Why has No One suggested triggering a large Volcano to help cool the Earth?

Question

Everytime there is a large Volcano that Erupts, the ash is thrown into the Atmosphere around the planet, which blocks some solar radiation and cools the planet. The result is refreezing of Artic Ice and other Glaciers. This happened in 1980 after Mount St. Helens. Tambora & Krakatau erupted in a period known as the Little Ice Age, which cooled the planet. Why cant we use explosives to trigger a Volcano that would help cool our planet?

Answer 1

This would only work if it was the eruption of a supervolcano and for all we know we may be doing this inadvertantly. By saying this I mean that by melting the polar ice caps with global warming more water will be added to the ocean and since the world is a spinning ball this water will naturally be attracted to accumulating where the centrifugal forces are the greatest, this being the equator. By shifting so much mass over the tectonic plates this could inadvertantly destabalize a fault line thus triggering a super volcanic eruption. The next next super volcanic eruption which is due is that of Yellowstone, and it should probably erupt within the next 20,000 years or so, but given what I suggested above, who knows, maybe it will come much sooner? When it erupts almost everyone between California and the Mississippi River will be killed and then as the ash cloud and sulphuric acid rain travels with the prevailing winds a lot of stress will be put upon the sustainability of life throughout the Eastern States and Eastern Canada. Southern California, Northern BC and Mexico will probably not be effected immediately. But eventually it will completely encompass the northern Hemisphere thrusting us into a prolonged ice age that will slowly go about restoring the Earths balance by storing the atmospheric polutants back into the Earth's surface through precipitation. Anyways, I don't think that explosives will be necessary, and in the case of a volcano that actually had the capability to counteract global warming, I hardly think that it would be in our best interest to intentionally trigger one of these beasts!

Answer 2

Actually, there are people discussing a similar solution. It's just that "triggering" a volcano is not the easiest way to accomplish this goal (I don't know if that's even possible). An article in the journal SCIENCE published last year suggested seeding the upper atmosphere directly with sulfur dioxide (SO2). This field is called geoengineering, and there is a bit of concern about unintended consequences.

After seeding, the resultant sulphate particles reflect heat from the sun back into space. Of course there are issues with this. It would be very difficult to perform this seeding-- involving LOTS of airplanes, balloons or giant guns. Also, it would slowly come back down to earth as-- acid rain. Same as with a volcano. Bummer.

No simple solutions.

Answer 3

I really don't think that explosives are going to set off a volcano, which is a natural occurance. It will probably just end up blowing a bigger hole in the top! The only way you can get a volcano to 'erupt' is to provoke a reaction using scientific know-how. But seeing as we haven't advanced that far yet, I don't think that is a suitable option.

Answer 4

Here's another idea for ya..We seem to have a drought every summer in the southern part of the US and I'm sure in other parts of the world. Since the glaciers are suppose to be pure (salt free) water, why not just start breaking off chunks of them and shipping them around the world to end the drought, and prevent the "flood" that will happen in the coastal areas of the world.

Answer 5

I will accept you solution as long as you accept two facts:
1. The size of the explosion would be massive, in fact, a lot larger than any of the thermonuclear weapons (H-bombs) now in existence. This could be overcome.

2. The result would be a time of reduced food production. Some countries could stock up in advance. Many could not. Are you willing to see the population of many countries depleted due to starvation? Some of those countries have nuclear weapons (India, Pakistan, China). What do you suggest that we do when they threaten to use them against us unless we provide them with food from our reserves?

Answer 6

The difference between the Asteroid, and the great flood, is that we have proof that one of these two definitely never happened. (Guess which one). Also, the Asteroid wasn't just a knock-off of another asteroid, the way that the flood myth was a knock-off of other flood myths.

Answer 7

yeah, volcano eruptions are generally bad. But, I think that might be what we end up doing ... trying to deflect some of the sunlight to combat warming.

Answer 8

Just because you haven't used the "Discover" button to look up previous answers on a topic doesn't mean nobody has suggested it yet (see link).

Answer 9

hmm. i suppose that would be good. but then the ash would end up killing tonz of people...becuz it would become like concrete in their lungs...so im not sure every one would enjoy that idea