Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NASA's plan to save Earth from a supervolcano

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 114 posts

Re: NASA's plan to save Earth from a supervolcano

#21

Post by yongjik »

exabrial wrote: post #18

The 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…

Wait, did you just claim centrally planned projects are disasters, and propose to use nationwide highway/pipeline network instead?

Re: NASA's plan to save Earth from a supervolcano

#22

Post by tempestn »

m_mueller wrote: post #17
stevenwoo wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Regardless, the parent's point stands, that the overall benefit would be enormous - far greater than just the value of the electricity generated.

Re: NASA's plan to save Earth from a supervolcano

#23

Post by weberc2 »

m_mueller wrote: post #17
stevenwoo wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Didn't toba reduce humanity to something like 2000 people?

Re: NASA's plan to save Earth from a supervolcano

#24

Post by grzm »

foota wrote: post #19
exabrial wrote: post #18

The 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?

Matter phase changes either require or release energy. For example, liquifying ice requires energy (which is why ice makes your drink cold when it melts), and the energy used to transform liquid water into steam can be reclaimed as useful work in steam engines. Phase change is one potential storage mechanism for, say, excess electricity production.

Re: NASA's plan to save Earth from a supervolcano

#26

Post by exabrial »

yongjik wrote: post #21
exabrial wrote: post #18

The 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…

Wait, did you just claim centrally planned projects are disasters, and propose to use nationwide highway/pipeline network instead?

Yes! The subtle point being that our pipelines/highways already exist, and I'd love to shove something besides oil down the pipelines.

Re: NASA's plan to save Earth from a supervolcano

#27

Post by milesf »

The idea of any group of humans "saving the Earth" is neighbouring on hubris. It's fine for the plot line of a Hollywood movie, but pragmatically we can't even engage in civil discourse anymore. Tampering with systems like plate tectonic without the ability to even predict the effects of oil shale fracking means we still have a lot to learn.

If the concern of the Earth being wiped out is legitimate, then focus instead on colonizing Space. The end result is the same: preserving human civilization.

Re: NASA's plan to save Earth from a supervolcano

#28

Post by Reason077 »

exabrial wrote: post #18

The 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…

"Imagine being able to "ship" electricity on conventional roads, or even in existing pipelines, much the way we do with hydrocarbons."

That's why people get excited about Hydrogen. Surplus energy can be used to produce H2 via electrolysis. The process is pretty inefficient, but that perhaps doesn't matter if the energy source is abundant enough.

However, the infrastructure required for H2 distribution would be expensive. You can't use existing gas pipelines. It's probably more practical and affordable to just build long-distance HVDC connectors to export 6GW of energy.

Re: NASA's plan to save Earth from a supervolcano

#29

Post by lumberingjack »

I was just in Yellowstone so much is still unknown about it and the more I read about it and saw the more afraid I became of it. At one point we saw a crater the size of a city block it was a geyser then in the 80s exploded and killed a few people. I got to thinking "WTF are we doing here this thing is going to blow at any time!?"

Re: NASA's plan to save Earth from a supervolcano

#30

Post by mos_basik »

khazhoux wrote: post #8
Freestyler_3 wrote: post #3

So 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.

I think GP is referring to this sentence near the end of the article:

>Cooling Yellowstone in this manner would happen at a rate of one metre a year, taking of the order of tens of thousands of years until just cold rock was left.

And I think that sentence is vague enough that any argument using only it as a basis will be pretty weak.

Post reply on HN