[gambiting]

>>Vulcanic eruption is natural and does not count,

I'm pretty sure the Earth's atmoshphere is physically incapable of differentiating between man-released CO2 and naturally released CO2.

>> man-made emmisions require permit

Whose permit? On what authority? Even if such permit would be required, who would deny it if the alternative was literally the destruction of a large portion of the United States(if we are talking about Yellowstone exploding)?

[Supermancho]

This would be an issue of national security. I would not want to be the person who spends money to set up drilling toward the Yellowstone Supervolcano without alerting the US Department of the Interior of the plans.

[gambiting]

I can only imagine that such a massive enterprise would be entirely conducted by the US Government, probably any of the military branches(is Engineers Corps still a thing?)

[kingaillas]

The Army Corps of Engineers is a thing... their civil works authority makes them the final authority on water management (changing river flow, dams, anything related to water management.) Not sure about supervolcanos though, couldn't find that on their website.

I am sure that a minimum of the US Geological Survey and ACE will be involved in any supervolcano remediation plan. And probably FEMA but hopefully they won't need to act. ;)

[zoe4883]

There is Paris Agreement, most countries signed including Italy and US. Detonating nukes and releasing several gigatons of CO2 is more dangerous than supervulcano.

Naturally released CO2 is harmless. There is a difference!

[gambiting]

>>Detonating nukes and releasing several gigatons of CO2 is more dangerous than supervulcano.

Eh? You are aware that if Yellowstone were to erupt it would literally mean the destruction of the United States. How is "defusing" the vulcano by detonating nukes "more dangerous" exactly?

>>Naturally released CO2 is harmless.

Again, atmosphere doesn't care - CO2 is CO2. Yes it doesn't count towards calculations that we currently do to model climate predictions, but it's not harmless, and a supervulcano event will fuck everything up, it doesn't magically stop having an effect just because it's natural.

[zoe4883]

How is that not positive? Drilling means gigatons of new CO2 emmisions.

Natural eruption would considerably reduce man made CO2 emmisions in near future. And nuclear winter from dust could stop global warming!

[gambiting]

Ah, so you were being facetious then. Should have said at the beginning, would have saved us some time and you the downvotes.

[bashinator]

> Natural eruption would considerably reduce man made CO2 emmisions in near future.

I imagine this is technically accurate, as an eruption of for example Yellowstone would utterly destroy most human civilization in North America.

[brohee]

https://www.vox.com/2014/9/5/6108169/yellowstone-supervolcan...

Definitely impactful but not civilization ending.

[nobodyandproud]

Is this like where people are tricked into believing “sea salt” in the diet is somehow healthier than “table salt”?