USGS

September is National Preparedness Month (USGS)

gregladen — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 07:47:36 +0000

September is National Preparedness Month (USGS)

Be prepared!

Did you now that September is, in the US, National Preparedness Month? The idea is to pay attention to natural threats and how to deal with them. This is a project of the USGS. Good idea to give it some thought on this tenth anniversary of Hurricane Katrina.

The USGS recommends a scientific approach, and talks about hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanoes, landslides, sinkholes, geomagnetic storms, drought, floods, wildfire, and more. For information on all of this, including info on The Great Shakout event coming in October (where we all pretend there is an earthquake) click here.

In sum,

gregladen Tue, 09/01/2015 - 03:47

Tags

Uncategorized

preparedness month

USGS

Peak Water: United States Water Use Drops to Lowest Level in 40 Years

pgleick — Wed, 05 Nov 2014 08:37:06 +0000

Peak Water: United States Water Use Drops to Lowest Level in 40 Years

The most important trend in the use of water is the slowly unfolding story of peak water in the United States and elsewhere. Data on US water use are compiled every five years by the US Geological Survey, covering every state and every sector of the economy. The latest data – for 2010 – have just been released, and they show the continuation and acceleration of a stunning trend: US water withdrawals, for all purposes, are declining, not growing.

Traditional water planning and management assume inevitable, continuing, lockstep growth in demand for water as populations and economies expand. This has led to calls for continued expansion in traditional water infrastructure: dams, aqueducts, groundwater extraction, and long-distance water transfers.

But over the past 40+ years, this assumption has been proven false. (See previous commentaries on this, here and here.) New limits on water availability, the changing nature of our economy, new technologies that permit great improvements in efficiency and productivity of water use, and new management approaches have broken the two curves of water use and traditional population and economic growth apart.

In short, the US has reached the era of peak water.

Below are two graphical representations of this remarkable change from the Pacific Institute using data on the US economy together with the USGS water use estimates. The first shows total gross domestic product of the US from 1900 to 2010 (in inflation-adjusted 2005 dollars) together with total “withdrawals” of water for all purposes – from domestic and industrial use to irrigation and power plant cooling. As shown, the most recent water withdrawals data show that withdrawals in 2010 were lower than at any time in the past 40 years back to 1970.

US GDP in $2005; Water Withdrawals in cubic kilometers per year. Data from USGS and USBEA.

The second graph shows the “economic productivity” of water use, measured by the 2005 dollars of gross domestic product generated with every 100 gallons of water withdrawn. This productivity of water use has tripled since 1970 and we now get over $10 of GDP for every 100 gallons of water withdrawn. (Again, these data are adjusted for inflation.)

$2005 of GDP produced for every 100 gallons of water withdrawn in the US. Data from USGS and USBEA.

The assumption that demand for water must inevitably grow is false. Let’s start planning for the reality that a healthy economy and population can mean more sustainable, efficient, and equitable water use.

Resources

Gleick, P.H. and M. Palaniappan. 2010. Peak Water: Conceptual and Practical Limits to Freshwater Withdrawal and Use. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), Vol. 107, No. 25, pp. 11155–11162 Washington, D.C. June 22, 2010. http://www.pnas.org/content/107/25/11155.full.pdf

USGS 2010 Water Use Data: Maupin, M.A., Kenny, J.F., Hutson, S.S., Lovelace, J.K., Barber, N.L., and Linsey, K.S., 2014, Estimated use of water in the United States in 2010: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1405, 56 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/cir1405.

Gleick, P.H. 2010. “Has the US Passed the Point of Peak Water?” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-h-gleick/has-the-us-passed-the-poi_b_758698.html

Gleick, P.H. 2011. “Is the US Reaching Peak Water?” Forbes blog post: http://www.forbes.com/sites/petergleick/2011/09/07/is-the-u-s-reaching-peak-water/

[This post also appears in a similar form at Peter Gleick's Huffington Post column.]

pgleick Wed, 11/05/2014 - 03:37

Tags

thermoelectric cooling

What about water use in the parts of the world where most of our old economy is now located? If water use in, say, China has increased in lockstep with our decrease, aren't we just outsourcing our water consumption along with our manufacturing?

