4 ms·

The “what happens” from the last paragraph: “The light under the drone was melted, and sensors were damaged from the extreme heat. He reports that the drone st

The “what happens” from the last paragraph: “The light under the drone was melted, and sensors were damaged from the extreme heat. He reports that the drone still works, but the vision sensor underneath no longer functions and gives constant errors during flights.“

shagie 6y ago
I was also amused by the Reddit post - https://www.reddit.com/r/Iceland/comments/mdrz95/into_the_volcano_melted_my_drone_for_this_shot/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Iceland/comments/mdrz95/into_the_vo... > So I wonder how many drones this volcano has eaten so far? to which the OP replies: > Haha at least 2 that i know of... which gets a response of: > This one, and the one before this one where you forgot to hit the record button? and the OP: > Correct (:facepalm:)
- amelius 6y ago
  > So I wonder how many drones this volcano has eaten so far? Perhaps it's a good way to deal with our e-waste?
  - mywacaday 6y ago
    Ignoring the logistics what are the downsides of dumping toxic waste into lava considering how long the lava would be stable once it has cooled?
    - BenjiWiebe 6y ago
      Toxic waste getting vaporized would be my biggest concern.
      - shagie 6y ago
        That's actually how its often gotten rid of - https://frtr.gov/matrix2/section4/4-23.html https://frtr.gov/matrix2/section4/4-23.html > temperatures, 870 to 1,200 °C (1,400 to 2,200 °F), are used to volatilize and combust (in the presence of oxygen) halogenated and other refractory organics in hazardous wastes. Often auxiliary fuels are employed to initiate and sustain combustion. The destruction and removal efficiency (DRE) for properly operated incinerators exceeds the 99.99% requirement for hazardous waste and can be operated to meet the 99.9999% requirement for PCBs and dioxins. Off gases and combustion residuals generally require treatment. And lava is in the range of 700 °C to 1300 °C. So... that could work. With regular waste incinerators, the issue is the treatment of the gas... which... well... they already have issues with - https://www.usgs.gov/natural-hazards/volcano-hazards/volcanic-gases https://www.usgs.gov/natural-hazards/volcano-hazards/volcani... That said... https://www.forbes.com/sites/robinandrews/2017/09/28/this-is-why-we-cant-throw-all-our-trash-into-volcanoes/?sh=7a54ac2926b8 https://www.forbes.com/sites/robinandrews/2017/09/28/this-is... > I was recently asked by a fairly small and young human why we don't just throw a lot of our waste into volcanoes – specifically, into the ones that have lava lakes, like Hawaii's Kilauea or the Democratic Republic of Congo's Nyiragongo. > ... > It's certainly a question that deserves an answer. Well, sadly, that answer probably isn’t the one you’re hoping for. As I've explained in a previous Forbes piece, lava lakes are complex things. They're extremely hot, and can melt plenty of things, that's for sure. However, they can't melt everything, and humanity has invented plenty of materials that would simply float atop the surface.
        cpeterso 6y ago
        I read an article that proposed burying nuclear waste in the fracture zone of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02430666 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02430666
        MauranKilom 6y ago
        Wouldn't you rather want to bury it in a subduction zone? Dumping it where new crust is being created seems like a strange solution...
    - dotancohen 6y ago
      I think that Sauron has voiced objection.
    - ericbarrett 6y ago
      The first problem is there's not enough lava. Per a few sources there have been about 6 billion tons/tonnes of solid plastic waste since the mid-20th century; assuming the density of PVC, .05 g/cm^3, my napkin math says this is over 100 cubic kilometers of plastic waste, or enough to build a small volcano on its own. (edit) You said "ignoring the logistics" so I agree with the other commenter, the outgassing of the burning would be environmentally devastating. Lava doesn't instantly vaporize things: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXJfg_JIUZA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXJfg_JIUZA
      - Someone 6y ago
        Nitpick: PVC sinks in water. That would make it over 1g/cm³. Polypropylene and polyethylene do float, but don’t come near 0.05g/cm³. They’re closer to 0.9g/cm³ (https://www.plasticseurope.org/en/about-plastics/what-are-plastics/large-family/polyolefins https://www.plasticseurope.org/en/about-plastics/what-are-pl...). That’s close to icebergs.
        ericbarrett 6y ago
        You are right, seems I had a bad source—density is closer to 1.1-1.5 g/cm^3 than the 0.5 I used. So only 50 cubic km...
        karamanolev 6y ago
        In your post you mentioned 0.05, so that's not a factor of 3 off of 1.5, but instead a factor of 30...
        ericbarrett 6y ago
        A little more formally, with sources: Density of plastic: https://omnexus.specialchem.com/polymer-properties/properties/density https://omnexus.specialchem.com/polymer-properties/propertie... - Eyeballed at 1.2 g/cm^3 Plastic waste, lifetime: https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/7/e1700782 https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/7/e1700782 - 6.3 megatonnes (2017) 6.3 Mt / (1.2 g/cm^3) = 5250000 (5.25 million) m^3 = 0.00525 km^3 You were right! My math was way off. Thanks for noticing. This is a great demonstration of peer review :)
    - evan_ 6y ago
      If you dump something radioactive into a volcano, now you have a radioactive volcano, which is not better
      - khuey 6y ago
        The vast majority of "toxic waste" is chemically toxic not radioactive.
      - m4rtink 6y ago
        I wonder if at least some volcanos might be radioactive ? The stuff is comming from deep below & there are theories the core is being kept molten thanks to decay of radioactive elements, so I wonder if some of that might get up occasionally ? Or is that nonsense as core is much much deeper and there is hardly any mixibg goin on between the layers?

