This story going around Facebook has a serious error that seems to obscure an important core of truth.
The supervolcano that lies beneath Yellowstone National Park is 2.5 times larger than previously thought, it was revealed at an American Geophysical Union meeting.
Scientists knew the supervolcano was big, and set out to find out just how big, in order to assess the threat level. What they discovered, they said, was “astounding.”
Between 125 and 185 billion cubic miles of magma is pooled under the surface, representing an existential threat to America, as well as the rest of the world. One scientist estimates an eruption would be 2,000 times the size of Mount St. Helens.
185 billion cubic miles? As in a cube that’s 5700 miles on each side? I don’t think so! But if you presume that what was meant was 185 billion cubic meters, which would translate to about 44.4 cubic miles of lava — or a cube (if you really wanted to stuff it all into a large box) of about 3.5 miles per side, then it makes a lot more sense. Although, as it stretches more than 55 miles below the surface, it might be better analogized to a 55-mile long cylinder of with a one-mile long diameter of hot magma. (MUCH easier to imagine, isn’t it?) Or just use the image above, gleaned from this page.
So with that out of the way, let’s go to the underlying story:
“We know there’s been these really large volcanic eruptions in the past and what we’re seeing now matches that,” [Dr. James Farrell of the University of Utah] said. “We see that there is indeed a large magma reservoir and that there is the potential for large volcanic eruptions in the future, although that would be in the far future.”
A recent scientific study indicates that the underground volcano is nearly 2.5 times bigger than originally thought, stretching more than 55 miles beneath the surface.
…
The last eruption from the Yellowstone super volcano took place 640,000 years ago. Researchers told BBCNews that ash was sent across North America following the eruption.
“These are really big volcanic eruptions and it would definitely be a global event. It would not only affect the U.S. but it would affect the world,” Farrell stated. “All this material that is shot up in the atmosphere would eventually circle the earth and would affect the climate throughout the world.”
So, obviously, the question is: how do we make money off of this? Um, by that I mean: is it possible to use this even larger-than-expected source of energy as a source of geothermal power — ideally before it kills us all? I would think that defusing this source of doom and using it to live a fossil-free life might be something on which we could get 80% or so of the country to agree (although maybe closer to 50% in Orange County.)
Your thoughts? Could we slant drill to Yellowstone from OC and drink their hot milkshake? (Answer: no.)
The Yellowstone Caldera lays directly beneath a national park. Not a lot of opportunity for industrial exploitation.
Slant drilling! Drink that hot milkshake! Drink it up! Thththththththppp!
(Note: It’s a bit like “The Price is Right.” The idea is to get close enough to the magma (to boil fluid and run a turbine — or several of them) without actually going over the point where one breaks through and releases the magma. My question is whether this exceeds our current drilling capacity. Relieving some of the heat from there would be a bonus — although I suspect that such efforts might be “spitting in the ocean.”)
I like it, thousands of them.
I started suggesting this about 5 years ago. Yellowstone is a huge park with limited access areas. I believe this could be done with little impact on wildlife. I would hope rather than believe that it would defuse the danger.
Ms. Keeney, therein lies the problem. The remote areas are supposed to remain comparatively pristine – that’s the point of conservation. Geothermal plants would require construction of permanent access roads, physical plant, transmission lines, etc.
Plants would have to be located outside the park boundaries.
There are lots of opportunities elsewhere in Wyoming alone: Saratoga and Thermopolis spring immediately to mind – although water temperatures and operating costs are a mystery to me.
The main problem is flathead lake,which needs to be drained imedeatly.when the magma dome collapses all this cold water rushes in and creates a huge steam explosion. SO drain the lake start work on fifty foot diameter tunnel from south Dakota and create new mountain while harvesting the magma for energy and refusing pressure no brained, wake up people use you heads.
What if this is an opportunity, that we are supposed to take advantage of…..lets say we use a drill like the channel tunnel drill and modify it to head straight down.
55 miles is a long way, straight down…the required changing of bits, salt water infringement the need for casing to keep the hole open, to depth. weight of the rig to dispose of the tailings.
This would be quite a project,…..but would the gain in technology be worth the effort?
At a certain depth the rock pressure, would want to blow the tooling out of the hole, and fill it in. Do we even have materials strong enough to go that deep! and what is the tempature of the magna 3200 *f. Steel turns to liquid at 2850*F. Even if we could clean out an old caldera. Could we ( humans) relieve enough pressure so this did not pop! It would be an engineering nightmare to go that deep!