Water use in China has indeed grown, with their economy, and this "outsourcing" is a part of the story. But even in China, water use is now leveling off and showing a split from GDP growth.

We still use large amounts of water in ways that contribute nothing to GDP and little to quality of life, such as ensuring that the grass of golf courses and suburban lawns remains green all summer.

I often see comments on the unsustainability of nuclear power, due to its use of freshwater.

Looking at your graph, the US is just below 500 km3 withdrawals per year - which by the 'Total Renewable Freshwater Supply by Country' data annex in 'The World's Water' is under a sixth of the US's annual renewable freshwater supply, 3069 km3.

Given the vast disparity between withdrawals and supply, does this negate that argument? Or is there a good upper limit of freshwater withdrawals that lowers the ceiling on use?

The problem, of course, is that the national "average" hides vast regional differences. Many parts of the US are past the point of "peak water" -- and are reaching limits of renewable supply (or exceeding them). Nuclear power (or any large powerplant that uses water for cooling) requires significant volumes of water depending on the kind of cooling technology used. But I think the biggest constraints to new nuclear plants is not water (except in some regions as noted above), but rather its high economic costs, public opposition, and the availability of cheaper, faster, and cleaner alternatives.

Isn't there a largenblu but? But what about the withdrawals in the San Joaquin valley? Isn't the map of water withdrawals unbalanced?

sorry about that I pressed the submit before editing

The Growing Evidence of the Threat of Fracking to the Nation’s Groundwater

pgleick — Thu, 27 Jun 2013 08:36:27 +0000

The Growing Evidence of the Threat of Fracking to the Nation’s Groundwater

For some time now, proponents of the controversial practice of hydraulic fracturing or “fracking” have claimed there was little or no evidence of real risk to groundwater. But as the classic saying goes: “the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” of a problem. And the evidence that fracking can contaminate groundwater and drinking water wells is growing stronger with every new study.

As most people now know, fracking is a method for enhancing the production of natural gas (or oil, or geothermal energy wells). Fracking involves injecting fluids -- typically complex mixes of water and chemicals – under high pressure into wells to create cracks and fissures in rock formations that improve the rates of production.

Whether you support or oppose fracking depends on many complex factors: the economics of the practice, perceptions about the implications for national security of relying on domestic or imported energy, the consequences for climate change from the emissions of different amounts of greenhouse gases from different energy strategies, the positive and negative implications of fracking for employment and quality of life in rural communities, and the scientific evidence about the environmental consequences of the practice, including risks to water availability, water and air quality, and local ecosystems.

Some of the most significant environmental concerns associated with fracking are related to impacts on water. In 2012, the Pacific Institute released a major study on these water-related risks. These risks include growing competition for limited water resources; the production of large volumes of contaminated wastewater that comes up with the oil or gas and must be treated, reinjected, or otherwise safely stored; truck traffic and its impacts on the water quality of streams; spills and leaks; and the risks of groundwater contamination from the drilling and fracking process or from surface seepage of improperly handled wastewater. Ceres recently released a map showing that many fracking operations are occurring in regions of the US where water stress is already a real problem.

This map, produced at www.ceres.org, shows that nearly half of all US shale gas and oil wells are being developed in regions of the US with high to extremely high water stress. The research is based on well data from FracFocus.org.

The Pacific Institute analysis concluded that a lack of credible and comprehensive data and information makes it much more difficult to identify or clearly assess the key water-related risks associated with hydraulic fracturing and to develop sound policies to minimize those risks. While much has been written about the interaction of hydraulic fracturing and water resources, the majority of this writing is either industry or advocacy reports that have not been peer-reviewed. As a result, the discourse around the issue is largely driven by opinion. Only by comprehensive and careful independent testing and monitoring is it possible to assess the full environmental and public health risks of fracking and identify strategies to minimize these risks This is particularly true for groundwater contamination, which is hard to measure, hard to monitor, and hard to track.

