[Submitted]Helium's Sinking, Oh My!

by **Zentata** » Mon Apr 13, 2020 11:45 am

Helium's Sinking, Oh My!

Description:The rise of helium in popular culture and science because of it's uses in welding, parties, rocketry, and more, has seen demand for it rocket up in the air. However, helium is in limited supply, due to bad management in the past, not to mention the difficulty to find and mine it, and so it is rapidly vanishing into thin air.
Validity:?

Option 1: "Well, I think we need to save up our gas.", says @@RANDOMNAME@@, who is the head of the National Helium Repository, "Since helium is a valuable resource, used in welding, rockets and weather balloons; we must strictly regulate its usage, and ensure that no helium is used except for scientific purposes. We can make our helium last a thousand years longer, if you agree." He struts off, but not before pinning a badge to your shirt that says "Be noble, keep the helium in the NHR!"

Effect: balloons are sinking, much to the disappointment of @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ children.

Validity: Allowing science?

Option 2: "You know, what if we just, like, you know, discouraged, like, the use of helium?" asks your foremost aide, @@RANDOMNAME@@. "I didn't even, like, know, that helium was a thing! I bet if you just tell people to go easy on it, they, like, totally, will!"@@HE@@ dances out of your office with a stapler in her hand, and a smile on @@HIS@@ face.

Effect: signs across @@NAME@@ say "Don't waste gas, save helium fast!"

Validity: None?

Option 3a (capitalist): @@RANDOMNAME@@, the C.E.O of GasCo, lifted up by a thousand helium balloons, bursts into your office via the window, and just before saying something, sprays some helium into his mouth. "Ahhhh, so good!" @@HE@@ says in a squeaky voice, "I really love this helium stuff! Why don't you subsidize its use, and make everyone inhale some each day! It clears the sinuses up like a charm. I'd be happy to mine it and package it for you, at a cost, of course." @@HE@@ sprays the room with helium, and then jumps out the window and floats away, leaving just one balloon behind.

Effect:@@NAME@@ is high and rising on helium

Option 3b (socialist): @@RANDOMNAME@@, the Minister of Economy, lifted up by a thousand helium balloons, bursts into your office via the window, and just before saying something, sprays some helium into his mouth. "Ahhhh, so good!" @@HE@@ says in a squeaky voice, "I really love this helium stuff! Why don't you subsidize its use, and make everyone inhale some each day! It clears the sinuses up like a charm.I think it would be just the thing for @@NAME@@, as expensive as it would be." @@HE@@ sprays the room with helium, and then jumps out the window and floats away, leaving just one balloon behind.

Effect:@@NAME@@ is high and rising on helium

Option 4: A man runs into your office and asks, "If we need helium so bad, why don't we just make some? I bet blowing up some nuclear stuff would really create some good gas!" He hands you a shirt with a photo of a mushroom cloud on it, and then says: "What do you say, mate? Do you want to blow up some bombs?"

Effect: The government of @@NAME@@ tries to solve all their issues with bombs!

by **Candlewhisper Archive** » Mon Apr 13, 2020 12:13 pm

Doesn't work for me. Not enough framing to this to explain why there's any good reason why helium in particular would be in short supply.

IRL, helium is in short supply, however. Not because of excessive demand, but because of the way the US has managed prices on the national helium reserve. Maybe research the real life issues, and construct a narrative around that.

by **Ender VI** » Mon Apr 13, 2020 12:15 pm

Hi! Rank amateur here, so take my comments with all the salt needed for a good steak.
I like the issue, although it could benefit from purging unnecessary phrases. For example:

Zentata wrote:Description:The rise of helium in popular culture and science has seen demand for it rocket~~up in the air~~. However, helium is in limited supply~~, and so is rapidly vanishing, and may soon be used up~~.

You can leave it to the reader to infer the exigence of the dwindling supply of helium from the increase of demand in the first sentence.The second sentence of the description could even be replaced by something like "However, the supply of helium is vanishing into thin air," and that leaves you more room to set up the issue.

As a general rule, making something more concise makes it more interesting, and thinking about only what needs to be said is a good exercise.

Unrelated idea: The Hindenburg was originally supposed to be filled with helium, but due to the US cutting off supply before WWII, it had to be filled with the much more flammable hydrogen. If it wasn't for that, the disaster probably wouldn't have happened. That seems like it'd be an good reference to work into one of the options.

