Slashdot Mirror


Just In: Yellowstone Is Big (ger)

jd writes "Really big. By using electrical conductivity tests rather than seismic waves, geologists have remapped the Yellowstone caldera. Whilst seismic waves indicate differences in the reflectivity of different materials, it doesn't show everything and contrast isn't always great. By looking at the electrical conductivity instead, different characteristics of molten and semi-molten rock can be measured and observed. The result — the caldera is far larger than had previously been suspected. This doesn't alter the chances of an eruption, and it's not even clear it would change the scale (prior eruptions are very easy to study, as they're on the surface) but it certainly changes the dynamics and our understanding of this fierce supervolcano."

109 comments

  1. And Leon's getting LARGER! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Airplane! quotes are always suitable

  2. Potentially an extinction level event? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting
    1. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats neet. I'll be in my bunker.

    2. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *pinkie to lip corner*
      burning in MAG----MA!

    3. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      May 21st!

    4. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      The Yellowstone eruption was a little smaller than Toba (2500 km^3 as opposed to 2800 km^3) but you probably don't notice after the first thousand cubic kilometers of ash have landed. There are four other supervolcanos known. Certainly these are extinction-level events - the Year Without A Summer was caused by a tiny volcano in comparison, altering global temperatures a mere 0.4'C, but the levels of famine and disease that resulted were staggering. Scale it up a hundredfold and throw in a continent's worth of ash and you're talking major problems for anything on the surface.

    5. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      618 days left. Just saying.

    6. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering I live a couple hundred miles from it I'm a gonner in the first wave

    7. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by sortius_nod · · Score: 2

      You probably wouldn't know about it seeing as you'd more than likely die from the eruption itself rather than the ash. It's people on the other side of the globe that will die slowly from famine and disease. Consider yourself lucky.

    8. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats neet. I'll be in my bunker.

      Great, you'll live long enough to choke and starve.

      Even if you live in Michigan which is disconnected enough not to be tossed in the atmosphere, you're still there when the lakes "slosh" from earthquakes, and it's the first landing zone when the park starts coming down.. Expect every living thing under ash, no Sun for a decade. The event will cut WORLD food supplies so there is simply no where to go could you travel because in the next years nobody will have food, or timber, or oil, natural gas....

      Should Yellowstone go boom, in the USA the best possible outcome would be to go right along with it.

    9. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by RobertM1968 · · Score: 2

      Considering I live a couple hundred miles from it I'm a gonner in the first wave

      Yes, and believe it or not, you're the lucky one. At only a couple hundred miles, you'll be incinerated in just a few minutes as the wave of heat and ejected particles & rocks reaches you at over the speed of sound. Much better than the suffering others will go through who survive. Lucky bastard!

    10. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by magarity · · Score: 1

      Considering I live a couple hundred miles from it I'm a gonner in the first wave

      Yeah; a friend of mine in southern Japan was moaning about the earthquake problems the northern part was having lately and I said, 'That's nothing; here in Denver we'll show you a *real* natural calamity just as soon as Yellowstone blows."

    11. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, can we as americans sue europe for false advertising when they sent us over here?

      We better pressure them before it happens.

    12. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          [/me contemplating a lava flow, and trying to hide in a subterranean bunker as "protection"]

          Ya. good idea. Let me know how it goes.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    13. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by syousef · · Score: 1

      Should Yellowstone go boom, in the USA the best possible outcome would be to go right along with it.

      Go right ahead. More food for the rest of us. If everyone were so defeatist, the human race would have gone extinct long before we developed tools.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    14. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by FunkSoulBrother · · Score: 2

      It works in Minecraft!

    15. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 1

      Hey, there's always cannibalism

    16. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We survived supervolcanoes and an ice age before, back in the stupid ages.
      I'm pretty sure we could handle one now.

