Slashdot Mirror
NASA's Plan To Stop A Supervolcano from Destroying The Earth's Climate (news.com.au)
Long-time walterbyrd shared a new article about NASA's contingency plan for "vast quantities of searing magma and clouds of fumes" erupting from a Wyoming supervolcano and slowly "burying much of the United States under a thick coat of ash and lava...enough to change the climate of the world for several centuries."
NASA believes the Yellowstone supervolcano is a greater threat to life on Earth than any asteroid. So it's come up with a plan to defuse its explosive potential... NASA scientists propose, a 10km [6.2 miles] deep hole into the hydrothermal water below and to the sides of the magma chamber. These fluids, which form Yellowstone's famous heat pools and geysers, already drain some 60-70 per cent of the heat from the magma chamber below. NASA proposes that, in an emergency, this enormous body of heated water can be injected with cooler water, extracting yet more heat. This could prevent the super volcano's magma from reaching the temperature at which it would erupt.
A member of NASA's Advisory Council on Planetary Defense told the BBC he'd concluded "the super volcano threat is substantially greater than the asteroid or comet threat."
A member of NASA's Advisory Council on Planetary Defense told the BBC he'd concluded "the super volcano threat is substantially greater than the asteroid or comet threat."
The geology of the Yellowstone magma dome is well understood, and this drilling proposal has no chance of triggering a premature eruption.
To elaborate on this: Yellowstone is a "bimodal" volcano. Magma comes in two types: mafic and felsic. Mafic lava is heavier and more fluid, and comes from deep in the earth. Felsic is lighter and "gooey" like honey or molten glass. Yellowstone has both. After a long quiescent period, it will erupt with felsic lava first, and then later erupt with mafic lava. This is because the felsic magma is lighter, so it floats on the heavier mafic lava.
So even if the drilling breaks a pressure barrier, any magma that comes through will be felsic, and it will get higher in viscosity as it rises and cools, thus forming a plug that will block further flow. This self-plugging action is one reason that felsic volcanoes tend to explode violently once they finally blow. Mafic volcanoes, like Mauna Loa in Hawaii, tend to have lots of small eruptions that can flow for years or decades, rather than one big blowout.
Felsic volcanoes are also called stratovolcanoes since they tend to be tall and narrow as the viscous lava doesn't flow far. The most common felsic rock is granite.
Mafic volcanoes are also called shield volcanoes, because their wide base makes them look like a shield laying on the ground. The most common mafic rock is basalt.
It could be a terawatt-scale version of Hellisheiði:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
AS a bonus, it could supply hot water for the entire northern tier of states. No more mortgaging your soul for each winter's supply of heating oil in the Northeast.
(I'm assuming you're honestly curious, and not trolling.)
NASA's science directorate includes a division devoted to Planetary Science. Earth is a planet [citation needed], and while NASA's missions to study non-Earth planets get lots of press (and deservedly so), Earth is a useful point of comparison (one that is much easier to reach than any other). Studying Earth informs our understanding of other planets, and of course understanding our planet is very valuable to us who live on it (NASA's motto: "For the Benefit of All"). Additionally, it is very convenient to study Earth from space-based platforms, so I wouldn't begrudge NASA a seat at the table.
You are correct in that there is also an element of self-preservation involved. The Planetary Defense Coordination Office devotes most of its attention to understanding threats from asteroids and developing response contingencies, but many of the effects of asteroid impact are similar to the effects of a supervolcano eruption (or nuclear war, and in fact we get data on meteor and meteorite impacts from their impacts and flashes tripping our nuclear detection sensors and satellites), so there is definitely a good reason for them to be involved in studying this phenomenon.
(As an aside, there is sometimes tension between NASA and other agencies, such as NSF and NOAA, about whether a particular satellite or instrument is studying "planetary science" [NASA/NSF], "climate" [NASA/NSF/NOAA], or "weather" [NOAA], because of course they're all looking at the same thing: Earth. It can sometimes turn into a delicate dance of nomenclature, principal investigatorship, data priority and custody, and funding.)