Consider hydrogen for Earth's Core

[Turtle]

Originally Posted by CharlieO

Good to see TURTLE still hanging in there.

...Some personal history, which I hope is allowed in this forum: I am personally aware of water and hydrogen gas being a problem in very deep boreholes. In fact, while working for Shell (Oil) Development in Emeryville, CA, during the 1950s, the problem we were trying to solve was the effect inside metals resulting from contact with hydrogen in deep boreholes. I'm sure you can understand what might be the problem when a drill string breaks several miles deep. "Fishing" any broken string out of a borehole is extremely costly. So it was necessary to try to protect drill strings from the effects of hydrogen infusion. We did have some success, albeit failures created by hydrogen in deep boreholes have continued to this day.

Regards, Charlie

Hi again Charlie. Five minutes ago I had this bit of yours on my mind and my natural question now is how are these drill rigs protected against electrolysis? What is used for a drilling fluid? Is it possible that a moving conductor (drill shaft) in a magnetic field (Earth's) is creating a current in an electrolyte (the drilling fluid) and so creating hydrogen gas while corroding the drill pipe? Well, off to more mulling. .......

[CharlieO]

InfiniteNow: Thanks for the heads up. After a quick review of the SCIENCE article and unless my math [in my earlier post] is incorrect, the rotation of Earth's outer core, mantle and crust is slowing down at a greatly reduced snail's pace. An Amoeba might move faster than the speed at which Earth is falling behind the [illogical] continued rotation of its Inner Core. Hardly a speed differential that could generate a magnetic field. Curious that professional scientists would claim Earth's inner core is moving ahead, when Earth is actually slowing down. Guess a misleading claim get better public attention.

TURTLE: Very good question on oil wells, for which I have no first hand answer. Shocking, but true. Guess I really don't know everything after all and I've probably forgotten more than most.

As I was in Shell's research facility, with a lot of pressure to concentrate on finding a solution to an unusual metal fatigue problem, the details of how wells were drilled or protected was not made evident to me; being a new man on the team. I do know the problem was largely with deeper wells and even then only a selected number were having problems with what the oil field geologists called 'sour crudes.' Apparently, these wells contained a lot of free hydrogen, hydrogen sulfide and water. This 'evil mixture' seemed to cause atomic hydrogen to infuse into the metal, apparently by electrolysis as you so astutely proposed. I was told various methods were being tried. Electric potential charge, nasty paint, changes in alloys, etc.

Only thing I was told later is there was only limited success. The infused hydrogen could be driven off with no evident damage to the metal with heat, but when metal was subjected to stress in the drilling process, the strain caused atomic hydrogen [H] to effuse from within the metal's molecules into grain boundaries and form molecular hydrogen [HH]. This developed enough pressure to separate the grains and deform the crystals, eventually leading to micro metal fractures and failure thru Hydrogen Embrittlement, a serious problem in many industries even today. One reason you may see lots of drill pipe being used for fencing. They don't hold up long in active service.

Interesting personal note, which I hope is allowed: On a trip back home to Oklahoma, I mentioned the research at Shell with Hydrogen Embrittlement to a fellow pilot, who was active Air Force. I soon found myself working for the USAF at Tinker AFB-OCAMA, 1959-60. Seems that a particular model of turbojet engines was having a difficult time keeping their compressor blades intact. Turns out only some interior blades were failing initially, then the engine would be torn apart or seized shut; usually tearing loose on bombers or killing pilots in fighters. We found the interior blades were the ones most affected by vibratory stress, mainly during compressor stalls. We then determined the manufacturer's Foreign Object Damage limits were not correctly related to the blade's most critical areas and FOD cleaning of runways was a waste of time, except in the case of the Concorde of course.

I thought the problem was Hydrogen Embrittlement and concluded the hydrogen creating the [possible] Embrittlement problem was [probably] infused into the blades during the manufacturing process and the blades were not being [properly] annealed by the manufacturer to remove it. Serious charge and all hell broke loose. Testifying before an Aviation Committee in Washington DC, was an experience I don't wish on my worst enemy. In the end, the manufacturer was let off the hook, their engine was taken out of service, annealing was improved on others, lives were saved and I ended up as a Service Engineer for British Leyland Cars, racing a few in the process; no American company would hire a 'Whistle Blower." British car problems were a lot more fun, I must add, and they had a lot of problems.