Because of the limited amount of data, some industry proponents have long claimed that fracking is safe. Indeed, we sometimes see statements at odds with actual scientific evidence. Here is one from the American Petroleum Institute:

“There are zero confirmed cases of groundwater contamination connected to the fracturing operation in one million wells hydraulically fractured over the last 60 years.”

Another industry proponent recently described the risks of groundwater pollution from fracking as “almost inconceivable.”

“Inconceivable”? That brings to mind the classic scene from the film Princess Bride, where Inigo Montoya says to Vizzini: “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.” [Here is a link to a 10-second clip from the movie: enjoy.]

In fact, even with the limited research done to date, there is clear scientific evidence that fracking not only can -- but already has -- led to groundwater contamination, including a new study just released this week. Here are just seven separate lines of evidence:

As far back as 1984, the USEPA reported on a clear case in which hydraulic fracturing fluids and natural gas from production operations contaminated a groundwater well in West Virginia, “rendering it unusable.”
The USEPA issued a draft report in 2011 on groundwater contamination in Pavillion, Wyoming, that showed extensive presence of fracking chemicals (natural and synthetic) in shallow and deep groundwater systems. Some of this contamination may have resulted from faulty wells drilled through groundwater aquifers; some of it may have resulted from surface seepage of fracking waste fluids escaping from badly designed and managed wastewater pits.
The US Geological Survey Report issued its own independent assessment of the Pavillion, Wyoming groundwater testing that also showed high concentrations of several chemicals used in fracking.
A Canadian groundwater contamination report described a “hydraulic fracturing incident” in 2011 in which errors in well drilling and management led to the release of fracking chemicals into groundwater including isopropanolamine, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene, petroleum hydrocarbons, and more.
A Duke University peer-reviewed study showed that fracked groundwater systems pose risks to other groundwater systems that were thought to be, but were not, hydraulically separate. This study clearly shows the risks in some groundwater geologies of cross contamination.
Even more compelling, another peer-reviewed study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences documented “systematic evidence for methane contamination of drinking water associated with shalegas extraction.”
The latest peer-reviewed study, released this week, also shows strong evidence that increased concentrations of methane and other hydrocarbons in drinking water wells are directly correlated with proximity to gas wells in the Marcellus Shale region of Pennsylvania.

This growing evidence of a real threat to some of the nation’s valuable groundwater makes it all the more disturbing to learn that the US EPA is halting its own independent assessment of groundwater contamination from fracking in the Pavillion gas fields of Wyoming and even worse, turning that research over to a project funded by the fracking company itself. This smells rotten and is not how independent research should be done.

Far more and better research is needed, and public agencies must demand that monitoring data be independently collected, analyzed, and publicly released. But the evidence already available shows that fracking threatens our water resources. I repeat my comment above: the net effects of fracking depend on a complicated mix of the risks and benefits of the process and how one evaluates, perceives, values, and weighs those effects. But no smart public policy can be made if we turn a blind eye to the risks, fail to pursue comprehensive independent science, or even worse, deny the science and the evidence already available to us.

Peter Gleick

pgleick Thu, 06/27/2013 - 04:36

No question, the Alberta report documents contaminated groundwater during a frack operation. The company mistakenly perforated the casing (which they have to do in order to be able to inject the fluids into the rock from the well) over a very shallow rock section.

The 1984 EPA report is far less certain, however. There are alot of "may"s in there, alot less analytical data, and far less certainty than to draw a firm conclusion that fracking rendered the groundwater unusable.

As for the Duke studies, even the authors aren't blaming fracking anymore, but crappy casing jobs allowing gas to migrate upward beside the wells. Further, the first of those papers spawned some comments that discussed whether that methane might've been there before the drilling ever took place (there is plenty of shallow thermogenic gas in the northeastern U.S.) and whether it's possible that fluids can move up from about a mile depth in the intervening rock. Thus, their results are far from certain (though probably correct in Dimock, where it was indeed found that gas wells with faulty casing contaminated groundwater).