      If push goes to shove, there'd be builders all around the world reinforcing and/or building shelters for humans and animals, and filters for air would be distributed. Also, UV sales would skyrocket for farming.
      Of course, yes, there will be quite a few deaths all around the world, more so in poorer countries, or countries that depend entirely on imported food.
      But Yellowstone has been weakening over every eruption it has created. The debris around it shrunk consistently each time.
      This isn't to say that it could still break that consistency next time, however.

      At this moment in time, I am more worried about the activity around Japan. Those were some serious Earthquakes. And lava certainly never resisted the chance to explode out that volcano there.
      An in-depth survey needs to be done on that area to see what the hell is going on.

    17. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by Internetuser1248 · · Score: 1

      Firstly, you guys and the mayan eotw crowd need to get together and hammer out a compromise. The world can't end twice.

      Secondly, 21st may is only a month away, it is bad business to predict the apocalypse so soon. It is going to take you at least that long just to put out a manuscript. Ideally you want to leave yourself six months for a really polished book ready, then a couple more months for negotiation with publishers and the actual printing process. Then ideally you want 2-3 years for the sales to peak properly, and for talkshow interviews and guest appearances. This way when the predicted date rolls around and your predictions are shown to be totally bogus, you have a nice pile of cash to retire with.

      Thirdly, does it bother anyone else that the country with the highest per capita belief in an impending apocalypse, the USA, also happens to be the country with the largest nuclear arsenal and a rapidly deteriorating political and economic system? I sometimes get this terrible feeling that whatever nutcase is currently in the whitehouse is just sitting with his finger on a big red button waiting for a sign from god.

    18. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by Sinn3d · · Score: 1

      ...and you're talking major problems for anything on the surface.

      Good thing most of us are in a basement.

      Better ask mom to bring down some extra sandwiches & dr peppers, ya know. Just in case.

    19. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the thing blows, you're gonna want to load tomatoes in those hydro cells in the basement rather than their current contents. I know, it's a sacrifice you need to make.

    20. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Even if you live in Michigan [...] Expect every living thing under ash, no Sun for a decade.

      So what's new?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    21. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      The ones Allah (pbuH) has chosen will survive. It is His will.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    22. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aren't these mini-ice-ages preceded by warmer than average climates? Maybe it's just the Earth's way of maintaining equilibrium - when it gets too hot the stuff under the surface is more insulated in relation to the fact that the smaller temperature difference allows for slower cooling of the stuff below the crust - which allows phase changes to occur resulting in pressure buildup - we know its right on the brink of that critical difference due to the fact there are still active volcanoes at all (all things seeking equilibrium, they would cool to a stop over time if the inside of the Earth were doing so on a scale that allowed for it). I don't believe global warming is entirely based on Human activity (there is certainly something to be said for increased methane from animal populations increasing since the last mass extinction, the solar cycle, aforementioned venting, etc) - even if we are speeding up the natural cycle a bit.

    23. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      Even if you live in Michigan [...] Expect every living thing under ash, no Sun for a decade.

      So what's new?

      Ash, instead of snow. So it'll be gray instead of white, outside of the roads where the slush was already gray.

      I welcome this change of pace!

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    24. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by airdweller · · Score: 0

      I'll take long suffering over quick death any time. But I guess I'm just a weirdo who wants to live.

    25. Re:Potentially an extinction level event? by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Actually hemp oil and milled hemp seeds are very nutritious and are less perishable than fresh tomatoes. Just sayin'.

  3. is the DHS on top of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yellowstone is terrorizing all of Idaho, Wyoming and Montana!

    1. Re:is the DHS on top of this? by countertrolling · · Score: 5, Funny

      is the DHS on top of this?

      Well, we hope they are when the thing blows.. takes care of one problem

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    2. Re:is the DHS on top of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yellowstone is terrorizing all of Idaho, Wyoming and Montana!

      No, they'd rather spend their time molesting and drug testing six year old girls.

    3. Re:is the DHS on top of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Dude ...

      Best comment in YEARS.