USAF research tie-in with Earth's hydrogen core: The stresses of Earth Tides created by Moon's Gravity, creates strains deep within Earth's Mantle. This is turn can physically cause hydrogen, migrating upward from the core thru molecules within the mantle material, to more actively effuse into more porous areas of Earth's crust. Volcanoes therefore become mainly hydrogen vents. Now that should raise some eyebrows. Sort of the next shoe.

Regards, Charlie

[freeztar]

Originally Posted by CharlieO

USAF research tie-in with Earth's hydrogen core: The stresses of Earth Tides created by Moon's Gravity, creates strains deep within Earth's Mantle. This is turn can physically cause hydrogen, migrating upward from the core thru molecules within the mantle material, to more actively effuse into more porous areas of Earth's crust. Volcanoes therefore become mainly hydrogen vents. Now that should raise some eyebrows. Sort of the next shoe.

I'm much more hesitant to make that leap of faith. Why couldn't the H2 be emanating from the crust, or even the mantle?

[CharlieO]

FREEZTAR: You are most justified in finding a complete break with dogma to be difficult and in fact there is still a good chance I may be wrong.

Earth's Mantle would in fact be an ideal place for atomic Hydrogen to sit quietly within other molecules for eons. However, Earth's crust is too well studied and found too lacking in hydrogen for it to have a chance to be a reservoir for the great amount of hydrogen which has emerged over the past four billion years. After all, no one really knows what elements composed the Mantle and in what ratios. Mainly silicon according to some, while others claim differently. Which proves a point. No one really knows.

So, being a former hydrogen properties researcher, I, like everyone else will lean towards what is most familiar. I'll probably see things differently than someone indoctrinated by a different religion, that is, theory [assumption], no matter what evidence is offered. However, the fact is the amount of hydrogen and its compounds, which emerges from volcanoes alone far exceeds all other elements which emerge from within Earth. Add to that the hydrogen and its compounds which effuse from earthquake zones, geysers, oil wells, gas wells and other natural venting areas and you must admit hydrogen has been the dominate element venting from within Earth for eons.

OK, volcanoes. Virtually everybody I've met will say volcanoes spew forth molten lava and blow a lot of melted rock into the air, therefore it must be molten below the crust and the gases dissolved within the magma cause the volcanic eruptions. This appears to be true, but looks can be deceiving.

Let's say two ants are walking along a great iron beam. Below it is a man with a cutting torch, which uses acetylene [mainly hydrogen] and oxygen to provide the heat to cut into the iron. Neither the Acetylene nor Oxygen are hot before they are combined. They can even be very cold. However, when they do combine, they create enough heat venting from a cutting torch to blow a hole in the iron beam.

What would the ants think? Why it would be understandable for the ants to conclude there must be a great reservoir of melted iron below the surface and the dissolved gases caused it to melt a hole thru the iron beam and splatter the melted iron around the hole. Remember, these are very intelligent ants, probably ant scientists. So it would also be completely understandable for early man to believe in melted magma rising from below, filling a magma chamber and then exploding thru the crust when the pressure of the dissolved gases becomes too great for the crust to contain. Sounds good, so what is the problem?

Unfortunately for the ants and us, there is no melted reservoir of magma beneath volcanoes. At least I've never seen any research or seismographic study which located a melted magma reservoir area below an active volcano. Which will probably result in a number of references being supplied by the sharp eyed readers of the this very intelligent forum.

Meanwhile, the only related experiments known to me were preformed as a means of measuring the temperature within active lava lakes. Perhaps surprisingly, these failed to find any 'throat' thru which the lava emerged, but did find the interior temperatures declined with increasing depth, to the point they were soon below the melting point of rock and only solid rocks could be found not very far below the surface of the boiling volcanic lake. T. A. Jagger, My Life with Volcanoes.

This could be explained by relatively cold hydrogen emerging from below and combining with oxygen in an exothermic reaction, resulting in a temperature rise which can easily melt rock, even iron.

About 40 years ago, I applied for a grant to study volcanic gas emissions, worldwide, as a theme for a Master's degree thesis. I wanted to find out what kind and what quantities of gasses vented from all possible volcanoes, both during eruptive events and relatively quiet periods.