http://www.pnas.org/content/108/43/E871.full

http://www.pnas.org/content/108/37/E663.full

As for the Duke study on whether deep systems are hydraulically connected to the surface, this finding flatly contradicts decades of the understanding of hydrogeology in petroleum systems (that deep systems are almost completely isolated from shallow systems: deep saline water almost never moves upward because it's more dense than freshwater at surface). The Duke study also didn't give a timescale for the intrusion of salt water upward to even make it possible to determine whether this is possible on a human time scale. Two papers (both rebuttals to Myers, 2012, a paper that tried to use MODFLOW to demonstrate that deep-to-surface communication was possible, something that the model was never intended for and is not really capable of determining) demonstrate the high ulikelihood of this very well.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1745-6584.2012.00990.x/abs…

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gwat.12015/abstract

Further, if gas could move that freely from depth to surface, there would not be a puff of gas anywhere under the earth in any formation, shallow or deep, as it would've leaked out millions of years ago. Marcellus gas was generated hundreds of millions of years ago and remains overpressured, suggesting it's been stuck in place for all that time and that the seals overhead (and there are far more than one seal and they're very thick) have very solid integrity that fracking would not change (it's well known the fractures don't extend more than 600 m upward even in the most aggressively fracked wells, more likely only a few hundred metres in most wells, and this is measureable using microseismic). There'd be no gas worth drilling for at all. Let's not forget that gas only moves upward until it hits a permeable formation, then it goes laterally because it's taking the path of least resistance (this, of course, would divert it from rising any further).

As for the USGS study on Pavillion, the USGS also found that they couldn't find many of the chemicals the EPA said they could. Plus, the data from re-testing the EPA test wells suggests there's a halo of contamination around them, likely caused by the cement the EPA used (the potassium concentrations that the EPA said came from fracking kept steadily dropping and never reached a baseline). Plus, while the EPA suggested KOH was used in the frack fluids and would explain the high pH in the samples they took, something that they used as a main argument in making the link between fracking and groundwater quality, state regulatory records indicate KOH wasn't used but CO2 foams instead, which should decrease pH, not raise it.

That's not the only significant problem with the EPA Pavillion study (for example, they also didn't do any hydrogeological mapping to determine whether it was possible for the fluids to move upwards, something that should be standard in any ground-water contamination case study, especially one that said frack solutions were moving upward, which is unusual). The problems are numerous and it's probably a good thing they retracted it or it was going to get butchered in peer review and then they'd lose even more credibility over this.

Now, I have absolutely no love for the oil and gas industry. They've obviously engendered very little trust because of their denial of climate change and resistance to many regulations that would greatly enhance protection of the environment. There is very good evidence that shoddy well casing has resulted in contaminated groundwater in Pennsylvania and elsewhere. I have no doubt in my mind that their bleating about using gas to displace coal to lower GHG emissions is a selling point only and, if that wasn't possible, they'd be back to denying GHG emissions are a problem at all. The Pavillion EPA study indicates abandoned surface pits likely contributed to poor groundwater quality in the shallow aquifers. Finally, I like the EPA's mission and they have a definite role in ensuring water quality and air quality in the U.S., as well as regulating CO2 emissions when congress won't pass legislation to do it, though I found EPA's methodology and conclusions for the Pavillion study sorely lacking.

But fracking very likely isn't the culprit except for a handful of cases (like the Alberta example). Where oil and gas activity is responsible, poor well casing and surface activity almost certainly is.

Thank you for taking the time, and effort, to write a detailed and informative post, adding information about the cases and questions I've raised. I guess my overall response is that, despite the uncertainties and criticisms of various of the studies (some of which may be valid, of course), the bottom line is where you ended: "a handful of cases" "poor well casing" "surface activity" "crappy casing jobs" are all real risks. Well done fracking operations may pose little or no risk: but millions of wells, poorly monitored, will cause more and more problems. Even if one-tenth of a percent (0.1%) of wells are "crappy" or "poor", that is still 1,000 wells that may cause groundwater problems. If society is going to accept fracking, we have the right to insist on better regulation, monitoring, enforcement....
Thanks.

It seems all the documented incidents of contamination involve spills, well casing failure and negligence. If this is the case, there is no evidence that hydrolic fracturing as a tequneque is causing damage (as most opposition claim), but that poor practices cause damage. An obvious cause of these incidents could be lack of regulation and oversight.
However, It would be necvisary to compair incident rates involving fracing with those of other energy reasource extraction.

