It's up, up and away for ancient trapped helium at Yellowstone

[G_j]

http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-yellowstone-helium-degassing-20140218,0,1665876.story#axzz2tzGdB9qB

by Monte Morin
February 19, 2014, 10:15 a.m.

Talk about passing gas: Vast stores of helium are escaping from the steam vents and hot springs of Yellowstone National Park after being trapped within Earth's crust for up to 2 billion years, according to new research.

In a study published Wednesday in the journal Nature, researchers with the U.S. Geological Survey determined that the famed national park was releasing hundreds -- if not thousands -- of times more helium than anticipated.

In fact, researchers say, the escaping helium -- about 60 tons per year -- is enough to fill one Goodyear blimp every week.
They also calculate that this "sudden" release of gas began roughly 2 million years ago, with the advent of volcanic activity there.

"That might seem like a really, really long time to people, but in the geologic time scale, the volcanism is a recent phenomenon," said study coauthor Bill Evans, a research chemist at the USGS office in Menlo Park, Calif.

Helium, or more accurately the isotope helium-4, is produced in Earth's crust as uranium and thorium decay. Often, this nonradioactive, crustal helium is swept away by groundwater, or freed as a result of tectonic movement.

But in areas where there is little groundwater or movement in Earth's crust, helium-4 can remain trapped and build up over time. This is especially true at Yellowstone, where inactive rocks, or what geologists call "craton," have been estimated to be 2.5 billion years old. (The park is located primarily in Wyoming.)

..more..
http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-yellowstone-helium-degassing-20140218,0,1665876.story#ixzz2tzQeGI2q

[Politicalboi]

1. Can't we frack that thing

And the water is right there.

[jsr]

3. Don't give them ideas

[TlalocW]

2. Is there anyway to capture it in an environmentally friendly manner?

I'm a balloon twister and every now and then do balloon decor. I've always tried to stay away from helium, but being in the biz, I hear about shortages and whatnot all the time. I also know helium is important for scientific experiments (which I prefer it go to that in the first place).

TlalocW

[RC]

4. I gotzs a question?

How can something lighter than air weight 60 tons?

[skamaria]

5. Because the same volume of air weighs more than 60 tons, ergo helium goes up..

[RC]

6. So the air being displace by the Helium weights 60 tons.

OK, that makes sense.

[muriel_volestrangler]

10. Probably not - they said it was '60 tons' of helium, without mentioning weight

or mass for that matter, but that should mean 'mass' in that case. Air, at sea-level and 0 C, has a density of 1.292 kg/m3, and helium 0.178 kg/m3. So the air it would displace would have a mass of about 60*1.292/0.178 = 436 tons.

[Chan790]

7. Also, there is a scientific literacy issue there.

Technically, they should have said the helium has a mass of 60 tons.

Mass is independent of Earth gravity. 60T of helium is 60T of helium whether it's on Earth, Mars or floating in space 30x10⁶ km from the sun.

Weight is dependent upon gravity. Identical things weigh different amounts on different gravitational bodies. Their mass remains constant.

For example, people weigh 1/6 as much on the Moon. On Jupiter, your weight is 2x your Earth weight. Science articles should really never use weight instead of mass. The measurements are interchangeable for objects on Earth but nowhere else and expressions in weight rather than mass are quickly exposed as problematic in light of questions like yours.

This explains it quite well:
http://www.nyu.edu/pages/mathmol/textbook/weightvmass.html

[muriel_volestrangler]

9. They didn't actually mention 'weigh', 'weight' or 'mass' in the article

They just said " the escaping helium -- about 60 tons per year", which is fine.

[Mnemosyne]

8. There is a global shortage now, wonder if this contributes. nt