economisto: really so stupid?

#1 19.05.2010, 21:28

Some of you might remember that a short time ago I started a poll where one of the options, in response to the devastating ash cloud, was to nuke it. Over the weeks since then the world has caught up, to the extent that it seems now to be the only semi-viable solution to the problem.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/8690513.stm

	Quote:
	...during previous eruptions, explosives have been used to create channels through which magma can flow harmlessly into the sea. "The Icelanders are very adept at doing this sort of thing," he says......would involve blowing a hole in the side of the mountain itself. "It would take something like a nuclear weapon to do it," Dr Allen adds

How do you like them apples?

#2 19.05.2010, 21:39

all people who wants to use nuclear weapon, even a little one, are stupid.

Faltrad · #3 19.05.2010, 22:07

For red vulcanos, not grey ones.

phdoofus · #4 19.05.2010, 22:10

Not saying you're stupid but go perform a simple experiment for me would you? Go to the kitchen or to the store. Get a bottle of soda. Shake bottle of soda vigorously. Take the cap off the soda bottle. Let me know what happens (pics are good, perhaps engage the services of a helpful friend).

#5 19.05.2010, 22:13

	Quote:	phdoofus
	Not saying you're stupid but go perform a simple experiment for me would you? Go to the kitchen or to the store. Get a bottle of soda. Shake bottle of soda vigorously. Take the cap off the soda bottle. Let me know what happens (pics are good, perhaps engage the services of a helpful friend).

Read the article - as long as the explosion is controlled and targetted, they are pretty much the only way to control a volcano.

phdoofus · #6 19.05.2010, 22:29

	Quote:	economisto
	Read the article - as long as the explosion is controlled and targetted, they are pretty much the only way to control a volcano.

I'd say it's actually the only way to 'do something' to a volcano, not necessarily 'control' a volcano. You're really kind off of in undiscovered territory. Like Spock, and Kirk, without the homoerotic subtext.

The key phrase there is 'You really don't have control of the situation'.
I can easily imagine all this going sideways and quite badly. For example, let's say it goes 'according to plan'. Now, you have irradiated lava groundwater mixing or irradiated lava reaching the surface and interacting with ice/seawater. Now you have a nice irradiated ash cloud.

#7 19.05.2010, 22:40

	Quote:	Bertrand - Geneva
	all people who wants to use nuclear weapon, even a little one, are stupid.

nukes can be low yield = low radiation.

Mud · #8 19.05.2010, 22:59

	Quote:	economisto
	what about Hiroshima

There goes any hope of an actual discussion on volcanoes.

HTD · #9 19.05.2010, 23:02

	Quote:	economisto
	Read the article - as long as the explosion is controlled and targetted, they are pretty much the only way to control a volcano.

Yea - like the US Army can precisely identify a target and hit it without collateral damage

#10 19.05.2010, 23:13

	Quote:	HTD
	Yea - like the US Army can precisely identify a target and hit it without collateral damage

Firstly - who is talking about the US army?? Secondly, collateral damage is impossible in a country with no collateral.

phdoofus · #11 19.05.2010, 23:16

	Quote:	HTD
	Yea - like the US Army can precisely identify a target and hit it without collateral damage

You wouldn't drop it. You'd have to drill and lower it.

HashBrown · #12 19.05.2010, 23:32

Easier to just nuke the UK.

JLF · #13 19.05.2010, 23:33

	Quote:	economisto
	Some of you might remember that a short time ago I started a poll where one of the options, in response to the devastating ash cloud, was to nuke it. Over the weeks since then the world has caught up, to the extent that it seems now to be the only semi-viable solution to the problem. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/8690513.stm How do you like them apples?

Strange... My boss (big time nerdy physicist) and I discussed this weeks back as well and I thought he was crazy for even suggesting it. Guess I wasn't thinking far enough outside the box...

HashBrown · #14 19.05.2010, 23:39

1. There has been nothing devastating about the ash cloud.
2. Even your atmospheric scientist (who knows shit about controlled uncontrolled nuclear reactions let alone controlled ones) states there's no way to control the situation. Such a highly non-linear event would be very unpredictable.

scribble · #15 19.05.2010, 23:41

Round up the people from that UK class+Israel Vs Palestine threads and drop them straight into the volcano from a plane. The amount of crap EF people come out with would choke any volcano

#16 19.05.2010, 23:43

	Quote:	HashBrown
	1. There has been nothing devastating about the ash cloud.

Well "devastating" is relative, but just to settle it: 2.5bn Euro please. Cheque is fine.

#17 19.05.2010, 23:50

	Quote:	economisto
	where one of the options, in response to the devastating ash cloud, was to nuke it. Over the weeks since then the world has caught up, to the extent that it seems now to be the only semi-viable solution to the problem.

Maybe they should let BP try to plug it.. at least the volcano isn't under water.

#18 19.05.2010, 23:55

	Quote:	vwild1
	Maybe they should let BP try to plug it.. at least the volcano isn't under water.

It's true - this leaking crust is really vexing me at the moment.

sharkey · #19 20.05.2010, 00:28

I really don't understand what all the fuss is about.

Just get a fu@king train.

Assassin · #20 20.05.2010, 00:32

The only reason that they haven't nuked it yet is that they haven't found the right corporate sponsor. "And today's atomic blast is brought to you by the United States Air Force, in conjunction with Pizza Hut - if you ever wanted to help mother nature and treat your friends to our crispy crust $ 5.99 all toppings pizza- just call 1-800-GO-USAF"

Enola Gay must be itching to be let out of the Smithsonian museum....