Personally, I work at a facility that extracts a reasource from via solution mining from a deposit 5-10 feet above a heavily utilized gas formation. Over the last 5-10 years more than 15 fracted wells have gone in around and under our location. Not being exempted from the clean water act we monitor ground water for contaminants every week, and have found no change since the fracing began. We take the issue seriously as contamination from these wells could potentially gravely impact our operation.

From what I have seen and read, hydrolic fracturing is safe as long as good practice is fallowed. If there is a problem with the implementation of this technology, it should be addressed with regulation monitoring.

Unfortunately the Oil and Gas industry use the "Drill first go to court later" business model. Also, thanks Peter, it's good to see my old man's quote being used in the right way every now and then, (Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence). He was an Astrophysicist.

Peter: absolutely, society has a huge interest in making sure things are done right. The regulations, monitoring, and enforcement have to be there to get that social licence. The IEA proposed some golden rules that would only increase well costs by 7%.

http://www.iea.org/newsroomandevents/pressreleases/2012/may/name,27266,…

The problem is that industry typically fights any attempts to improve standards. Typically, of course, but not always: in Pennsylvania, there's a coalition between some of the big industry players and environmentalists to set some real standards. In Illinois, new regulations were set and were accepted by some environmentalists and some industry. That being said, that's not the norm and that's disappointing.

Miguelito and Thad, it seems to me that the separation between fracking and processes necessary to implement it is meaningless in practice.
As an analogy, consider if there has been an epidemic of collapses in new buildings. Would you accept the protest "It's just because some construction firms used substandard steel, nothing to worry about"?

Dick, if there were some building collapses would it be more useful to ban all building projects or Thales a look at what caused the collapses and solve the problem, furthermore suppose these buildings were of a new design and when compared to existing designes colapsed with the same rate( of course in reality there is no acceptable collapse rate for buildings). Would it be logical to ban the new design while leaving the old design regulations the same?

We can all agree here that the use of carbon based fuels is one of the biggest problems facing is inofern times. Steps need to be taken to turn the trends around, however banning exploration and extraction of natural gas for the same rate of pollution as other drilling logically leads to banning ALL drilling, if you want that take your house off of the power grid(a good option if you can afford wind and solar units) do not drive any car gas or electric charged with the national power grid, do not buy any product that contains or is produced with the help of plastics, eat only non fertilizer grown food, and perhaps we can get the transition accomplished faster.

I totally agree that there are real risks, particularly around poor casing work and water management practices (and, moreso, from treating shale gas as a transition fuel without any policies to back that up - I worry constantly that we have lulled ourselves into complacency around NG's entirely insufficient ability to mitigate climate change.)

However, what I came to say is that, like Vizzini's 'inconceivable', I think that we as scientists and public technical voices need to consciously avoid using 'fracking' as the catch-all term it has become. Not only does it not accurately reflect where many problems originate, but we will lose the debate every time against companies who use it more specifically to retort claims of problems.

I understand (intimately) that this is a battle over public discourse that is hard to affect, but we - you! - should know better and act better, in an effort to improve the quality and accuracy of that discussion.

Alex, thank you for the comment. I partly agree -- the term is used loosely as a overarching reference to processes used to extract difficult to access fossil fuels. I use it, and used it in this post, to refer to hydraulic fracturing techniques (applied largely to NG but also to oil and to some degree geothermal wells). Moreover (and perhaps this is your point), some of the groundwater contamination results from inappropriate surface disposal of waste fluids, not the actual well operations themselves. We make this point very clearly in the paper we released on this topic. http://www.pacinst.org/publication/hydraulic-fracturing-and-water-resou….

Earthquakes, Climate Change and Oil Spills Are Just Part of the Job for Marcia McNutt at USGS

kcollins — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 08:00:00 +0000

Earthquakes, Climate Change and Oil Spills Are Just Part of the Job for Marcia McNutt at USGS

Overseeing the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) - the country's largest water, earth and biological scientific and civilian mapping agency -- seems a natural fit for Marcia McNutt. She's a Navy Seals-trained underwater demolition and explosives expert, earthquake scientist, avid lover of the ocean -- and a leading geophysicist who brings vast academic and scientific background to her post.