      Ok, so I'm only an Anonymous Coward, but if I could I'd buy you a beer.

    4. Re:is the DHS on top of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      is the DHS on top of this?

      Well, we hope they are when the thing blows.. takes care of one problem

      More likely Big Sis will plug the thing...

    5. Re:is the DHS on top of this? by Low+Ranked+Craig · · Score: 1

      if not there's always Rosie O'donnell.

      --
      I still cannot find the droids I am looking for...
    6. Re:is the DHS on top of this? by ZosX · · Score: 1

      Too bad you are just a coward.

    7. Re:is the DHS on top of this? by SeNtM · · Score: 1

      Shouldn't the house and senate be planning a trip to yellowstone soon??? I am sick and tired about hearing how hard it is getting by on $175k a year.

      --
      "There ought to be limits to freedom." -George W. Bush
    8. Re:is the DHS on top of this? by ThePromenader · · Score: 1

      ...or Rod Blagojevich's hair, that should plug it nicely.

      --

      No, no sig. Really.

      ThePromenader
    9. Re:is the DHS on top of this? by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      if not there's always Rosie O'donnell.

      Yes, but fire can't melt rock.

  4. Not directly, but pretty close by billstewart · · Score: 1

    They probably don't have an office much closer than Boise, so they're not right on top, but they've always been a bit over the edge.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  5. solution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bury it in water, it seems like it's the popular method of solving problems these days.

  6. New scale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lightly dead

    Somewhat dead

    Fairly dead

    Dead

    More than a bit dead

    Very dead

    Seriously dead

    Extremely dead

    Betamax dead

    1. Re:New scale by Skidborg · · Score: 1

      What about Duke Nukem Forever Dead? Where does that go on the scale?

      ----------
      Standing by for apk assault.

      --
      Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
    2. Re:New scale by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      Do you have alert color codes to go with that? I get a bit confused with the words sometimes.

    3. Re:New scale by neonmonk · · Score: 1

      Stillbirth?

    4. Re:New scale by The+Grim+Reefer2 · · Score: 1

      Sorry, color codes are simply too difficult for us to understand, especially when it never changes. The new system has two levels:

      1. Fucked

      and

      2. Place your head firmly between you legs, and kiss your ass goodbye.

    5. Re:New scale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Reincarnated aka undead.

    6. Re:New scale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot "dead as disco".

    7. Re:New scale by EdZ · · Score: 1

      I'm not seeing "Mostly Dead".

    8. Re:New scale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why are you so stupid?

    9. Re:New scale by Skidborg · · Score: 1

      Hiya, apk. You don't disappoint.

      --
      Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
    10. Re:New scale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You didn't answer my question. Why are you so stupid?

    11. Re:New scale by Skidborg · · Score: 1

      I was trusting in your vast intellect to figure it out and tell me. After all, I don't have a doctorate degree in neurology like you do. I probably can't be trusted with a formidable question such as the one you pose.

      --
      Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
    12. Re:New scale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You aren't answering the question: Why are you so stupid?

    13. Re:New scale by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      The "Hollywood" episode of Happy Days played on TV here in Houston today. Both parts (it was a two-parter).

      Yes, that's the one where Fonzie jumps the (now proverbial) shark.

    14. Re:New scale by Skidborg · · Score: 1

      I don't have to answer it. I am a being with free will. I choose to defy you, and egg you on.

      --
      Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
  7. Miles/km by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does any one else find it kind of cute how they label the axes in miles, in increments of 50km?

    Silly United States, miles are for kids!

    1. Re:Miles/km by Fluffeh · · Score: 1

      Does any one else find it kind of cute how they label the axes in miles, in increments of 50km?

      The scientists probably did all of their work in kms, but then changed the numbers to miles so that the average American had a clue to it. It may have been difficult (for some unknown reason) to change the labels to increments of 50 miles...

