Could a nuke ignite sub-surface methane?

In summary, the conversation discusses the possibility of using a nuke to stop the BP leak and the potential consequences of such an action. It also suggests an alternative solution involving inserting a large bag into the flow area to contain the leak. The conversation also touches on the physics of burning in a sub-sea environment and the potential release of greenhouse gases.
  • #1
rockhouse
42
0
I'm not sure if this is the right spot for this question...if not could the mods move it please?

If a nuke was used on the BP leak, would there be a chance that it could ignite the methane?
I know there's lots of variables and factors but, if it was possible to ignite it, what's the chance of that happening? And if it did ignite huge pockets of methane, what would happen down there?
This whole BP leak thing is tragic...but interesting too.
 
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
  • #2
Burning generally requires oxygen.
Sub surface is generally lacking in air.
 
  • #3
^Yeah, i was just wondering if pockets of sea water containing oxygen could be under the surface and could ignite somehow.
I'm not real keen on the physics of it all.
 
  • #4
An old practice for large bullet wounds when medical supplies are not handy is to insert a 'tampon' into the wound.

As it absorbs the blood, it expands to conform to the shape of the wound, preventing excessive bleeding very quickly.

It seems like something along the same principle might work in this case.

A rather large 'bag' could be inserted into the flow area. It could contain a pipe with a remotely controlled 'cap'.

The bag is expanded with water or such.

The pipe would serve a couple functions. One, it could be used to get the bag into place. Two, it could be used to relieve some of the pressure when needed.

I can foresee that it would need to be a rather tough bag so that it doesn't get torn by rocks or such.

But it seems like it might work as a short term solution.


Kevin Randolph
 
  • #5
A nuke would not ignite the sub-sea methane as no oxygen would be available to support combustion. However a more damaging event could occur if the heat released would melt the methane hydrate bed causing a huge gas bubble to rise to the surface and ignite on the surface if a flame source were available. In any case a large quantity of greenhouse gas would be released to the atmosphere (either CH4 or CO2).
 

1. Could a nuke ignite sub-surface methane?

This is a commonly asked question due to the potential for catastrophic consequences. The answer is yes, it is possible for a nuclear explosion to ignite sub-surface methane. However, the likelihood of this happening is extremely low and requires specific conditions to be met.

2. What conditions are necessary for a nuke to ignite sub-surface methane?

In order for a nuclear explosion to ignite sub-surface methane, there needs to be a high concentration of methane gas present, a strong enough shockwave from the explosion, and a source of ignition. These conditions are not often met in natural settings.

3. What are the potential consequences of a nuke igniting sub-surface methane?

If a nuclear explosion were to ignite sub-surface methane, it could potentially result in a large-scale explosion and release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. This could contribute to climate change and have severe environmental impacts.

4. Are there any documented cases of a nuke igniting sub-surface methane?

There are no known cases of a nuclear explosion directly igniting sub-surface methane. However, there have been instances of natural gas being ignited by nuclear testing, such as the infamous "Sedan" test in Nevada in 1962.

5. How can we prevent a nuke from igniting sub-surface methane?

The best way to prevent a nuclear explosion from igniting sub-surface methane is to avoid conducting nuclear tests in areas with high methane concentrations. Additionally, proper safety measures and monitoring can help mitigate the risk of accidental ignition.

Similar threads

  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
40
Views
4K
  • Earth Sciences
Replies
34
Views
8K
  • Materials and Chemical Engineering
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
354
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • Nuclear Engineering
2
Replies
49
Views
24K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Electromagnetism
2
Replies
36
Views
3K
Replies
45
Views
3K
Back
Top