As the first woman director of the USGS in the agency's 131-year history, Marcia was nominated to the post by President Obama in 2009 and later approved by the Senate to head USGS's mission of serving as the key scientific advisor to the government and other decision makers on a wide range of conditions, issues and problems related to natural resources and geology -- including climate change, water supply, seismic activity, fossil fuels and environmental issues associated with renewable energy. USGS scientists collect, monitor and analyze data in these areas to provide a further understanding of the problems and issues at hand.

In her post, Marcia also serves as scientific advisor to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of the Interior. Says Marcia: "Scientific information from the U.S. Geological Survey is crucial to solving the most important problems facing society--including sufficient supplies of fresh water and clean energy and providing accurate information that allows citizens to prepare intelligently for climate change. I am honored to have the opportunity to lead such a respected institution given the importance of USGS science to our quality of life."

What do you think is the biggest challenge facing the USGS at this time?

Tags

Nifty Fifty

BP oil spill

climate change

Nifty Fifty Speaker Marcia McNutt

U.S. Geological Survey

USGS

GVP's Sally Kuhn Sennert answers your questions!

eklemetti — Fri, 13 Aug 2010 02:49:04 +0000

GVP's Sally Kuhn Sennert answers your questions!

Earlier this summer, we had a chance to ask Sally Kuhn Sennert of the Smithsonian Institution/USGS Global Volcanism Program questions about her job as the main writer of the well-loved Weekly Volcanic Activity Report. Well, now here are the answers!

Sally Kuhn Sennert of the Global Volcanism Program in front of Mt. Rainier, Washington.

Q&A Sally Kuhn Sennert:

Q: Could you describe how you go about putting together the weekly update?
A: If time permits, I would start to gather information on Friday when particular sources post their weekly summaries. The majority of the information gathering, however, actually happens on Monday mornings, when I visit about 40 websites. I also rely on reports coming to me via email either directly from the source (like from Rabaul Volcano Observatory) or indirectly through news feeds. I read the source information and write reports for most of Monday and Tuesday, often revisiting sites for updated information in the process. On Wednesday morning, I check a few more sites and then pass the "finished" Weekly Report to colleagues. The Report then goes through two rounds of editing by two of three regular Weekly Report editors in the Global Volcanism Program. In the meantime, I prepare the website files, such as the interactive map. If everything goes smoothly, the Report should be posted around 4 PM on any given Wednesday! Whew!

Q: How do you differentiate between reliable and unreliable sources?
A: I consider THE authority to be the folks at individual observatories and therefore the reports they produce. I also utilize the notices from the multiple Volcanic Ash Advisory Centers (VAACS). News reports are also important, especially when there are no other sources. With the media, I try to only use major sources, such as Reuters or Associated Press, and I use them carefully! Once in a while, one of the sources gets something wrong (analysts initially thought plume seen in satellite imagery was from volcano- later discovered it was from forest fire) or I misinterpret a translation, and a correction has to be posted in the report. That is the nature of the "rapid reporting" of the Weekly.

Q: Do you get a lot of "tips" from people about volcanic activity that is happening?
A: Funny thing about that- on a few occasions now, I have learned about eruptions I had no clue about from my grandma or mom!! In my defense, they are events that happened on weekends, when I am tuned out. Yeah, that's my story.

Q: What would make your job easier in terms of getting a complete picture of activity?
A: Definitely visiting more volcanoes!! It is so much easier getting the big picture of an event if you have been there and know the layout of the land or have seen the previous eruption products first hand. I would also love to meet more volcanologists (esp. folks at the observatories) around the world. Familiarity with people you communicate with is so important.