At first, there was academic support for this effort and an endorsement was anticipated, albeit volcanic gases were not exactly in line with what my major professor was comfortable with. He specialized in the study of lava's features. Never the less, I was looking forward to corresponding with volcano researchers all over the world.

My initial review of available information indicated Hydrogen and its compounds were the primary emissions from volcanoes; as much as 97% and largely within water. In addition, the amount of gaseous emissions was estimated to be in the millions of tonnes during a single eruptive period; which at first even I thought might be excessive.

One volcano, Mount Etna in central Italy was chosen as my primary example. It is the highest, largest and most active volcano in Europe. It has erupted an estimated 18,700 times over the past 300,000 years, roughly every 16 years. Mount Etna is an enormous cone, about two miles high and some 8 miles across its effective base, albeit its lavas spread out thinly for many more miles.

The volume of a cone is 1/3 (Pi (radius x radius)) times height. Igneous rock averages about 5,000 pounds per cubic yard or 2.6 million tonnes per cubic mile. [Remember some igneous rock is so light it can float.] If the cone consists of 300+ cubic miles of rock, probably less due to the cone not being a consistent cone shape, then Mount Etna might weigh about 780 million tonnes. An awesome weight to be sure.

However, gas emissions were observed by serious scientists to vary from 100 to 250 tonnes per day, mainly hydrogen and its compounds, again largely water. Eruptive gaseous emissions were estimated to be in the order of ten to forty thousand tonnes per day. Since Etna's violent eruptions have been recorded over the past 2,500 years as lasting for days, even weeks, with lesser eruptions continuing for months, an average of 25,000 tonnes per day x 10 days x 18,700 events equals 4.675 billion tonnes of gas. An average of 175 tonnes per day for 300,000 years equals 19.163 billion tonnes of gas, for a total of 23.838 billion tonnes of gaseous emissions over the known life of Mount Etna, roughly 30 times the total mass of one of the world's most 'enormous' volcanoes. [My math skills may be lacking and more recent estimates might be different, but I believe my point is valid.]

I concluded the amount of gaseous emissions, over the known life of just Mount Etna, might include enough hydrogen, mainly combined with oxygen as water, to fill the nearby Ionian Sea. It seems curious that scientifically trained volcanic researchers only seem to concentrate on the 'enormous' quantities of melted lava appearing around the base of what is effectively a gigantic gas vent. Not sure why they only seem to focus their interest on mainly the melted slag or lava which appears around a hole blown thru Earth's surface by the intense heat of what is actually a gigantic hydrogen-oxygen cutting torch.

Meanwhile, the gas emitted during a major eruption of just one of 300 or more active volcanoes, in one event, can change Earth's climate and damage all flora and fauna worldwide for months, if not for years. Volcanic events have done this in man's recent past. Gas venting from a series of volcanoes over a short period, say during one year, could easily change Earth's climate for decades, and may have done so in prehistoric events which were recorded by man in oral histories. Gas venting from only half of the thousands of volcanoes known to exist, could wipe man as a species off the face of the Earth.

Some researchers, mentioned in SCIENCE, have recently reported the possibility that the mighty comet or asteroid which crashed into the Yucatan some 65 million years ago and assumed to have killed off the dinosaurs, may have only been the "trigger" for the release of enormous amounts of 'dissolved gases' stored in Earth's Mantle. They now suggest the Yucatan event largely disturbed Earth's Mantle enough so 'dissolved gases' were then released from volcanoes all over the world, creating a climate change that killed 90% of Earth's species.

The Decca Traps in India [hundreds of square miles of lava fields] were given as an example of the enormous amounts of lava being released during the same time period, which would represent far greater amounts of hydrogen compounds by weight venting into Earth's atmosphere. In short, so much hydrogen was represented as venting from within that Earth's climate would have been changed for decades, until solar radiation could separate the hydrogen from oxygen in the upper stratosphere and a more livable balance be restored to our surface atmosphere.

Core or Mantle, I believe there is good evidence for hydrogen venting from within as the primary element controlling Earth's climate and our lives. Good question FREEZTAR.

Regards, Charlie

[Turtle]

Originally Posted by CharlieO

...

OK, volcanoes. Virtually everybody I've met will say volcanoes spew forth molten lava and blow a lot of melted rock into the air, therefore it must be molten below the crust and the gases dissolved within the magma cause the volcanic eruptions. This appears to be true, but looks can be deceiving. ...