EDIT: do what CWA suggests

by **Zentata** » Mon Apr 13, 2020 1:09 pm

I've taken a look at the IRL issue a bit more, and it seems as though only a few countries mine it, and that there isn't much of it. Once helium is used, it just goes away, so I've added a bit of context as to why there isn't much helium left in the particular nation. It should be a bit better now.

by **Trotterdam** » Mon Apr 13, 2020 1:13 pm

Helium is pretty rare in real life, due to being such a light gas that our planet's gravity has a hard time holding on to it, and once you let go of it you don't tend to see it back, unlike heavy minerals that fall to the ground and can eventually be recycled.

However, for there to be a real dilemma, there needs to be a good reason for demand to be high, not just for supply to be low.

by **Zentata** » Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:41 pm

Trotterdam wrote:Helium is pretty rare in real life, due to being such a light gas that our planet's gravity has a hard time holding on to it, and once you let go of it you don't tend to see it back, unlike heavy minerals that fall to the ground and can eventually be recycled.

However, for there to be a real dilemma, there needs to be a good reason for demand to be high, not just for supply to be low.

How would you recommend I show that high demand?

by **Trotterdam** » Mon Apr 13, 2020 4:11 pm

Zentata wrote:How would you recommend I show that high demand?

Give a better reason for it than "the rise of helium in popular culture and science". What are people using helium for and why is it important?

by **SherpDaWerp** » Mon Apr 13, 2020 5:11 pm

Trotterdam wrote:
Zentata wrote:How would you recommend I show that high demand?
Give a better reason for it than "the rise of helium in popular culture and science". What are people using helium for and why is it important?

Although, I do like "the rise of helium" - that's a pretty good pun.

by **Zentata** » Mon Apr 13, 2020 5:20 pm

Alright. So, for helium is used for, well, balloons, arc welding, rocketry, it's used in the production of fibre cables and computer chips, and it cools mri magnents. I'll try to fit this in.

by **Australian rePublic** » Mon Apr 13, 2020 11:08 pm

You missed an oppertunity to use a "pass gas" pun, as well as a a pun refering to the fact that helium is considered "nobel" amongst the gases

by **Zentata** » Sat Apr 25, 2020 8:38 am

/bump

by **Australian rePublic** » Sat Apr 25, 2020 3:16 pm

This needs some crazy NSesque style option, like huge nuclear reactions to create more helium

by **Zentata** » Sun Apr 26, 2020 11:47 am

Updated!

by **Candensia** » Sun Apr 26, 2020 12:27 pm

I still don't think the current premise adequately justifies a helium shortage.

In #890, a cobalt shortage is justified by @@NAME@@ having a large information technology sector, which needs cobalt for use in electronics, and also presents humanitarian delimas associated with cobalt mining.

Take it with a grain of salt, but I currently have a draft where @@NAME@@ faces concerns of a lithium shortage. That shortage is justified by @@NAME@@ adopting electric cars, which require lithium for use in rechargable batteries, on top of ordinary demand, like in electronics.

I think a helium shortage is doable, but there should be some reason that justifies the shortage, and "bad management" of helium supplies isn't adequate, I feel.

I think you should review CWA's suggestion. Show how bad management has created a national issue, and you then justify why a shortage might exist.

by **Zentata** » Sun Apr 26, 2020 2:27 pm

Candensia wrote:I still don't think the current premise adequately justifies a helium shortage.

In #890, a cobalt shortage is justified by @@NAME@@ having a large information technology sector, which needs cobalt for use in electronics, and also presents humanitarian delimas associated with cobalt mining.

Take it with a grain of salt, but I currently have a draft where @@NAME@@ faces concerns of a lithium shortage. That shortage is justified by @@NAME@@ adopting electric cars, which require lithium for use in rechargable batteries, on top of ordinary demand, like in electronics.

I think a helium shortage is doable, but there should be some reason that justifies the shortage, and "bad management" of helium supplies isn't adequate, I feel.

I think you should review CWA's suggestion. Show how bad management has created a national issue, and you then justify why a shortage might exist.

Because helium is used to cool magnets, which are used in MRIs and other particle accelerators and the like, would increasing scientific/medical demand along with bad mangement work?

by **Zentata** » Wed Apr 29, 2020 1:28 pm

/bump

by **Candensia** » Wed Apr 29, 2020 5:41 pm

Maybe it could work, but you'd need to say why demand has increased, not just *that* it has increased.

Additionally, saying "bad management" on its own does not adequately explain the situation. It’s too vague.

Observe.

A new report indicates that, due to bad management, several government agencies waste huge amounts of money each year.

Compare that to this.