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
  8. More evidence... by Lord_of_the_nerf · · Score: 1

    ...that the Earth has been sent from the past to kill us.

    1. Re:More evidence... by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 3, Funny

      Which is why we need to kill it first.

    2. Re:More evidence... by ShiftyOne · · Score: 1

      Is that the plot to Terminator 4? I have a feeling Arnold could stop this.

    3. Re:More evidence... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Funny

      Which is why we need to kill it first.

      Hey, give us a break! We're working on it.

      Avariciously yours, Dick Cheney & Co.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    4. Re:More evidence... by ruiner13 · · Score: 1

      Is that the plot to Terminator 4?

      You mean this: Terminator Salvation (T4)?

      No, you didn't miss anything...

      --

      today is spelling optional day.

    5. Re:More evidence... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I rented that without too much hope. Then I turned it off when I was supposed to believe the robots were building themselves with USB ports. Might have been the first scene.

    6. Re:More evidence... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hear you'll be inviting it on a hunting trip.

  9. Right under Idaho National Lab? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See above

  10. Whilst? 1750 called, they want their word back. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From TFS:

    remapped the Yellowstone caldera. Whilst seismic waves indicate

    Whilst? Really? Maybe throw in a saith for emphasis next time, and you will shew me how e-reet your language skills are?

    Seriously, the word "While" would have been a much better choice.

  11. Great! by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    Lets tap it for geo-thermal. The issue with a previous attempt is that they simply pulled the steam from it. Instead, it should be a recycling generator in which it re-injects the water back into the ground.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or we can make it a giant landfill that automatically recycles garbage into raw materials

    2. Re:Great! by frecky · · Score: 1

      Isn't this what we do already ? Inject water in hydraulic fracturing for Shale gas ?

    3. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not a bad idea! This way, future generations may yet be able to avoid the Garbage Avalanche of 2505.

    4. Re:Great! by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      Lets tap it for geo-thermal. The issue with a previous attempt is that they simply pulled the steam from it. Instead, it should be a recycling generator in which it re-injects the water back into the ground.

      Boom, Baby, Boom.

    5. Re:Great! by jd · · Score: 1

      It's an interesting idea and there should be a way to make it work, but previous attempts at injecting water into geothermally active areas have tended to cause mini earthquakes. It would take some doing to get it right and I'm not sure I'm inclined to trust the companies capable of the drilling necessary.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    6. Re:Great! by jd · · Score: 1

      If they ever get a commercial fusion reactor, the "waste" heat would be more than sufficient for you to recycle garbage into ultra-pure reservoirs of the elements within it. The radiation might alter a few of them in the process (you can turn platinum into gold even in fission reactors, it's just kinda pointless).

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    7. Re:Great! by confused+one · · Score: 1

      The formation is hot enough that you could use a closed loop, cycling pressurized water in through loop of pipe acting as a heat exchanger.

    8. Re:Great! by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Nope. Totally different things. In your example, you use pretty wicked chemicals under extreme pressure to force open cracks. With what I am talking about, you pull water out as steam which drops the pressure a bit, but then re-inject the water back into it, which slowly raises the pressure back up to what it was.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  12. Mis-Read it by rax313 · · Score: 0

    When I first read the title I thought slashdot was invaded by a justin beiber article.

  13. News flash! by pclminion · · Score: 0

    Alert! When you change the definition of "size" so that size is measured differently that before, the size of things changes! More on this in a future broadcast.

    1. Re:News flash! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your comment doesn't make any sense. They didn't change the definition of "size", or anything else for that matter. They used a different technique to measure it and discovered that it is bigger than the other technique had revealed.

  14. Caldera is not what got bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    The caldera is not any bigger, just the arear of hot rock or melt under the area. The caldera (collapse feature) is still exactly the same size

    1. Re:Caldera is not what got bigger by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      Thank you - I was about to post the same observation

  15. I expect Sony will have their lawyers to it soon.. by damn_registrars · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... as this clearly seems like an even bigger example of "geohot".