Regards, Charlie

Erhmm...I don't think so. This is so gross a generalized mischaracterization of volcanoes that it is not even wrong. But I didn't come about the ants.

Inasmuch as you found the information on the role of electrolysis in hydrogen production new & welcome, here is another even more revealing bit of new information on the role of electricity in rocks under pressure. ....>>

Earth Conductivity

Piezoelectric earth

[CharlieO]

TURTLE, I read the intro and then the whole six pages following and learned more than I ever suspected about electrical discharges created by Earth movements. Makes a lot of sense. Thank you.

Regards, Charlie

[freeztar]

Originally Posted by CharlieO

FREEZTAR: You are most justified in finding a complete break with dogma to be difficult and in fact there is still a good chance I may be wrong.

I'm open-minded and skeptical.

Core or Mantle, I believe there is good evidence for hydrogen venting from within as the primary element controlling Earth's climate and our lives. Good question FREEZTAR.

What do you mean by H2 being the "primary element controlling Earth's climate and our lives"?

That is an extremely bold statement, and as an "armchair" enthusiast studying climatology, I would love to hear the justification.

[Turtle]

Originally Posted by CharlieO

TURTLE, I read the intro and then the whole six pages following and learned more than I ever suspected about electrical discharges created by Earth movements. Makes a lot of sense. Thank you.

Regards, Charlie

Roger. I love how science is always ammendable. So I was off researching for another thread and ran across more stuff for us. As a bit of an aside, were I to have to go to the library(s) to track this stuff down like in the old days, it would happen at a pace a snail would scoff at, if at all. Yay internet! Fullfilling its original purpose.

OK The electolytic effect refered to as 'galvanic corrosion' occurs without the application of external current but by means of action between dissimilar metals. This article deals with it in pressure storage vessels, but the dissimilar metals found in a drill head & rig will behave similarly.

OilPro - Tech Notes - Corrosion is just the pits

Originally Posted by oil pro

...Galvanic Corrosion

The Corrosion Doctors define it like this: "Galvanic corrosion refers to corrosion damage induced when two dissimilar materials are coupled in a corrosive electrolyte. The driving force for corrosion is a(n electric) potential difference between the different materials. The less noble material will become the anode of this corrosion cell and tend to corrode at an accelerated rate, compared with the uncoupled condition. The more noble material will act as the cathode in the corrosion cell. ...

[CharlieO]

To ALL: Sorry for the response delay. Snow storm, ice on wires, living far out on Colorado plains. Dial-up unreliable, wireless too distant, satellite too expensive. Been off-line for awhile. Busy staying alive. At least I have a cell phone to call on and a generator for Barbara's concentrator, frig and furnace.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

In response to TURTLE: "so gross a generalized mischaracterization" is kind, compared to what has been said about me in the past. I would have probably been burnt at the stake in early days. I still maintain volcanoes are just hydrogen vents and physical evidence would seem to confirm this. Pity there is no physical evidence connecting volcanoes with the assumed Hot Iron Core. I did run across at few references you might find of interest. - - - - - - -

WIKIPEDIA: Gases are released from magma through volatile constituents reaching such high concentrations in the base magma that they evaporate. (Technically, this would be described as the exsolution and accumulation of the gases upon reaching excess supersaturation of these constituents in the host solution (magmatic melt), and their subsequent loss from the host by diffusion and phase separation into bubbles). Molten rock (either magma or lava) near the atmosphere releases high-temperature volcanic gas (>400 °C). In explosive volcanic eruptions, sudden release of gases from magma may cause rapid movements of the molten rock. When the magma encounters water seawater, lake water or groundwater, it can be rapidly fragmented. The rapid expansion of gases is the driving mechanism of most explosive volcanic eruptions. However, a significant portion of volcanic gas release occurs during quasi-continuous quiescent phases of active volcanism.

