6 ms·

I have to agree with you on the point that life will find a way regardless of our meddling or not. However, I feel like the Yellowstone super volcano bogeyman i

I have to agree with you on the point that life will find a way regardless of our meddling or not. However, I feel like the Yellowstone super volcano bogeyman is not worth the effort. It is like worrying about an asteroid hitting the planet, there is nothing we can do about it so why worry?

jostmey 9y ago
The volcano erupts every 600,000 years or so. It has been 600,000 years or so since the last eruption. I don't think there's any evidence that it will happen in our lifetime, but it is due to happen soon on the geological timescale
- lostlogin 9y ago
  I live near a few volcanoes on the Pacific rim and I have visited a few more. I’m yet to visit any that aren’t classed as overdue for an eruption. The continual stating of ‘disaster is around the corner’ immunises rather than galvanises most people.
- KozmoNau7 9y ago
  Every 600,000 years on average. Might be 300,000 years and then 900,000 years. We are talking about big and unpredictable timescales, after all.
  - glenstein 9y ago
    Good point, it's potentially extremely overdue, making it a greater cause for worry.
sliverstorm 9y ago
there is nothing we can do about it so why worry? Well, we could run a geothermal plant to cool it down and prevent eruption...
- takk309 9y ago
  I don't think that it would. How much energy would we have to extract to make sure it is not a threat? The article states that 6GW of heat is already leaking from Yellowstone. How much impact can we really have pulling another 6GW? The article may be to brief and I need to do more research into the topic but is there some amount of energy that must be extracted to put the chance of an explosion into an acceptable range?
  - tempestn 9y ago
    As the other replies to this comment state, these things were very clearly stated in the article itself. On what basis do you disagree with the assessments there? What value is there in stating your disagreement without addressing the contradiction with the article, or presenting any evidence?
  - caf 9y ago
    Nasa estimates that if a 35% increase in heat transfer could be achieved from its magma chamber, Yellowstone would no longer pose a threat. The only question is how?
  - elihu 9y ago
    From the original BBC article: > Yellowstone currently leaks about 60-70% of the heat coming up from below into the atmosphere, via water which seeps into the magma chamber through cracks. The remainder builds up inside the magma, enabling it to dissolve more and more volatile gases and surrounding rocks. Once this heat reaches a certain threshold, then an explosive eruption is inevitable. > But if more of the heat could be extracted, then the supervolcano would never erupt. Nasa estimates that if a 35% increase in heat transfer could be achieved from its magma chamber, Yellowstone would no longer pose a threat. The only question is how? So, two or three GW of heat loss should be sufficient to keep the magma chamber from heating any further if NASA's estimates are accurate.
gooseus 9y ago
I would say that we can do something about it... we can hedge our bets and we can be smarter about how we direct our efforts in the time we have. I have recently started to evangelize panbioticism and project which seek to seed the solar system/galaxy with terrestrial life. Even if humans can't become self-sustaining outside of Earth before we get wiped out by something, I believe that we can give our genetic family a chance by sending out clusters of small probes of primitive AI and primitive organisms which can maybe evolve elsewhere. Also by storing a vault of our knowledge and storage for embryos for ourselves and as many diverse species as possible. We could build that and land it on a moon outside of the radius of an expanded sun with a beacon to help it be found. Any of these things is absolutely feasible and would give life a better shot in the future. Here is Dr. Michael Mautners website for the Society for Life in Space (SOLIS) http://www.panspermia-society.com/ http://www.panspermia-society.com/
- KozmoNau7 9y ago
  I like that idea, seed the universe. We may not be able to save humanity, but we will give life a fighting chance.
- logfromblammo 9y ago
  I'm already with you. I think the initial effort lies with exploiting extremophile bacteria and encysting or spore-forming organisms, though. Not to say that a K-strategy solution won't work eventually, but right now, r-strategy seems best. Get as many Earth-origin organisms to as many different celestial bodies as possible, and hope that 0.0001% of them land in a good spot.
qiqing 9y ago
> It is like worrying about an asteroid hitting the planet, there is nothing we can do about it so why worry? It is very much like an asteroid in that there are lots of things we can do. Excerpt from the article: “When people first considered the idea of defending the Earth from an asteroid impact, they reacted in a similar way to the supervolcano threat,” Wilcox says. “People thought, ‘As puny as we are, how can humans possibly prevent an asteroid from hitting the Earth.’ Well, it turns out if you engineer something which pushes very slightly for a very long time, you can make the asteroid miss the Earth. So the problem turns out to be easier than people think. In both cases it requires the scientific community to invest brain power and you have to start early. But Yellowstone explodes roughly every 600,000 years, and it is about 600,000 years since it last exploded, which should cause us to sit up and take notice.”

