4 ms·

I absolutely understand your concerns. There are approximately twenty supervolcanoes around the world, so I wouldn't worry to much. There is an almost supervul

I absolutely understand your concerns. There are approximately twenty supervolcanoes around the world, so I wouldn't worry to much. There is an almost supervulcano in Italy that is also much closer to where power is needed [0]. Remoteness is not that much of a problem though: (ultra) high-voltage direct-current ("(U)HVDC") power lines have losses in the order of 3% per 1000km (that's 620mi) which is very acceptable. China has power lines that move the power equivalent of several nuclear power plants over thousands of kilometers for example. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phlegraean_Fields https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phlegraean_Fields [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-voltage_direct_current https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-voltage_direct_current

rbanffy 5y ago
> There is an almost supervulcano in Italy And the Mediterranean can provide a lot of water for cooling at the same time the extra heat can easily be used for desalination.
andrewflnr 5y ago
Yellowstone is not just "a supervolcano", as mentioned it's a natural preserve and generally beautiful place. I'm pretty sure there are enough other geologically active sites closer to populations and with less history that there's no reason to bother with Yellowstone
- _Microft 5y ago
  As I already said, I absolutely understand the concerns. That does not mean that it might not become inevitable to do something about it one day. In the long run, the choice seem to be that it either blows up right away (in the geologically-near future) or to extract enough energy to at least delay the disaster. Edit, as reply to child comment: here is the NASA report that concludes that it is possible to cool supervolcanoes: https://scienceandtechnology.jpl.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/documents/DefendingCivilizationFromSupervolcanos20151015.pdf https://scienceandtechnology.jpl.nasa.gov/sites/default/file...
  - chrisco255 5y ago
    It's naive to believe that you can extract enough energy from the earth's core to prevent supervolcanic eruptions.
    - sdenton4 5y ago
      Well, it's also native to believe that we could dunno enough CO2 into the atmosphere to affect global mean temperature, yet here we are. Multiply any activity by a non trivial fraction of humanity and you get non trivial side effects.
- grkvlt 5y ago
  maybe, but if not, and (hypothetically) if it could solve the problem of carbon neutral energy and therefore halt global climate change, destruction of Yellowstone as a 'beautiful place' could well be a price worth paying in the long run. i don't think it's likely though, fortunately for Yellowstone!
- LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
  Think bigger! Imagine it as the maintenance node and transportation hub for the new coast to coast hyperloop network! All subterran! Not only powered by renewable energy, but powering the entire network and nation by subterran HVDC also!

rbanffy 5y ago

> There is an almost supervulcano in Italy And the Mediterranean can provide a lot of water for cooling at the same time the extra heat can easily be used for desalination.

andrewflnr 5y ago

Yellowstone is not just "a supervolcano", as mentioned it's a natural preserve and generally beautiful place. I'm pretty sure there are enough other geologically active sites closer to populations and with less history that there's no reason to bother with Yellowstone

_Microft 5y ago
As I already said, I absolutely understand the concerns. That does not mean that it might not become inevitable to do something about it one day. In the long run, the choice seem to be that it either blows up right away (in the geologically-near future) or to extract enough energy to at least delay the disaster. Edit, as reply to child comment: here is the NASA report that concludes that it is possible to cool supervolcanoes: https://scienceandtechnology.jpl.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/documents/DefendingCivilizationFromSupervolcanos20151015.pdf https://scienceandtechnology.jpl.nasa.gov/sites/default/file...
- chrisco255 5y ago
  It's naive to believe that you can extract enough energy from the earth's core to prevent supervolcanic eruptions.
  - sdenton4 5y ago
    Well, it's also native to believe that we could dunno enough CO2 into the atmosphere to affect global mean temperature, yet here we are. Multiply any activity by a non trivial fraction of humanity and you get non trivial side effects.
grkvlt 5y ago
maybe, but if not, and (hypothetically) if it could solve the problem of carbon neutral energy and therefore halt global climate change, destruction of Yellowstone as a 'beautiful place' could well be a price worth paying in the long run. i don't think it's likely though, fortunately for Yellowstone!
LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
Think bigger! Imagine it as the maintenance node and transportation hub for the new coast to coast hyperloop network! All subterran! Not only powered by renewable energy, but powering the entire network and nation by subterran HVDC also!