The abundance of gases varies considerably from volcano to volcano. However, water vapor is consistently the most common volcanic gas, normally comprising more than 60% of total emissions. Carbon dioxide typically accounts for 10 to 40% of emissions.[1]

Certain constituents of volcanic gases may show very early signs of changing conditions at depth, making them a powerful tool to predict imminent unrest. Used in conjunction with monitoring data on seismicity and deformation, correlative monitoring gains great efficiency. Volcanic gas monitoring is a standard tool of any volcano observatory. Volcanic gas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



FROM Agence France-Presse
Last updated 06:24am (Mla time) 12/06/2007
SAN JOSE -- Costa Rica's Turrialba volcano on Wednesday began spewing vapor and gas, raising alarm among experts over a potential eruption though no evacuations have yet been ordered, officials said. Costa Rican volcano begins spewing gas, vapor - INQUIRER.net, Philippine News for Filipinos


THINKQUEST: Volcanic gas is contained within magma. As the magma rises to the Earth's surface the gases are exsolved. Because some gases are toxic they can suffocate people. Gas escapes from fissures and vents and help to form fumaroles, solfataras and mud pots. Volcanic Gas


BRITANNICA: The most common volcanic gases are water vapour, carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and hydrogen sulfide. Small quantities of other volatile elements and compounds also are present, such as hydrogen, helium, nitrogen, hydrogen chloride, hydrogen fluoride, and mercury. The specific gaseous compounds released from magma depend on the temperature, pressure, and overall composition of the volatile elements present. The amount of available oxygen is of critical importance in determining which volatile gases are present.

When oxygen is lacking, methane, hydrogen, and hydrogen sulfide are chemically stable, but when hot volcanic gases mix with atmospheric gases, water vapour, carbon dioxide, and sulfur dioxide are stable.The most common volcanic gases are water vapour, carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and hydrogen sulfide. Small quantities of other volatile elements and compounds also are present, such as hydrogen, helium, nitrogen, hydrogen chloride, hydrogen fluoride, and mercury.

The specific gaseous compounds released from magma depend on the temperature, pressure, and overall composition of the volatile elements present. The amount of available oxygen is of critical importance in determining which volatile gases are present. When oxygen is lacking, methane, hydrogen, and hydrogen sulfide are chemically stable, but when hot volcanic gases mix with atmospheric gases, water vapour, carbon dioxide, and sulfur dioxide are stable. volcano :: Gas clouds --* Britannica Online Encyclopedia

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

TURTLE: You may note in the above references there is NO mention of the AMOUNT of gases released from the magma over time. Fact is, the only element which can infuse within other materials is hydrogen, which can then effuse as an apparent "dissolved gas."

In fact, after reviewing all the references I can find, no material directly related to Earth's Mantle has ever been found around volcanic vents. There are many references to the types of lava found around volcanic vents, all of which appear to be directly related to the type of crust on which the particular volcano is located. In other words, hydrogen is the only element solely coming from within the mantle and sometimes, but not always, mixing with oxides in the crust beneath the volcano to create eruptions and/or intense heat within Earth's surface layers. There is no free hydrogen on Earth's surface than does not come from within. Everything else can be found on the surface.

Another point you might want to consider, if researchers and my math are correct, is the AMOUNT of gases venting from Mount Etna appear to be at least 30 times greater by weight, over time, than the volcano itself today. Consider the impossibility of a pound of 'magma' or lava containing 30 times its weight in dissolved gases? The best I ever did under laboratory conditions was to infuse samples of various materials with hydrogen in ratios of 1.17:1 minimum to 1.70:1 maximum, compared to the initial weight of the samples.

To equal the dissolved gases venting from Mount Etna, one would have to believe a pound of lava would have to hold about 45 times MORE in dissolved gases than was done under the best of conditions in one of the finest materials laboratories in the world. Shell didn't mind spend a lot of money when preventing millions of dollars in drilling failures were at stake.

If I am still guilty of a "gross generalized mischaracterization" in your view of how volcanoes function, I plead guilty. Albeit, at least my mischaracterization is based on physical experiments and scientific measurements under laboratory conditions as well as physical facts which can be observed and measured in the field. At good counter is to claim conditions inside Earth must be beyond anything which can be duplicated or observed on the surface. Good logical type of assumption, has been used by many others before to explain why I was unable to duplicate assumed volcanic conditions, but still just another an assumption. I prefer physical facts.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

In response to FREEZTAR: Your wrote: What do you mean by H2 being the "primary element controlling Earth's climate and our lives"?