jostmey 9y ago

The volcano erupts every 600,000 years or so. It has been 600,000 years or so since the last eruption. I don't think there's any evidence that it will happen in our lifetime, but it is due to happen soon on the geological timescale

lostlogin 9y ago
I live near a few volcanoes on the Pacific rim and I have visited a few more. I’m yet to visit any that aren’t classed as overdue for an eruption. The continual stating of ‘disaster is around the corner’ immunises rather than galvanises most people.
KozmoNau7 9y ago
Every 600,000 years on average. Might be 300,000 years and then 900,000 years. We are talking about big and unpredictable timescales, after all.
- glenstein 9y ago
  Good point, it's potentially extremely overdue, making it a greater cause for worry.

sliverstorm 9y ago

there is nothing we can do about it so why worry? Well, we could run a geothermal plant to cool it down and prevent eruption...

takk309 9y ago
I don't think that it would. How much energy would we have to extract to make sure it is not a threat? The article states that 6GW of heat is already leaking from Yellowstone. How much impact can we really have pulling another 6GW? The article may be to brief and I need to do more research into the topic but is there some amount of energy that must be extracted to put the chance of an explosion into an acceptable range?
- tempestn 9y ago
  As the other replies to this comment state, these things were very clearly stated in the article itself. On what basis do you disagree with the assessments there? What value is there in stating your disagreement without addressing the contradiction with the article, or presenting any evidence?
- caf 9y ago
  Nasa estimates that if a 35% increase in heat transfer could be achieved from its magma chamber, Yellowstone would no longer pose a threat. The only question is how?
- elihu 9y ago
  From the original BBC article: > Yellowstone currently leaks about 60-70% of the heat coming up from below into the atmosphere, via water which seeps into the magma chamber through cracks. The remainder builds up inside the magma, enabling it to dissolve more and more volatile gases and surrounding rocks. Once this heat reaches a certain threshold, then an explosive eruption is inevitable. > But if more of the heat could be extracted, then the supervolcano would never erupt. Nasa estimates that if a 35% increase in heat transfer could be achieved from its magma chamber, Yellowstone would no longer pose a threat. The only question is how? So, two or three GW of heat loss should be sufficient to keep the magma chamber from heating any further if NASA's estimates are accurate.

gooseus 9y ago

I would say that we can do something about it... we can hedge our bets and we can be smarter about how we direct our efforts in the time we have. I have recently started to evangelize panbioticism and project which seek to seed the solar system/galaxy with terrestrial life. Even if humans can't become self-sustaining outside of Earth before we get wiped out by something, I believe that we can give our genetic family a chance by sending out clusters of small probes of primitive AI and primitive organisms which can maybe evolve elsewhere. Also by storing a vault of our knowledge and storage for embryos for ourselves and as many diverse species as possible. We could build that and land it on a moon outside of the radius of an expanded sun with a beacon to help it be found. Any of these things is absolutely feasible and would give life a better shot in the future. Here is Dr. Michael Mautners website for the Society for Life in Space (SOLIS) http://www.panspermia-society.com/ http://www.panspermia-society.com/

KozmoNau7 9y ago
I like that idea, seed the universe. We may not be able to save humanity, but we will give life a fighting chance.
logfromblammo 9y ago
I'm already with you. I think the initial effort lies with exploiting extremophile bacteria and encysting or spore-forming organisms, though. Not to say that a K-strategy solution won't work eventually, but right now, r-strategy seems best. Get as many Earth-origin organisms to as many different celestial bodies as possible, and hope that 0.0001% of them land in a good spot.

qiqing 9y ago

> It is like worrying about an asteroid hitting the planet, there is nothing we can do about it so why worry? It is very much like an asteroid in that there are lots of things we can do. Excerpt from the article: “When people first considered the idea of defending the Earth from an asteroid impact, they reacted in a similar way to the supervolcano threat,” Wilcox says. “People thought, ‘As puny as we are, how can humans possibly prevent an asteroid from hitting the Earth.’ Well, it turns out if you engineer something which pushes very slightly for a very long time, you can make the asteroid miss the Earth. So the problem turns out to be easier than people think. In both cases it requires the scientific community to invest brain power and you have to start early. But Yellowstone explodes roughly every 600,000 years, and it is about 600,000 years since it last exploded, which should cause us to sit up and take notice.”