First of all, i think you miss the general idea, the idea is to vent a magma chamber, and produce geo thermal energy.
Specifically by cooling down the magma in the tunnel, after the magma chamber is vented, by drawing the heat energy off the tunnel.
I apologize for misusing terms to define ideas, now as far as i know, there is nothing that will not melt when magma comes in contact with it, that is not to say that there isn't,
but considering the extremely high temperatures involved, this varyable has to be taken into consideration. Where increased size of a concreate tunnel's wall thickness, coupled with even
reinforcement steel, would create a buffer zone that holds tunnel stability while transfering heat.
quote
1.There are currently no tunneling mechanisms available that could tolerate the temperatures that will be experienced as you approach the magma chamber. How would you plan to deal with this?
2.We do not know how explosively the magma would react when pressure is relieved by penetration by the tunnel. How would you plan to address this?
3.the geothermal energy available from the magma that enters the tunnel would be extremely limited. How would you justify the expense?
4. Since, in fact, you could not justify the expense, how would you go about tapping the geothermal energy of the chamber?
5. How would you deal with the political objections?
end quote
1. There was a teqnique developed where a suit was made for people to enter deep caves that were very hot, where the suit had water flowing drawing the heat away from the person, this concept
could be adapted for machenery, where the machinery if kept at a stable temperature and the flow of coolant could also cool the drilling bit.
2. Do a mini, exploritory venting into a smaller chamber, with scientific devices to measure and graph data:
pressure increase vs time,
heat increase vs time,
functional tool use,
integrity of chamber
sonic imgaing of chamber
etc.
3. the limitation of availible heat energy would be measured by the volume of the tunnel, this is potentiall very large, and once a process is perfected, a single chamber can be tapped multiple times,
the scientific data , the minerals in the cooled magma, and the energy produced should more than cover the cost of doing an exploration project
4. i would run a steam turbine to produce the energy
5. the political objections would be based on scientific reasoning, while i agree there should be 2 sides, one against , one for, i believe that each scientist should take both sides, considering the danger
and multiple disaster scenerios, so for every problem, one should think of a solution, for every solution one should think of a problem, etc.
while at the same time, we have launched to the moon, we have tunneled under a great sea, we have created hundreds of miles of mining tunnels, we have scientific instruments that can using sound, get a picture of a magma chamber
we have done all these things, with any project of this size , there should be opposition based on worse case scenerios, but those who have the largest opposition, should have the mind to find a solution to issues
and as far as a plane ticket goes, get them one now, there is radiation in their food,
lets start a vote, all those in favor of my posts being more stuctured, say I, all opposed say nay, you can pm me
"foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds"
Ralph Waldo Emmerson :essays