A new report indicates that several government agencies allow employees to visit casinos and gamble using taxpayer money.

What does "bad management" mean in this issue? That's what you need to consider.

by **Zentata** » Fri May 01, 2020 5:10 am

Perhaps something about the government not controlling the demand?

by **SherpDaWerp** » Fri May 01, 2020 5:27 pm

Zentata wrote:Perhaps something about the government not controlling the demand?

You could describe this such that "heaps of modern inventions use helium" - all the important examples you've given (welding, MRI magnets, rocketry, weather balloons) are modern inventions. It sounds reasonable to me that governments would have sold off great amounts of helium to corporations for unimportant things like parties before realising that MRI magnets were even going to be invented, so that could be part of your reasoning behind the bad management.

by **Zentata** » Mon May 04, 2020 6:57 am

/bump

I'll update this soon, but any other feedback?

by **Akragas** » Mon May 04, 2020 8:57 am

Hello! I like the helium depletion theme overall; one good reason for a major spike in demand would be progress in the cryogenic industry (which includes uses in superconductors such as in MRI and so on).

Regarding option 4, I am really fond of the offbeat idea of producing helium through nuclear means; arguably, though, the current way it is presented is impracticable. Detonating a warhead of course produces a large amount of radiation (some of which is in the form of alpha particles, helium-4 nuclei to be used for the gas production in this scenario), but the particles are ejected, well, with the energy of a nuclear explosion. A way of actually collecting these selectively (amidst an A-bomb explosion!) would probably enter deep the realm of physical infeasibility...

The alternative would be to collect the alpha particles in the controlled environment of a nuclear reactor; the irl physics is still rather sketchy (see physics.stackexchange.com/questions/109985/is-it-possible-to-manufacture-helium), requiring an enormous reactor for production in the grams-kilograms per year range.

So, a good way to put this option (adding to its extravagance) would be to have a nuclear power lobbyist suggest that all the nation's power should be generated by nuclear power stations, with precious helium as a by-product.

Suitable results could include a semi-comical line about the result of low-level radiation all over the country ("weak radioluminescence is affectionately called the @@NAME@@ Effect") or an ironic twist with this all-nuclear conversion to cover helium production eventually resulting in uranium deposits depletion.

(Hope that all helps!)

by **Trotterdam** » Mon May 04, 2020 9:32 am

Akragas wrote:Suitable results could include a semi-comical line about the result of low-level radiation all over the country ("weak radioluminescence is affectionately called the @@NATION@@ Effect") or an ironic twist with this all-nuclear conversion to cover helium production eventually resulting in uranium deposits depletion.

When you talk about using nuclear reactions to produce helium, I think of nuclear fusion (where every single candidate reaction ends up producing helium), not nuclear fission (which works on the wrong side of the periodic table), so uranium wouldn't be involved.

by **Akragas** » Mon May 04, 2020 9:55 am

Trotterdam wrote:When you talk about using nuclear reactions to produce helium, I think of nuclear fusion (where every single candidate reaction ends up producing helium), not nuclear fission (which works on the wrong side of the periodic table), so uranium wouldn't be involved.

Yep, fusion would be the ideal process to produce helium, but (very unfortunately) we can't achieve a fusion reaction with net energy gain on Earth (the energy expenditure to create the right conditions is just massive).

In fact, fission does produce a large amount of alpha radiation, as it is one of the possible decay modes present in all actinide decay chains; the alpha particles would just have to be collected in a suitable manner (this is theoretically possible, just requires huge amounts of used uranium/plutonium fuel for a small helium production according to the folks in Physics StackExchange; but then again the chain reaction where these are consumed is still suitable for energy production, enabling the option I mentioned). I wouldn't think this level of technicality is required in the issue, just saying this is physically doable and would be the way to go in a realistic (as far as one may call it so) scenario

by **Trotterdam** » Mon May 04, 2020 10:26 am

Akragas wrote:we can't achieve a fusion reaction with net energy gain on Earth

You wouldn't need to, if the point is to make helium rather than energy.

Make the energy somewhere else and then use that to power the fusion to make helium. The amount of energy isn't too bad - state-of-the-art experimental fusion reactors have managed to give back more than half of the energy they cost to run (well, for a certain value of "cost" - from what I'm reading, this seems to be a doctored number that ignores various side costs not part of the fusion reaction itself) - so I think that it's more practical than trying to catch alpha particles at a natural decay rate from a slurry of radioactive waste.

[Submitted]Helium's Sinking, Oh My!

[Submitted]Helium's Sinking, Oh My!

Who is online