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  16. Re:Whilst? 1750 called, they want their word back. by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Me thynketh it acordaunt to resoun

  17. Complete this series by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    2,000,000
    1,300,000
          640,000
                              X

    What is your best guess at X? ..... yielding three huge caldera eruptions about 2 million, 1.3 million and 642,000 years ago.
    X is about when we expect the next one.

    1. Re:Complete this series by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      without getting all fancy, 700k to 660k to 620k (time between events)

      I think it happened 20k years ago and we're all safe.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    2. Re:Complete this series by mkiwi · · Score: 1

      Just to be sure, we better nuke the volcano. From the moon.

    3. Re:Complete this series by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      Just to be sure, we better nuke the volcano. From the moon.

      Just to be realistic, nuke the moon. From the volcano.

  18. I've seen this movie before. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is just a matter of time before Godzilla comes to the United States. I for one think we should pull our troops back from the middle east, and keep the in reserve for the inevitable unholy onslaught. While they are there the can enforce the border. In the mean time any scientists that are not working on the Godzilla project should be focused on the problem of getting off of the planet. Humanity might escape the menace of Godzilla this time, but what about the time after that, and the time after that. Only foolish doomed race stupidly stands by, while it's major cities and attacked and destroyed by Godzilla. We need a giant space ship, and we need it now.

    Let's find a new planet that isn't already inhabited by demon spawn atomic lizards. Let's find one that is only inhabited fluffy bunnies.

    Thailand, Hatti, Japan, we are next.

  19. Yellowstone is Bigger? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By like what, four inches? I mean, if it answered one of those grow-your-penis adverts and it worked like they say it should...

  20. Yellowstone's big, yeah yeah by neko+the+frog · · Score: 1

    It's not small, no no

    --
    -- the opinions stated above aren't those of my employer. in fact, they're probably not even my own. you know what, ju
  21. Re:Whilst? 1750 called, they want their word back. by ThePromenader · · Score: 1

    Whence the vitriol? Whither your goal? Nitpicking natter is worth but a lump of coal.

    --

    No, no sig. Really.

    ThePromenader
  22. Must resist temptation....! by yellowstone · · Score: 0

    Nah, too easy.

    --
    150 Opening BINARY mode data connection for slashdot.sig (129323052 bytes).
  23. Better Article by Scorch_Mechanic · · Score: 4, Informative

    The one in the summary is fine, but the original (better) article is here:
    http://www.unews.utah.edu/p/?r=032411-5
    It talks more in depth about how they actually did the imaging. It's actually quite interesting.

    --
    You should turn signatures off.
  24. Re:Whilst? 1750 called, they want their word back. by samjam · · Score: 1

    me-thinkerish perfectous cromulatory expressionator

  25. tap that sh*t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    as much (relatively) free energy as you want

  26. Re:Whilst? 1750 called, they want their word back. by dbIII · · Score: 1

    It's a quote written in 1387 from the prologue to Canterbury Tales and just about everybody here will be able to understand all six words (I used to be an engineer not a literary type). It just shows how much the above poster is whining about something not fitting in a 600 word doubleplusgood dictionary.

  27. Re:Whilst? 1750 called, they want their word back. by Rysc · · Score: 1

    You're out of line. Whilst is not nearly as archaic as your other examples and is still often found used for artistic or stylistic purposes, especially in formal contexts.

    --
    I want my Cowboyneal
  28. Lets do some grade school math! by DontBlameCanada · · Score: 1

    2Million->1.3Mill->642,000 years ago. Let's following the series!

    2M->1.3M = 700,000
    1.3M->642,000=658,000
    642,000->??

    Interval of ~670,000 years +/- 21,000.

    Next eruption: 642,000 - 670,000 = 28000 +/- 21000 = essentially any time, ouch.

