Posted on 04/15/2002 10:46:19 AM PDT by cogitator
Since I posted an article about the problems with National Park funding,
National Parks Suffering from Lack of Funds, I thought this week's picture should be of one reason why this should be important to all of us.
you can see numerous Quicktime movies of Yellowstone Geysers.
My solution is to divert funds for aquisition of new properties and pay for what we have. Also allow tax credits to companies who provide pro-bono work on sites.
A very small amount. The main source in Yellowstone would be bacterial action on decaying tree trunks, compensated by the large numbers of trees in the park.
Please tell me you don't really believe that!
This is in reference to my statement that the geyser/hot springs at Yellowstone are not significant sources of CO2 and that bacterial respiration of decaying tree trunks would be the major source of CO2 in the Yellowstone ecosystem, offset to some extent by the photosynthetic activity of the trees.
The geysers and hot springs are thermal features. They are heated by a magmatic source under Yellowstone. They primarily release water in the form of water vapor.
There is some uplift associated with the Yellowstone Caldera, and some uplift areas (like Mammoth Lakes, CA) have associated releases of magmatic CO2. My memory is telling me that there may be some areas in Yellowstone where there is some ground release of CO2, but I'm not sure.
Note that areas of recent volcanism can store a lot of CO2 -- the gas releases from Lakes Monoun and Nyos in Cameroon which killed a large number of people show that is very possible. But there is no indication of this at Yellowstone.
(One other thing did occur to me: the Mammoth Hot Springs area is a source of CO2. The precipitation of the travertine deposits from the dissolved carbonate in the water releases CO2. My mistake there, but I still stand by the statement that it is insignificant.)
On the other hand, bacterial respiration of organic matter (tree trunks, bison/deer/elk/moose feces, aquatic vegetation) is a well-known and large source of CO2.
So aside from my error in not acknowledging Mammoth Hot Springs as a source of CO2, I'm not sure what else you are admonishing me not to believe.
The way this thread was linked to another thread led me to take your comment as the decaying vegetation caused the heat producing the steam.
With that thought in my mind, I could not help but respond.
Thank you for your well reasoned (and measured) response. I agree with your conclusions regarding the CO2 production.
Again, my apology.
The vent began millions of years ago in what is now Idaho, and as that part of the surface of North America rotated WSW, the vent remained open spewing the environmentally-friendly gas CO2 into the atmosphere from it's origin in Idaho to Wyoming, it's present site.
When the flow of heat energy in the heat pipe, is less than the conductive loss of heat energy to the country rock, the heat vent at the surface will cool, heal and become quiescent.
Then the trees, brush, grass, etc. will have to find another source for life-giving Carbon.
With only 337 parts per million CO2 in our atmosphere, there needs to be more Yellowstone Heat vents to boost the life-giving supply of CO2.
CO2 is a rare gas with a very short lifespan.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.