Would The People Have Pompeii Known?

[constanze]

I just watched a show (text in german here) about the possibility of a new eruption of the Vesuv. Although they have an observatory that monitors seismic activity 24hrs. and they measure the gases coming out of the volcanoe, a French geologist has discovered that the previously 8 km deep magma has risen to 3 km below the surface.
An even bigger threat are the Campi Filegri close by, a whole magma pool, where they have observed (with the help of satellites) that the surface of the Earth is rising - “the Earth is breathing in”, as one scientist said. If those blow up - an explosion instead of an eruption, since there’s no outlet like the shaft of a normal volcano - millions of lices, instead of “only” the 700.000 in Neaples, would be at stake. Vesuv could also explode if a chimney is blocked.

[Sublight]

@constanze

• Although geologists had known about Methan nodules on sea bottom before, nobody had suspected before it happened how big they were or how big a problem they could be, until suddenly in a lake in Africe (which name I can’t remember at the moment) had a very minor quake/trembler, which resulted in a cloud of deadly, silent gas “belching” out of the lake and killing over a hundred people in their sleep at night.

Lake Nyos, in Cameroon.

Although just two years earlier a similar event happened at Lake Monoun, also in Cameroon.

[Chronos]

If those blow up - an explosion instead of an eruption, since there’s no outlet like the shaft of a normal volcano - millions of lices, instead of “only” the 700.000 in Neaples, would be at stake.

OK, so the Pompeians would have clean hair, then. What’s so bad about that?

As for that impending methane belch in the Black Sea, isn’t methane a commodity of some value, and couldn’t a pipe to tap it be economical on those grounds? It seems to me like sticking a giant drinking straw into a lake should be cheaper and easier than drilling deep holes through rock. Of course, this would produce carbon dioxide, but as I understand it, on a per carbon atom basis, methane is a much worse greenhouse gas than CO[sub]2[/sub], and it’d also be replacing some other fossil fuel.

[constanze]

@Chronos

As for that impending methane belch in the Black Sea, isn’t methane a commodity of some value, and couldn’t a pipe to tap it be economical on those grounds? It seems to me like sticking a giant drinking straw into a lake should be cheaper and easier than drilling deep holes through rock. Of course, this would produce carbon dioxide, but as I understand it, on a per carbon atom basis, methane is a much worse greenhouse gas than CO[sub]2[/sub], and it’d also be replacing some other fossil fuel.

That’s why I mentioned the two possible solutions:

@by myself

Unlike the Yellowstone supervolcano problem, however, this problem could be solved by technology - both sewage plants in the adjoining countries, and by sinking (optimal) long pipes down to the bottom, extracting the methane and treating it (so it doesn’t contribute to global warming) or simply sticking pipes in the methane layer and burning it off (cheaper, but bad for global warming).

Both solutions, even the “bad” for global warming one of simply putting in pipes and selling the Methane off to burn it would still require initial investments of some capital. I also don’t know how much a role the apparently active denial the Russian and other adjoining countries’ authorities/govt. are engaging in plays a role in not exploiting this.

[Chronos]

Oh, ok, when you said “burning it off”, I was picturing something more like the fires on the tops of smokestacks, where you’re burning it just to get rid of it, not selling it first and getting some use out of it.