroxide or ozone, in efforts to produce more hydroxyl (OH) which could in turn oxidize as much methane as possible.
- Building on the outcome of 2., equipping small aircraft with such technology, as well as autopilot software, GPS, LiPo batteries and with solar thin film mounted both on top of and underneath the wings.
In subsequent years, numerous such planes could follow, also going to other parts of the Arctic. At the end of Summer, the planes could return home for a check-up and possible upgrade of the technology, to be launched again the next year.
There are many self-financed clubs where members build and fly remote controlled aircraft, as discussed in comments underneath this post.
Even a small financial incentive could help such clubs make a lot progress and give them a goal, while the publicity would also make people more aware of the problems we face in the Arctic.
image left) and by equipment carried onboard, such as small versions of methane analyzers.
Measuring from different vantage points can pinpoint the most suitable location to cross-aim multiple laser beams at, to minimize the energy needed to heat up methane to its point of auto-ignition (image below).
At well over 500 degrees Celsius, methane's minimum auto-ignition temperature is rather high. Other volatile hydrocarbons in the vicinity may ignite at lower temperatures (with less energy), in turn igniting the methane.
For further background on the above, also see: