Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, the US had a program called "Project Plowshares" dedicated to their use in, primarily, construction: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Plowshare
The quiet-part-out-loudness of naming a project designed as a propaganda measure to leverage peaceful applications of nuclear technology (including explosions) to build acceptance of (/ mitigate opposition to) nuclear weaponry qua weaponry so as to invoke Joel 3:9-10 (“Proclaim ye this among the Gentiles; Prepare war, wake up the mighty men, let all the men of war draw near; let them come up: / Beat your plowshares i…
Can you drill into a supervolcano to relieve pressure? (2016)
71–80 of 125 posts
Re: Can you drill into a supervolcano to relieve pressure? (2016)
#72Re: Can you drill into a supervolcano to relieve pressure? (2016)
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
Relatedly: apparently it would be a good idea to destroy the Martian moon Phobos before settling the planet. It's a fascinating proposal and makes sense; you can read about it here: https://marspedia.org/Bringing_down_Phobos
If we are going down that rabbit hole, I love the plan to create an artificial Martian magnetosphere by placing a magnetic field generating satellite between mars and the solar winds. Generating an atmosphere on mars is all well and good, but it will just blow away again without some protection. The generator would only require roughly 583.9 exajoules, or roughly the world's total energy consumption in 2020. https://…
Not in any appreciable amount over human timescales.
Re: Can you drill into a supervolcano to relieve pressure? (2016)
#74On a related note: why not seriously tap these geothermal hot spots for energy? Doesn't stop at night or when the wind dies down.
At least in the US, environmental activism has contributed to lack of geothermal development. While the US has large regions with high geothermal potential, such as the Great Basin area of the mountain West, much of this land is undeveloped and under Federal control. This allows activists anywhere in the country to make getting permission difficult and expensive, the effect of which has been to limit the practical si…
That is not a triumph of ecoterror, but of economics: solar and wind are already substantically cheaper, and continue getting much cheaper, where geothermal, like nukes, stays just as expensive to build and operate as ever. So, pace baseload, a dollar spent today is overwhelmingly better spent on a solar panel or wind turbine, or, soon, storage for solar and wind, or production of H2 as feedstock for industrial processes and hydrocarbon synthesis from captured CO2.
There is never any need to install new solar or wind in wilderness. Both coexist productively and synergistically with current agricultural land use. A farm or pasture with solar is more agriculturally productive than the same without, and also generates clean power. In effect, the power output subsidizes construction of the shading infrastructure that reduces heat stress and evaporation.
A wind turbine displaces minimal ground area, and thus may be in the middle of a solar farm, both situated in current, productive cropland. Output may be used locally to produce ammonia when spot prices bottom out, useful on-site for both fertilizer and fuel.
Re: Can you drill into a supervolcano to relieve pressure? (2016)
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
As far as I know, nothing has been releaseed from one of these major calderas at scale in recorded history
That's like saying humans don't have to eat because you haven't been hungry in the last minute.
I'm quite aware of the fact that the earth is older than written records of the earth.
Re: Can you drill into a supervolcano to relieve pressure? (2016)
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
The quiet-part-out-loudness of naming a project designed as a propaganda measure to leverage peaceful applications of nuclear technology (including explosions) to build acceptance of (/ mitigate opposition to) nuclear weaponry qua weaponry so as to invoke Joel 3:9-10 (“Proclaim ye this among the Gentiles; Prepare war, wake up the mighty men, let all the men of war draw near; let them come up: / Beat your plowshares i…
The cynicism is dizzying.
Re: Can you drill into a supervolcano to relieve pressure? (2016)
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
A superconducting tape girdling the planet's equator would suffice, and require after startup only the power needed to keep it chilled at all times below 70K.
That sounds actually quite practical and like an amazing option! Are there papers about this you could please share the links to?
21340 km of superconducting tape could take rather some time to fabricate. Then, of course you need to get it there, and lay it out, and construct 20k refrigeration plants. Then, extract enough nitrogen from the atmosphere (1.89% concentration) for refrigerant; you'll need about 4M tons of it. You also need 21340 km of cryo-safe piping bonded to the tape, which probably weighs another 4M tons. Plus heat insulation.
Leakage from 21340 km of tubing, even if just migration of single molecules through the walls of the tube, would require continuous injection of fresh nitrogen.
And, I guess, you had better protect it from meteorite strikes. A planet-sized magnetic field suddenly imploding would seem to release enough energy to vaporize your whole tape. Maybe you should have two of them, parallel, 100km apart so they are unlikely to both be taken out by the same meteorite.
Re: Can you drill into a supervolcano to relieve pressure? (2016)
#78I can well attest to that. A year or so after the major eruption of Mount St. Helens on May 18, 1980, I had business in both Portland and Seattle and on that occasion I drove from Portland to Seattle rather than fly, as I'd normally do. (I'd been to Tektronix to whinge about ongoing problems we'd been having with a PAL 625 TV sync pulse generator—an interesting story in itself but I'll leave that for another time).
I live an ocean away—thousands of miles from Portland but I had an ulterior motive for renting a vehicle in Portland and driving to Seattle, as this time I wanted to visit and drive over the 'renewed' Tacoma Narrows bridge which replaced the infamous Galloping Gertie that failed in 1940—of which I'd learned so much about years earlier in structures and physics. Having a vehicle made that possible. Visiting Mt St Helens wasn't on my agenda—and I'd already seen it post the 1980 eruption from a commercial SFO/SEA flight although I did expect to see it in the distance to the east from the I5.
It was somewhat latish afternoon, 3:30–4:00 pm, when I arrived at my nearest point on the I5 to Mt St Helens and unexpectedly nearby there was a small airfield. Signs on the highway indicated that a company was offering joy flights to Mt St Helens, so on-the-spur-of-the-moment I decided to take the flight. Unfortunately, I was the only one wanting a flight at that time and the pilot told me that it was uneconomic to take only one person (two being the minimum) so I'd have to wait until additional sightseers turned up—and if that didn't happen soon (within 15 or so minutes) then it'd be too late in the day to fly! Anyway, I struck a deal at somewhat less than the amount for two people and we were on our way.
I don't need to describe this remarkable scene except to say it was spectacular—much more so than the somewhat limited view from the commercial jet; and anyone who's interested will already be familiar with the wonderful photos in National Geographic and elsewhere. However, one point I must comment on is that for mile after mile in this desolate lunar-mud-like landscape the remaining trunks of the flattened pine trees were all facing radially away from the exit point of the explosion like the spokes of a bicycle wheel, it was one of the strangest sights I've ever seen. There was no doubt that this was an extremely huge explosion.
After doing the standard joy flight, the pilot suggested that seeing I'd paid much more than the normal fare would I like him to take me closer to the crater. Gleefully, I agreed and we not only got closer to the crater but we actually flew around inside it — right, the crater is truly huge when one's actually inside it! When the author says it took him nearly 'six hours to walk out of the center of the crater' he not exaggerating one iota.
'Tis a damn shame photos aren't allowed on HN, otherwise I'd post some of my old slides taken from inside the crater (they're truly spectacular).
Re: Can you drill into a supervolcano to relieve pressure? (2016)
#79Re: the first paragraph's reference to nuking the Deepwater horizon's oil leak, Soviet engineers demonstrated that this was a viable technique back in the 60's. Plenty of wild non-war applications have been proposed for nuclear bombs over the years, but this is the only one I can think of that is actually somewhat of a good idea. Any fallout is minor and contained under 1km+ of bedrock, and the harm prevented is wort…
>Plenty of wild non-war applications have been proposed for nuclear bombs over the years Yup, Project Plowshare (US) and Nuclear Explosions for the National Economy (USSR) looked a lot of interesting/crazy ideas for non-military applications for nuclear weapons. Some of the ideas were just nuts for use on earth (like making bays) but if we ever do start setting up shop on another planet, like Mars, nuclear detonation…
Re: Can you drill into a supervolcano to relieve pressure? (2016)
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
If we are going down that rabbit hole, I love the plan to create an artificial Martian magnetosphere by placing a magnetic field generating satellite between mars and the solar winds. Generating an atmosphere on mars is all well and good, but it will just blow away again without some protection. The generator would only require roughly 583.9 exajoules, or roughly the world's total energy consumption in 2020. https://…
A superconducting tape girdling the planet's equator would suffice, and require after startup only the power needed to keep it chilled at all times below 70K.