[Geysers] RE: Conduit dimensions - sources?

[Davis, Brian L.]

Paul Strasser wrote:

> Brian - I wish to be charitable.

<grin> That's OK, I'm in academia - "being charitable" is another way to say "you're dead wrong, and should know it". Seriously, I understand taking this text with a large does of ionic solids - in a more eco-conscious world, his take on geothermal power is... interesting, as well. But he does lay out some nice theoretical constraints and limitations, which I'm trying to translate into somewhat more familiar units and concepts, as well as repeating some older, somewhat discarded ideas like constrictions are absolutely needed.

> Those depths that Rinehart cites are, well, unverified
> by any other researched anywhere in the world.

Agreed - I'd never seen any other reference below 22 m anywhere else in the literature. But it's not always obvious to me what the primary sources are. If Old Faithful had only been plumbed to a "bottom" three or four times, it would seem reasonable that somebody might have gotten lucky on one occasion and no one had been able to reproduce it. What is curious about Rinehart's original paper is the temperature traces, which do seem very different for the "deep soundings", but it's not at all clear how many times he had to try to "thread the needle" in replacing the thermistor, for instance.

Lynn Stephens wrote:

> The data I'm compiled may not be extensive enough
> for your purposes, but I did compiled a list of pool/tube
> depths from Allen & Day, and two reports in Yellowstone
> Nature Notes.  The compilation included descriptions of
> how the depths were determined. 

That actually sounds like a very useful reference! If anyone knows what issue of the Sput it was in, or can email me a scanned copy of some type, I would welcome the information. This is exactly why I asked - I'm aware that there's so much more out there than I'm aware of :).

-- 
Brian Davis