That is an extremely bold statement, and as an "armchair" enthusiast studying climatology, I would love to hear the justification.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Good question. Are you aware of considerable amounts of hydrogen escaping into space every day? When water vapour rises into the stratosphere, from low pressure zones, it is subjected to solar radiation. A finite amount of water vapor, at a rate determined by the intensity of solar radiation at that time, separates into oxygen and hydrogen. The heavier oxygen descends back down to Earth, in high pressure zones. The hydrogen, being too light to be retained by Earth's Gravity, escapes into space, trailing Earth like a comet's tail and visible as far as Moon's orbit. This is a physical fact that can be seen. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to locate any scientific measurements.

So, every day, a specific amount of water vapour is being changed into oxygen and hydrogen, and the hydrogen is being lost in space. Somehow, more hydrogen must be coming from somewhere to replace that which is being lost. If not, we would have constantly increasing amounts of oxygen and decreasing amounts of water. Now that could produce some dramatic climatic changes as the result of too little hydrogen.

When Earth's Core or Mantle, as you prefer, effuses more hydrogen usual, which combines with oxygen and produces water, you will have more water vapour than usual and only a finite amount of solar radiation to separate a limited amount of water vapour into oxygen and hydrogen. Then you will have more water vapour retained in Earth's atmosphere than is necessary to maintain ambient temperatures and climatic conditions.

Dense clouds will follow an overabundance of water vapour and these will reflect the sunlight, thus temperatures will drop and more rain and snow will appear. So how is this related to hydrogen? Well, check on what happens when there is a major volcanic eruption, with more than the usual amount of hydrogen and hydrogen compounds, including water vapor, plus some particulate materials and aerosols, vented from within Earth; dissolved gases, if you will.

Climatic conditions can become deadly following a major eruption, albeit Mount Saint Helens was no biggie. With a biggie, there may be a year or more without summer, e.g., Mount Pinatubo, Krakotoa, Santorini, Tamboro, etc. With a number of biggies being triggered into major venting by an asteroid strike, there may be dozens, if not hundreds of years without summers. That's climatic change you can reference directly to volcanic emissions, with hydrogen being the dominate element in these emissions. sizes of eruptions

Consider what will happen when Earth's Core or Mantle ceases to provide hydrogen to combine with oxygen in Earth's crust and create water. We will die. Will happen someday.

Hope this is an understandable and believable answer to your question.

Regards, Charlie

[Eclogite]

On the topic of hydrogen embrittlement in drilling operations: Charlie you provided the explanation within your very detailed post. You note that the wells were tapping into 'sour crude', i.e. crude oil with a significant hydrogen sulphide content. It is a classic problem when drilling in H2S zones. However, it offers zero support for the notion of hydrogen emananting from the mantle. (Though your ensuing story makes for interesting reading.)

Originally Posted by CharlieO

I still maintain volcanoes are just hydrogen vents and physical evidence would seem to confirm this.

What physical evidence? I know of absolutely no evidence that would support this contention. I am ready to be amazed - please offer it now.
You then provide some lengthy quotes which far from supporting your argument actually refute it.
Thus the wikipedia article states "water vapor is consistently the most common volcanic gas, normally comprising more than 60% of total emissions. Carbon dioxide typically accounts for 10 to 40% of emissions." No mention of hydrogen.
Two short quotes simply refere to volcanic gases, while the Britannica article tells us " The most common volcanic gases are water vapour, carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and hydrogen sulfide. Small quantities of other volatile elements and compounds also are present, such as hydrogen, helium, nitrogen, hydrogen chloride, hydrogen fluoride, and mercury." Hydrogen present then, but as a small quantity only.

Originally Posted by CharlieO

I can find, no material directly related to Earth's Mantle has ever been found around volcanic vents

To paraphrase what Turtle said of an earlier statement of yours, this is so wrong it isn't even wrong.
I don't have time to go into a comprehensive description of reality. This is dealt with in any of scores of text books, doubtless several internet sites, and thousands of research papers.
Briefly, partial melting of the mantle generates basaltic magmas that erupt at mid ocean ridges, island chains, such as Hawaii, or in continental locations such as the Deccan Traps. The character of the mantle, and possible contamination as the magma rises through the crust effect the final composition of the erupted magma, but it is largely 'material directly related to Earth's Mantle'. This is simply not in dispute.
(Where subduction zones carry sediments beneath continental masses partial melting of the sediments at depths will generate andesitic magmas. You would be correct that they contain little or no mantle material.)

Charlie, I don't want you to feel Turtle and I are ganging up on you here, but on these points at least you are simply wrong.