Hacker News Reader

Comment by sebazzz | Hacker News Reader

This seems to be similar to that American town where the coal mine went in fire and kept burning, even to this day.

Except here the organic substrate is burning. Apparently it is well insulated because the top snow layer doesn't melt but it is also porous because the fire needs oxygen.

View on HN

You're thinking of the Centralia fire:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centralia_mine_fire

"The Centralia mine fire is a coal-seam fire which has been burning in the labyrinth of abandoned coal mines underneath the borough of Centralia, Pennsylvania, United States, since at least May 27, 1962. Its original cause and start date are still a matter of debate. It is burning at depths of up to 300 ft (90 m) over an 8 mi (13 km) stretch of 3,700 acres (15 km2).[4] At its current rate, it could continue to burn for over 250 years."

Replace the oxygen in that tunnels with a mix of water and some inert mix gas heavier than air?

Identify each pit and air vent smoking and seal it tight until the oxygen is exhausted?

Nobody has really tried anything to stop this C02 emission source in 70 years?

Have you heard of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Routine_flaring ?

It is not that simple. The rock is still hot, hot enough that it will take decades to cool. It could reignite decades later if given air. Any effort to seal and extinguish the fire would be a project more like chernobyl remediation than putting out a forest fire.

Also, if the coal is hot, putting water (steam) on it produces flammable gas (CO and H2).

CO2 injection to smother and cool?

That makes carbon monoxide.

Maybe nitrogen?

Appears to be state of the art (injecting nitrogen foam). Good call!

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40789-022-00539-4

https://patents.google.com/patent/US7104336

I wonder if big companies would agree to sponsor this fix if the government will agree in return to include a reduction in their carbon emissions taxes of that year. If well done everybody would be happy. One problem less.

We have prices and rewards allocated for looking for solutions to non-simple cases. How much resources have been trow to the problem? More or less resources than excuses?

Let a lot of the main carbon storage released just because "why should we care?" is ludicrous. We are in a better position to fix it than in 60's.

Can they at least get energy out of it? Eg by putting pipes in the ground and pumping water through them so that it comes out hot enough to drive a turbine?

There seem to be a lot of these coal fires:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal-seam_fire

We should use them as geothermal power sources.

Oh great. With in situ coal combustion, we can use all the coal, not just the readily mineable coal. Let's reproduce the CO2 increase from the end Permian extinction.

If they are already burning, and we can't or won't put them out, then why not? As of now, they are emitting CO2 and are also of no use.

Should we not use them out of spite of ourselves?

It's not a safe area to be around. The ground shifts, the air is death. The water is death. Really not worth it. There are some great videos on youtube about these places. They make clear why nobody lives around them.

we already are, on a planet-wide basis

Reply on news.ycombinator.com