Live data from Hacker News

Could we stop Yellowstone from erupting with a giant geothermal power plant?

constructionphysics.substack.com

111–120 of 191 posts

Re: Could we stop Yellowstone from erupting with a giant geothermal power plant?

#111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I trust any engineer who responds with an “it depends..” over someone who has an absolute answer. Stainless would probably do ok but I’d assume stone or fiberglass/FRP would be superior over time out in the elements. But not the best stuff to build a house with. Oh what about titanium? Edit: lol oh well even timber structures Can last a millenium if maintained

Stone and adobe, in the right conditions. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancestral_Puebloan_dwellings

In those conditions even plain, untreated wood lasts a long time. Many of those structures still have wood beams in pretty good condition.

ie, the durability of those structures is more due to where they are, than what they are made of.

Re: Could we stop Yellowstone from erupting with a giant geothermal power plant?

#112

"If heat could be bled off of the magma chambers, cooling and solidifying them, not only would that stop the volcano from erupting..." Where does the confidence to make this claim come from? I can imagine that the consequence of this might actually just be strengthening the "barrier" the magma has to erupt through, and when it finally builds up enough energy to do that, it'll be stronger in proportion to how strong t…

Well, consider the fact that the vast majority of the earth surface, in fact, almost the entire surface of the earth is entirely volcano-less. Look under your feet -- no volcanoes! Move over a couple of steps and look again -- no volcanoes. So it is safe to say that a certain thickness of rock would serve enough to prevent volcanoes. You just have to provide enough cooling to ensure a sufficiently thick layer of magm…

[deleted]

Re: Could we stop Yellowstone from erupting with a giant geothermal power plant?

#113
post #91
post #65

Short answer: no For a slightly longer answer, here is the conclusion of the article: Trying to build an enormous geothermal power plant and associated transmission lines(!) in one of the most beloved National Parks(!!), which there’s specifically a law against (!!!), and which could potentially trigger a civilization-destroying volcanic eruption (!!!!) is like the final boss of the permitting reform movement. Also,…

Anytime soon is one thing, but "If at all"? It's been happening for millions of years, and it sure seems like there still "activity" there. Not sure what kind of scientist could say they don't expect it to ever erupt again?

[deleted]

Re: Could we stop Yellowstone from erupting with a giant geothermal power plant?

#114
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because it "has extremely high corrosion resistance." Isn't this true though? Especially relative to other materials that can corrode? It seems like you're reacting as if he said it _cant_ corrode.

In general, it's true compared to other metals. Compared to other materials in general (e.g., glass) it's certainly not true. Over the scale of a thousand years, there could be a big difference between something that is corrosion resistant (stainless steel) and something that doesn't corrode at all.

But are you suggesting a non corrosive material would outlast stainless steel? Otherwise I don’t see the point in your distinction. Obviously your example of glass wouldn’t.

I guess I would have thought stone would last longer.

Re: Could we stop Yellowstone from erupting with a giant geothermal power plant?

#115
post #22

The article makes the common (and grating) error of conflating power (1.5 gigawatts) and energy (power over time). Put another way, "1.5 gigawatts" does not in any way describe a rate. Do they mean 1.5 gigawatts per hour? or per day? or per year? I'm referring to this section: ...the rate that energy builds below the volcano is only around 1.5 gigawatts - less heat than a typical power plant sheds. Yellowstone curren…

whoops! ok, yes, my physics is all wrong here. thanks for correcting!

Re: Could we stop Yellowstone from erupting with a giant geothermal power plant?

#116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, consider the fact that the vast majority of the earth surface, in fact, almost the entire surface of the earth is entirely volcano-less. Look under your feet -- no volcanoes! Move over a couple of steps and look again -- no volcanoes. So it is safe to say that a certain thickness of rock would serve enough to prevent volcanoes. You just have to provide enough cooling to ensure a sufficiently thick layer of magm…

Yeah, but how much? The crust is far deeper than humans are capable of penetrating. It's probably a fair concern that it's also far deeper than humans are capable of cooling.

Well, lets ponder this a little further. Currently there are no volcanoes in Yellowstone. So we know that the rock layer is sufficient. We also know that the rock keeps losing heat with time because it has higher than average temperature. But we also know that the rock keeps gaining heat from magma pushing up from some deep underground crack.

What we have to do is measure the net heat gain and calculate how much additional heat a geothermal plant has to extract from the rocks to turn it into net heat loss. Of course the plant will have to extract it from the hotter spots in order to prevent any local maximums from causing volcanoes. But that is the most efficient option for a geothermal plant anyways.

As far as measuring the net heat gain -- it should not be that hard. All you need is to sprinkle a couple of hundred sensors in the rock, monitor them for a while to be able to remove surface effects (like the sun and ambient air temperature) and you should be able to get a decent estimate. In fact I would not be surprised if seismologist already have a pretty good estimate of the heat gain.

Then, when you build the plant, you can be certain that as long as heat is being drained from the rock, magma will keep solidifying and the rock layer will keep getting thicker, etc.

Of course a good earthquake can screw up all of these plans, but an earthquake can destroy any power plant. But then again Yellowstone is one of the most earthquake prone areas of the world, so that perhaps is the biggest danger of this plan.

Re: Could we stop Yellowstone from erupting with a giant geothermal power plant?

#117
post #91
post #65

Short answer: no For a slightly longer answer, here is the conclusion of the article: Trying to build an enormous geothermal power plant and associated transmission lines(!) in one of the most beloved National Parks(!!), which there’s specifically a law against (!!!), and which could potentially trigger a civilization-destroying volcanic eruption (!!!!) is like the final boss of the permitting reform movement. Also,…

Anytime soon is one thing, but "If at all"? It's been happening for millions of years, and it sure seems like there still "activity" there. Not sure what kind of scientist could say they don't expect it to ever erupt again?

If we can be pretty confident it'll be 100 years, that's long enough for technology to progress a lot before we fiddle with it. Not sure what "soon" means in this case, but I suspect they don't mean "within a couple years".

Re: Could we stop Yellowstone from erupting with a giant geothermal power plant?

#118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I trust any engineer who responds with an “it depends..” over someone who has an absolute answer. Stainless would probably do ok but I’d assume stone or fiberglass/FRP would be superior over time out in the elements. But not the best stuff to build a house with. Oh what about titanium? Edit: lol oh well even timber structures Can last a millenium if maintained

>I trust any engineer who responds with an “it depends..” over someone who has an absolute answer. That heuristic matches on the hordes of liars who try and sound smart while hedging their claims with a liberal application of weasel words to avoid being provably wrong. And those people outnumber the "good engineers" probably by at least an order of magnitude...

"When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure."

Re: Could we stop Yellowstone from erupting with a giant geothermal power plant?

#119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Concrete, bricks and granite can also work pretty well... as the Pantheon in Rome proves.

We don't make concrete like the Romans did though.

Still concrete will still last longer than most other materials.

The biggest issue with modern concrete construction is the usage of reenforced concrete using iron or steel rebar which tends to corrode quickly. Reenforced concrete seems to have a half life of ~50 years.

Re: Could we stop Yellowstone from erupting with a giant geothermal power plant?

#120
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I wouldn’t want to be operating the drill This is where AI applications could actually be of benefit. Also, instead of sending Harry Stamper and a bunch of misfit roughnecks to some asteroid of doom, we could just train AI on Harry's knowledge of deep well drilling. It'll be fine.

Why do we need AI for this when remote controlled operations would work just fine, especially terrestrially?

Because you can't get VC funding for your new venture if you don't have AI some where in your slide deck
Post reply on HN