Slashdot Mirror
Is the Yellowstone Supervolcano About To Blow?
An anonymous reader writes "Apparently, Yellowstone National Park has been having a very unusual number of earthquakes. Many of the most recent tremors have been deeper underground, an ominous sign. Combine that with a rapid rise in elevation over the past three years, and the possibility that earthquake activity from surrounding areas could trigger such an eruption on its own, and you've got the possible warning signs of a supervolcano eruption that would wipe out half to 2/3 of the continental US, plunge global temperatures, and wipe out a very significant chunk of world food sources. Here's a little more info to make your New Year brighter!"
You have NO friggin' idea what you're talking about. The mega-eruption, if it happens, could be *hundreds of thousands* times bigger than Mount St. Helens. The last super volcano was 75,000 years ago. Light was blocked out all over the world. 35 centimeters of ash fell *2500 miles* away. The global temperature plunged 21 degrees. Mankind was almost extinguished, cut back to only a few thousand. This one...could be *ten times bigger*.
You are forgetting about the volcanic dust in the lungs that will cause a painful death for many. For the most part, the dust is too fine to be filtered out.
I noticed that too, and the local distribution of the cluster does look somewhat like pre-volcanic activity. But if it were the supervolcano. I'd expect activity along the caldera margins. This looks more like something that would result in a new cone or maybe just some new hot springs under the lake.
Watashi wa chikyubutsurigakusha desu.
I believe the point being that if this particular volcano erupts, pretty much everyone will hear it.
Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
Probably not, but Yellowstone is a very geologically active area, and my first thought when I hear about new activity there (which comes and goes all the time) is of hydrothermal effects.
There's a lot of water moving around underground there, lots of faults, and lots of heat to drive it. When water or ground moves it can change the pressure in other areas, which may allow existing fractures or faults to slip and cause earthquakes. (The hydrostatic pressure of water and CO2 in cracks in rocks can reduce the effective confining pressure holding the rocks together, so they slip more easily -- understanding fluid effects is critical to understanding earthquakes.)
It seems like every time there's an earthquake, or change in geyser activity, or some ground inflation, or whatever, the popular press starts barking about gigantic volcanic eruptions. Before you pay attention to them, consider that a volcanic eruption requires molten rock to reach the surface. On its way it will have to push lots of existing rock out of the way, and that rock will have to go someplace, probably up, which we would detect as significant ground inflation. On its way volatiles would be released which we would expect to detect as unusual concentrations of various volcanic gases and changes in water chemistry. Significant changes in the behavior of existing geothermal features would also be expected.
We also hear a lot about Yellowstone's largest eruptions, but most eruptions are small.
Interestingly, it has been calculated that as much as almost 1/3 of a cubic kilometer of basalt is intruded beneath Yellowstone each year, which if I recall correctly is similar to the amount entering the magma system beneath Hawaii. In Yellowstone, however, it's trapped beneath a gummy layer of molten silica rich rock which itself eventually erupts and partially accounts for Yellowstone's famously explosive outbursts. The basalt, for its part, tends to cool and solidify underground, over time forming a long track of high density rock that is easy to see on any topographic map of the western US as a feature we call the Snake River Plain, terminating with the Yellowstone Caldera as the head of the snake.
Mankind was almost extinguished, cut back to only a few thousand.
But this was human civilization from 75,000 years ago, which intellectually and technologically pales in comparison to human civilization today. Wouldn't the advancements we've made since the Toba eruption help us to endure the effect of another mega-eruption?
The three last eruptions were 6000, 700, and 2500 times Mt St Helens 1980 (MSHE), which released 1.67 exajoules (1.673 x 10^18 Joules). According to the esteemed Christopher Thomas 1 Burning Library of Congress (BLoC) is equivalent to 4 petajoules (4 x 10^15 Joules). Converting MSHE to BLoC gives 1 MSHE = 418.25 BLoC. So the last three eruptions were 2509500 BLoC, 292775 BLoC, and 1045625 BLoC, respectively. Since we don't know how big the next eruption will be, let's just assume the mean of the last 3, and that's 1282633.3 BLoCs, or 39% of the total solar energy that strikes the surface of the Earth.
At its worst, there will be an immense disruption of the electrical and telecommunications grid, immense expense from ash damage and removal, alot of immediate deaths and some ash deaths.