    1. Re:Lets do some grade school math! by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1
      But this isn't grade school math. It's probabilitiesI've seen this in a lot of places, and the Quaking Fear and Apocalypse channel uses it to good effect. (History Channel)

      The eruption interval gives some idea of what might be expected, but there is no such thing as being "due" for an eruption. There would be nothing to stop an eruption next year, then another one a hundred years form now. or 5 million years later. Likewise, with the hot spot staying more or less in one place, and the land moving over top of it, does the new overburden have a mitigating or accelerating effect? Does entropy play into this?

      Is there going to be another eruption? Probably. As to when, for us humans, and for what we might do about it, it might as well be a stochastic process.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  29. Geothermal energy question by wcrowe · · Score: 1

    I have a serious (and perhaps stupid) question related to the topic. Given the interest in alternative energy, the size of the Yellowstone caldera, and its proximity to the surface, is it a completely silly idea to exploit it as an energy source? Are there already geothermal power plants in the Yellowstone area?

    --
    Proverbs 21:19
    1. Re:Geothermal energy question by spike+hay · · Score: 1

      I don't know about Yellowstone in particular, but there are some tentative plans to exploit Newberry Crater (another shield volcano caldera, but much smaller). Interestingly, the same types of magnetotelluric techniques are being used to map promising sites for geothermal plants.

      --
      If you don't understand any of my sayings, come to me in private and I shall take you in my German mouth.
    2. Re:Geothermal energy question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could it be possible to massively tap these potentially lethal geophysical objects and have, theoretically, unlimited power for the foreseeable future, while reducing the internal pressure to safer levels? Magmapower, anyone?

  30. Two different concepts by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    What you are talking about is EGS. It is about drilling DEEP and then injecting below the bedrock. Minor tremors would be expected, but nothing major. As confused one speaks about, you want a closed loop in shallow well. THat is not a big deal. The reason why the only small one was shot down, is that they were not injecting back. As such, they were depleting the water out of the system. That would destroy geysers all over. And few want to see old faithful gone.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  31. Re:I expect Sony will have their lawyers to it soo by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

    He was only prevented from messing with the PlayStation series of consoles, not volcanic features of national parks.

  32. Re:I expect Sony will have their lawyers to it soo by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

    The joke: >>---------------->





    .....



    You: :(

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  33. Re:I expect Sony will have their lawyers to it soo by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

    um, no.

    Straight man ----> .....

    people who take a second to get that the straight man is also making a joke .....

    people like you who point out that the straight man's joke missed the joke .....

    humor for pond scum

  34. Y R U so stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Y R U so stupid?

  35. Thanks Providence (Rhode Island?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It sure is a Good Thing Yellowstone was designated a park instead of us erecting heavy highrises all over it, and then it exploding. Hmm, a good place to build future nuclear reactors. Maybe do us a favor and explode about the time they decide to waste humanity. haha We have ourself a PLAN.

  36. U shouldn't troll others 1st then skidborg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or, did you not do that to apk here, first: http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2080454&cid=35795872 Skidborg? You're caught red-handed with your own off topic trolling stupidity as the proof no less, right there in that url above, Skidborg. Seems the big troller skidborg can't take what he dishes out and cries like the trolling wuss he really is.

  37. U trolled 1st, sowing the wind. Now, the whirlwind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or, did you not do that to apk, here, 1st: http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2080454&cid=35795872 Skidborg? You're caught red-handed with your own off topic trolling stupidity as the proof no less, right there in that url above, Skidborg. Seems the big troller skidborg can't take what he dishes out and cries like the trolling wuss he really is when its directed back at he in a re-trolling.

  38. U shouldn't have trolled apk 1st then, skidborg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or, did you not do that to apk, here, 1st: http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2080454&cid=35795872 Skidborg? You're caught red-handed with your own off topic trolling stupidity as the proof no less, right there in that url above, Skidborg. Seems the big troller skidborg can't take what he dishes out and cries like the trolling wuss he really is when its directed back at he in a re-trolling.