Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So, the house would be saved... and then you'd own a house in the middle of a lava field - which would be... problematic, to put it mildly. Aside from that, its resale value would be roughly zero. After all, who wants to live on a plain that is one mass of black rock? [A: No one.]
At any rate, in most instances an elevated house would combust, or suffer significant damage if it didn't completely burn away, because lava fields are extremely hot. Even the coolest lavas are around 1000 degrees Fahrenheit, and the air above a flowing field will be superheated to hundreds of degrees.
People pay good money to live on it, and it provides a natural barrier to protect their house.
The original comment talked about building mounds or dykes. I always wondered if using water to cool the front of the flow could be effective in directing it away from housing and neighborhoods. I think there was an issue in the Pahoa flow a few years ago about some guy doing that because it just sent the lava onto the neighbor's property. So not good, but it did sound like it was possible to do. Maybe have a lava-fighting brigade that could work with firehouses to protect the neighborhood as best as possible, channeling the flow into the smallest area and directing it away. Then again, maybe it's too dynamic and too difficult, and the lava will go where it wants.
Iceland has had moderate success doing that.
Quote:
Cool it with water
One of the most successful lava stops came in the 1970s on the Icelandic island of Haimey. Lava from the Eldfell volcano threatened the island's harbour and the town of Vestmannaeyjar.
For almost five months in 1973, frigid sea water was blasted through cannons towards the advancing lava. As the water hit the superheated rock, it turned into steam, allowing the lava's heat to dissipate.
A fifth of Vestmannaeyjar was destroyed before larger cannons were brought in, but enough of the lava flow was slowed and redirected to save the harbour.
In all, 1.5 billion gallons (6.8 billion litres) of water were used.
But conditions were right for such an intervention to work - the lava from Eldfell was particularly slow moving and an inexhaustible supply of water was available, Dr Nawotniak says.
Might work for slow-moving Aa, but if you try doing that with Pahoehoe, you probably would just accelerate construction of a lave-tube with the result that more lava will go further.
An existing, functional harbor with all that entails is probably worth the expenditure, but Puna.... not so much.
Might work for slow-moving Aa, but if you try doing that with Pahoehoe, you probably would just accelerate construction of a lave-tube with the result that more lava will go further.
An existing, functional harbor with all that entails is probably worth the expenditure, but Puna.... not so much.
Ultimately, Mother Nature will always win. LOL. But I think that a combination of barriers and water could slow it down enough to maybe stop it before it gets to a development.
It seems to me the biggest problem in Hawaii, is building materials. From the videos I have seen, many of the homes burn before the lava even gets to them. It might be a good idea to build with non combustible building materials. It would protect your investment from non lava caused fires too.
Ultimately, Mother Nature will always win. LOL. But I think that a combination of barriers and water could slow it down enough to maybe stop it before it gets to a development.
It seems to me the biggest problem in Hawaii, is building materials. From the videos I have seen, many of the homes burn before the lava even gets to them. It might be a good idea to build with non combustible building materials. It would protect your investment from non lava caused fires too.
There was a flow from PuuOo (2014) that instead of heading south like the previous flows did over the ensuing years since 1983, came off the North side of the crater and went ever-so-slowly towards Pahoa. It stopped, miraculously, just short of the town. In a situation like than, yes, it might have been stopped a few hundred yards sooner, IF a sufficient supply of water was available (probably not) and if there was a means to pump it fast enough to matter (perhaps).
One guy, using a bulldozer, did manage some redirection, but then there is the legal issue that if you redirect lava, and it wipes out somebody else, well guess whose door the lawyers (or Process Servers) will be knocking on . What was initially an act of "god" suddenly becomes the fault of a guy with a dozer.
It might work in a few situations given the right lava, right terrain, sufficient resources and enough value to be saved from destruction by M Pele to make it worthwhile.
You can find the best defense from the Realtors Motto, i.e. Location, location, location.
I believe the radiant heat from an active lava flow under your house, up on heat-resistant legs will set any combustibles on fire, perhaps spall concrete and soften steel until it fails.
Some places in Kalapana were covered with 80' of fresh, hot, chewy lava.
I've not asked them, but I suspect that many folks in Puna would prefer that their houses be elsewhere - even before the lava showed up. The main reason they are in Puna is because it's less expensive than pretty much anywhere else in Hawaii. However, as we are now seeing - those lava zones mean more than how much more you'll have to pay for insurance.
Before the building codes got so extensive, houses weren't that difficult nor expensive to build. Folks could afford to build, live on the side of a volcano and then lose a house to a lava flow. Since the codes have changed - and rather significantly in the past decade - it's now much more expensive to build a house. Although, at least Hawaii houses don't have the whole HVAC thing going on, nor the deep frost heave safe foundations. But still, having the same code for a building that is gonna get eaten by lava doesn't quite seem proper.
Government red tape sucks. I’m all for common sense regulations, but more often than not regulations are over the top and costly to the consumer and economy.
Government red tape sucks. I’m all for common sense regulations, but more often than not regulations are over the top and costly to the consumer and economy.
I don't know how satisfied today's American would be with such an abode. Perhaps some, but I don't think most would. We've gotten too used to the conveniences, niceties and a few luxuries.
I second this Cloudy.
My house is on an old lava flow and I love it. No, coquis, no termites, very few bugs of any kind. My dogs don't track in mud, I have lot's of landscaping and gardens yet my dogs don't have mud to track in etc...
What's not to love. I liken it to living in the Southwest on the mainland. If you can find beauty in a stark desert, then why not in a lava flow?
I second this Cloudy.
My house is on an old lava flow and I love it. No, coquis, no termites, very few bugs of any kind. My dogs don't track in mud, I have lot's of landscaping and gardens yet my dogs don't have mud to track in etc...
What's not to love. I liken it to living in the Southwest on the mainland. If you can find beauty in a stark desert, then why not in a lava flow?
That sounds very good!!!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