shagie 6y ago

I was also amused by the Reddit post - https://www.reddit.com/r/Iceland/comments/mdrz95/into_the_volcano_melted_my_drone_for_this_shot/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Iceland/comments/mdrz95/into_the_vo... > So I wonder how many drones this volcano has eaten so far? to which the OP replies: > Haha at least 2 that i know of... which gets a response of: > This one, and the one before this one where you forgot to hit the record button? and the OP: > Correct (:facepalm:)

amelius 6y ago
> So I wonder how many drones this volcano has eaten so far? Perhaps it's a good way to deal with our e-waste?
- mywacaday 6y ago
  Ignoring the logistics what are the downsides of dumping toxic waste into lava considering how long the lava would be stable once it has cooled?
  - BenjiWiebe 6y ago
    Toxic waste getting vaporized would be my biggest concern.
    - shagie 6y ago
      That's actually how its often gotten rid of - https://frtr.gov/matrix2/section4/4-23.html https://frtr.gov/matrix2/section4/4-23.html > temperatures, 870 to 1,200 °C (1,400 to 2,200 °F), are used to volatilize and combust (in the presence of oxygen) halogenated and other refractory organics in hazardous wastes. Often auxiliary fuels are employed to initiate and sustain combustion. The destruction and removal efficiency (DRE) for properly operated incinerators exceeds the 99.99% requirement for hazardous waste and can be operated to meet the 99.9999% requirement for PCBs and dioxins. Off gases and combustion residuals generally require treatment. And lava is in the range of 700 °C to 1300 °C. So... that could work. With regular waste incinerators, the issue is the treatment of the gas... which... well... they already have issues with - https://www.usgs.gov/natural-hazards/volcano-hazards/volcanic-gases https://www.usgs.gov/natural-hazards/volcano-hazards/volcani... That said... https://www.forbes.com/sites/robinandrews/2017/09/28/this-is-why-we-cant-throw-all-our-trash-into-volcanoes/?sh=7a54ac2926b8 https://www.forbes.com/sites/robinandrews/2017/09/28/this-is... > I was recently asked by a fairly small and young human why we don't just throw a lot of our waste into volcanoes – specifically, into the ones that have lava lakes, like Hawaii's Kilauea or the Democratic Republic of Congo's Nyiragongo. > ... > It's certainly a question that deserves an answer. Well, sadly, that answer probably isn’t the one you’re hoping for. As I've explained in a previous Forbes piece, lava lakes are complex things. They're extremely hot, and can melt plenty of things, that's for sure. However, they can't melt everything, and humanity has invented plenty of materials that would simply float atop the surface.
      - cpeterso 6y ago
        I read an article that proposed burying nuclear waste in the fracture zone of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02430666 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02430666
        MauranKilom 6y ago
        Wouldn't you rather want to bury it in a subduction zone? Dumping it where new crust is being created seems like a strange solution...
  - dotancohen 6y ago
    I think that Sauron has voiced objection.
  - ericbarrett 6y ago
    The first problem is there's not enough lava. Per a few sources there have been about 6 billion tons/tonnes of solid plastic waste since the mid-20th century; assuming the density of PVC, .05 g/cm^3, my napkin math says this is over 100 cubic kilometers of plastic waste, or enough to build a small volcano on its own. (edit) You said "ignoring the logistics" so I agree with the other commenter, the outgassing of the burning would be environmentally devastating. Lava doesn't instantly vaporize things: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXJfg_JIUZA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXJfg_JIUZA
    - Someone 6y ago
      Nitpick: PVC sinks in water. That would make it over 1g/cm³. Polypropylene and polyethylene do float, but don’t come near 0.05g/cm³. They’re closer to 0.9g/cm³ (https://www.plasticseurope.org/en/about-plastics/what-are-plastics/large-family/polyolefins https://www.plasticseurope.org/en/about-plastics/what-are-pl...). That’s close to icebergs.
      - ericbarrett 6y ago
        You are right, seems I had a bad source—density is closer to 1.1-1.5 g/cm^3 than the 0.5 I used. So only 50 cubic km...
        karamanolev 6y ago
        In your post you mentioned 0.05, so that's not a factor of 3 off of 1.5, but instead a factor of 30...
        ericbarrett 6y ago
        A little more formally, with sources: Density of plastic: https://omnexus.specialchem.com/polymer-properties/properties/density https://omnexus.specialchem.com/polymer-properties/propertie... - Eyeballed at 1.2 g/cm^3 Plastic waste, lifetime: https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/7/e1700782 https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/7/e1700782 - 6.3 megatonnes (2017) 6.3 Mt / (1.2 g/cm^3) = 5250000 (5.25 million) m^3 = 0.00525 km^3 You were right! My math was way off. Thanks for noticing. This is a great demonstration of peer review :)
  - evan_ 6y ago
    If you dump something radioactive into a volcano, now you have a radioactive volcano, which is not better
    - khuey 6y ago
      The vast majority of "toxic waste" is chemically toxic not radioactive.
    - m4rtink 6y ago
      I wonder if at least some volcanos might be radioactive ? The stuff is comming from deep below & there are theories the core is being kept molten thanks to decay of radioactive elements, so I wonder if some of that might get up occasionally ? Or is that nonsense as core is much much deeper and there is hardly any mixibg goin on between the layers?