You forgot one little detail: Widespread subzero temperatures and no new food anywhere on the planet for at least a year.
well, if that does happen then there will certainly be major food shortages around the world and severe infrastructure damage (reservoirs becoming silted up, dams breaking, entire towns covered by meters of ash, power lines in other areas snapping from the weight of ash cover, etc.) in the US, but i think science & technology will prevail. my city happens to be within the ash cover area, but i think the city population would still be able to survive.
first off, we would need to get respirators and gas masks, then we would have to secure a water supply. next, we'd need to repair the power lines or build our own little power plant. since no one is going to be driving on the roads, we would have plenty of gasoline to run a large gas turbine capable of powering a small community for a couple of years.
with basic infrastructure restored, we can then focus on securing a food supply. with careful rationing (America is the land of waste and excess after all), existing food supplies that were produced before the disaster would probably last a good year or so. that would be just enough time to establish a local food supply. lack of sunlight and cold weather won't be a problem with a power plant available. it's not too hard to build a greenhouse (or use an existing one) and set up a hydroponic system and grow lamps to produce artificial sunlight & heat.
it will take some hard work, but it's nothing that a little human ingenuity can't overcome. if anything, it'll encourage people to adopt more sustainable lifestyles, foster cooperation and a sense of community, and create a more efficient and egalitarian society in the long run. if Americans want to survive this kind of disaster, they'll have to learn to cooperate with and help one another. rather than depending on agribusiness and corporate farms hundreds of miles away to produce one's food, local communities will have to get together and set up farming co-ops and learn to be more self-sufficient.
if this were India, China, or Africa, then there might be a large death toll. but America has a lot more material wealth and natural resources. we also have a more educated population and the technological and scientific knowledge that brings. our biggest challenge is simply overcoming our culture of selfishness and ignorance. if mass hysteria breaks out or society degenerates into lawless chaos, with everyone fighting over immediate resources, each person blindly pursuing their own selfish interests rather than working together, then we probably won't survive. but chances are most communities will be able to make it through such an ordeal.
personally, i'd travel to the nearest university where there are the highest concentrations of:
additionally, college campuses have large libraries, digital knowledge repositories, advanced research labs, scientific equipment, and many even have greenhouses and seed banks. so you have the human resources, information resources, and material resources to survive the catastrophe. and you'll also be connected to a global academic network.
It won't "burn/melt most of the populated areas of Canada and Mexico", not even close. The magma/lava discharge will simply stay in and around the area of Yellowstone +/- at most 100 miles (heck, the longest known magma/lava flow in the solar system is only ~160 miles, and that is on Jupiter's moon, Io). The only thing that people outside that area have to worry about is ash and volcanic gasses which will be discharged. Unfortunately, the jet stream will force that eastward across the USA (and around the world, in the event of a major eruption). Get your facts straight. And the people modding the parent up for informative should also get their facts straight...
There is also no direct evidence that the eruption of Mt Toba was the cause of the drop in human population. For all we know there could have been a major epidemic which was highly contagious which would slowly kill someone over the course of a year or more (think something like an AIDs virus which was transmitted simply by close contact, not sexually transmitted). We simply don't know for certain. We are now, however, much more technologically capable of dealing with a mini-ice age if it was triggered by an event like this. While it would be difficult, if we really had to work for something, we would develop filters for removal of the particles of ash and soot in the air, and eventually also devise methods to remove or trap the volcanic gasses.
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
Interestingly, when St. Helens erupted, the majority of the ash fell in a relatively small agricultural region. I know, I lived right in the middle of that farm country at the time. When it happened, everyone assumed a total loss for the year, since the ground was caked in inches of the ash cement. The region looked like a wasteland, and mobility was very limited.
But the agricultural disaster never happened. The crops bounced back with a vengeance and produced spectacular record yields. Not just for that year, but for several years thereafter. It turns out that the several inches of ash acted as incredible fertilizer and helped the soil retain moisture, and the crops poked their way through the ash after a couple good rains. Most of the US would get that kind of dusting of ash across its agricultural belt, and while there might be some cooling it will likely be offset in part by a massive agricultural rebound that compensates for a significant part of it. We expected the worst when St. Helens erupted, but the reality was far less than that in terms of food production.