It's had 1.1 billion years to accumulate': Helium reservoir in Minnesota has 'mind-bogglingly large' concentrations

[admin]

Laboratory results for a helium reservoir discovered in northern Minnesota suggest concentrations of the sought-after gas are the highest the industry has ever seen.

It's had 1.1 billion years to accumulate': Helium reservoir in Minnesota has 'mind-bogglingly large' concentrations : Read more

 

[WCPlace]

Helium is a stable non radioactive element, it does not "break down" in storage!

 

[Geezer345]

While this, and the news about the Albanian Hydrogen Deposit, are good news; I would add a "caveat". The reason We have these deposits available, is that they were probably "trapped" as the Earth accumulated, and formed.

Both Hydrogen and Helium, are very "light" gasses, and in their "elemental" form, the Earth's Gravity is too "weak" to hold them. Fortunately, pure Hydrogen is very reactive, and will readily combine, with heavier gasses. Helium, however, is a "noble" gas, and will remain, in its "elemental" form, as will some pure Hydrogen. Both will therefore, rise to the top of the Atmosphere, and eventually, will be lost, forever; to the Earth. Some research, and the Composition of Our Atmosphere, suggest this.

I would suggest, and argue; that We should Not, be "profligate", in the use of these gasses, or any gasses, below Nitrogen and Oxygen, on the Periodic Table. The Earth's Gravity is too weak, to hold them, and We may lose, what We do have, if We aren't careful. Once "gone", they will be "gone", for good.

 

[Mr T]

Helium is a stable non radioactive element, it does not "break down" in storage!

Yes, it begs the question as to how someone with multiple science degrees, who writes for multiple publications, can not know the basics of the most common elements in the universe. But, I run across this constantly nowadays, writers with degrees in this and that who have no clue what they are talking about. It's as if no-one is checking their work.

 

[kevin75025]

Helium is a stable non radioactive element, it does not "break down" in storage!

presumably relative to the helium selling, this could be in reference to the gas permeation into the storage container. doubt the effect would be all that large, wonder if that startup CEOs was exaggerating or what.
also the article mentions liquid helium cooling of nuclear reactions, which seems dubious. that would seem to evaporate your whole tank in milliseconds. LHe is used in quantum computing though.

 

[Hatchetman]

Yes, it begs the question as to how someone with multiple science degrees, who writes for multiple publications, can not know the basics of the most common elements in the universe. But, I run across this constantly nowadays, writers with degrees in this and that who have no clue what they are talking about. It's as if no-one is checking their work.

It seems the "Trainee writer" mixed the storage of helium in man made containers and natural "containers". I believe bottles are a safe way to store helium but the person being interviewed used the same word for the gas being contained underground, in which case it makes perfect sense. The gas has been there for millions of years, but when you break the layer that keeps it there, it seeps out like bubbles from a can of soda and it cannot be closed again.
Its understandable of course that an expert thinks its as clear to others as to him, that a journalist who thinks she understands it does not suspect anything is wrong and believes the expert instead of the gut feeling older writers develop against BS, nobody has time or money to check the facts and tired editors spell check instead of fact check.
I dont blame any single person here, but its the product of the times. People want quality news with quality writing, but nobody is willing to pay for the time and work quality requires.
Stanley spent half a year looking for Livingstone in Africa. Today you have half an hour, and that is unpaid work.