The advantages may be obvious but it all comes down to unit economics. How do costs per MW compare to something like coal, hydro, wind, or solar? And let's not forget the risk assessment that needs to be done in case the supervolcano does in fact explode, or even hiccup. Will it destroy or incapacitate the energy generating facilities?
NASA's plan to save Earth from a supervolcano
11–20 of 114 posts
Re: NASA's plan to save Earth from a supervolcano
#12The advantages may be obvious but it all comes down to unit economics. How do costs per MW compare to something like coal, hydro, wind, or solar? And let's not forget the risk assessment that needs to be done in case the supervolcano does in fact explode, or even hiccup. Will it destroy or incapacitate the energy generating facilities?
Isn't the Yellowstone eruption essentially the same as the dinosaur ending meteorite event? Wouldn't most humans die except for those that could live off of stored foods/what could be raised off of stored food for a couple of years until the sun is visible again ala The Road (besides immediately killing a large percentage of Americans)?
Re: NASA's plan to save Earth from a supervolcano
#13So they need to re-drill constantly? (after each m3.)
I have no idea what you mean by "m3", and I did some google searches ("m3 volcano" "m3 drilling") and it's still not clear. If "m3" is jargon related to volcanos, geology, drilling, or geothermic power generation, I submit to you that most HN readers will be unfamiliar with the term. Or maybe it's just me.
Probably refers to earthquakes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment_magnitude_scale).
Re: NASA's plan to save Earth from a supervolcano
#14This just looks like an attempt to get geothermal energy from Yellowstone. The 6GW power getting out of the ground now is really nothing compared to the energy that's down there. Thermal conduction and fluid transport are what allows the energy to the surface. Adding geo-thermal power generation would increase energy dissipated but would do little to actually change the geologic situation.
I suspect if you asked power companies if they'd go for it they would jump at the opportunity, but TFA jumps the gun and suggests that the government may need to offer incentives to get started.
In short: Let's use peoples fear of global calamity to get them to allow drilling and building in a national park and get free money from the government too.
Re: NASA's plan to save Earth from a supervolcano
#15Seems like it might be prudent to first try extracting 35% of the heat from a volcano smaller than the Yellowstone Caldera. We might learn some things, and if we get it wrong the consequences don't result in widespread starvation. That said, it's obvious that this plan is just the start of serious investigation into how we can engineer mitigations to an eruption at Yellowstone. I would be interested in seeing a model…
I don't think we dare trigger any eruptions at Yellowstone, ever ever ever. My understanding is that there's a positive feedback loop that kicks in; there's just no way to know the whole thing won't go up.
But the plan of drilling into the bottom of the magma chamber from the sides sounds like it might be safe enough. The pressure is much higher there, which ironically is safer because it keeps dissolved gases from coming out of solution, which is what starts the eruption process. That, at least, is my non-expert understanding.
Re: NASA's plan to save Earth from a supervolcano
#16[deleted]
Re: NASA's plan to save Earth from a supervolcano
#17The advantages may be obvious but it all comes down to unit economics. How do costs per MW compare to something like coal, hydro, wind, or solar? And let's not forget the risk assessment that needs to be done in case the supervolcano does in fact explode, or even hiccup. Will it destroy or incapacitate the energy generating facilities?
Isn't the Yellowstone eruption essentially the same as the dinosaur ending meteorite event? Wouldn't most humans die except for those that could live off of stored foods/what could be raised off of stored food for a couple of years until the sun is visible again ala The Road (besides immediately killing a large percentage of Americans)?
I don't think it's on that magnitude.
Humanity lived through an even larger eruption (Toba). I don't think anything but small animals
living underground could have survived that asteroid.
Re: NASA's plan to save Earth from a supervolcano
#18The other problem not mentioned: Yellowstone is the middle of fricken nowhere.
Electricity is hard to send long distances and central planning projects have shown to be their own disasters time-and-time again through history. "This time around though" we have more established population centers so maybe we can pull it off? Not sure! If the power could be produced cheap enough, it might pay off to maintain the massive power grid to send electricity to population centers...
What would truly be revolutionary is phase change electricity storage mechanism! Imagine being able to "ship" electricity on conventional roads, or even in existing pipelines, much the way we do with hydrocarbons.
Batteries charge roughly at the same rate they discharge, making electric cars a PITA. A conventional automobile can be "charged up" with enough potential energy in 8 mins in what takes the fastest chargers 75mins.
Re: NASA's plan to save Earth from a supervolcano
#19The other problem not mentioned: Yellowstone is the middle of fricken nowhere. Electricity is hard to send long distances and central planning projects have shown to be their own disasters time-and-time again through history. "This time around though" we have more established population centers so maybe we can pull it off? Not sure! If the power could be produced cheap enough, it might pay off to maintain the massive…
I'm ignorant, what does phase change have to do with energy storage?
Re: NASA's plan to save Earth from a supervolcano
#20The other problem not mentioned: Yellowstone is the middle of fricken nowhere. Electricity is hard to send long distances and central planning projects have shown to be their own disasters time-and-time again through history. "This time around though" we have more established population centers so maybe we can pull it off? Not sure! If the power could be produced cheap enough, it might pay off to maintain the massive…
This is not as intractable as you might initially think [0].
[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tres_Amigas_SuperStation