Q: How do you see the reports changing in the future? What about the GVP in general?
A: As the world becomes more digital, GVP has lost some of the personal connections with contacts that have really strengthened the monthly Bulletin, the database of activity, and to some degree the Weekly in the past. People used to call in or fax information, but now, observers can just post reports on their own blogs or websites! We are in the process of really reconnecting with people and fostering better information exchange. We are also continuing to improve our website and how we communicate to reach as many people as possible. For the Weekly specifically, I would love to see better maps available for each volcano- perhaps something 3-D and interactive.

Q: Have any new social networking sites like Facebook or Twitter made your job easier or harder?
A: Both! It is important to keep up with the current communication technology and methods; if you want to get your information out there, you have to do it in the way your audience prefers. The downside is that I can't keep up! My grandma and I share this complaint.

Q: What sort of questions do you get at the GVP from the general public? How about the media?
A: Public questions vary depending on the interests of the individual asking the question. GVP recently participated in the Smithsonian's Folk Life festival and showcased what we did. Questions from the public varied from why the "African Plate" is named the Nubia Plate to what was the magnitude of an earthquake that happened in the questioner's hometown on the day they were born. Questions like these, and seeing the wonder on people's faces when you talk about volcanoes or geology in any form, make it all worth it. Most of the questions from the media come during an eruption and center on trying to get us to predict when it will stop. Enthusiastic reporters are always fun to talk to, no matter what they try to make you say!

Q: Is there any way the general public can get involved with helping the GVP, the weekly reports or the website?
A: YES! GVP hosts several volunteers that work on the Bulletin reports, if you're interested drop me an email. We also welcome reports of volcanic activity from anyone that will send them, either volcanologists doing fieldwork or the casual vacationing observer. We do need specific information to incorporate the information into a report, such as date of observation or where the observer was. The more info the better! Many of our reports of volcanic activity "in the middle of nowhere" come from a recreational sailor passing by or a hiker on an adventure. I often ask, if a volcano in the ocean erupts and no one is there to see it happen, did it? A later random floating pumice raft may have the answer.

Q: What volcanic event of the last few years was the most interesting to follow?
A: The eruptions that stand out in my mind are from Jebel at Tair (2007), Nevado del Huila (2007), Kelut's dome growth (2007), ChaitÃ©n (2008), Sarychev Peak (2009), and finally the 2010 EyjafjallajÃ¶kull eruption. All of these events were new, exciting, important, and fun to follow.

Q: What else do you do for the Global Volcanism Program and/or the Smithsonian Institute/USGS?
A: My current high-priority "other project" is to write film scripts. I am helping my Global Volcanism Program colleagues create short educational films based on our historic film footage archive that we are currently digitizing. Several will be available on-line very soon, and in multiple languages.

Q: What is your favorite volcano?
A: I have to pick only one? That is tough! My default favorite (from grad school days) is PopocatÃ©petl, specifically because of the fabulous existence of "Popo Cam", but when I really think about it, I have to say Kilauea. It is such an interesting and accessible volcano! People from all walks of life, all ages, all backgrounds and interests can go there, hopefully at the right time, and have an experience of a lifetime. I lucked out when I participated in a field school and got to stand on cooled lava flows while watching (and feeling the heat of) new Earth being born right in front of me. I will never forget my time there, and probably never again eat a burrito as good as the one I cooked on an incandescent crack.

Q: How do you determine which volcanoes are listed in the active category versus the ongoing category (each week)? (From Diane; Stephen in the UK)
A: There is a page called "Criteria and Disclaimers" that discusses the topic of your question (http://www.volcano.si.edu/reports/usgs/index.cfm?content=disclaimers). Even though the reasoning behind the category assignment seems straight-forward, there are some volcanoes or some eruptions that don't quite fit the mold. So I sometimes consider the assignment on a case-by-case basis. For instance, I reported seismic swarms (no eruption) at Melimoyu in mid-June 2010. That volcano has never been reported on in the Weekly or the Bulletin, as it has only two documented eruptions in the Holocene. I assigned it to the "New Activity/Unrest" section to draw attention to it simply because it has not been reported on before. There are other volcanoes that have periodic or "typical" seismic swarms that I don't include in the weekly at all.

Q: Why are there sometimes unfinished or outdated information on the Global Volcanism Program website? (from Jon Friman)
A: The only area that may seem "unfinished" that I can think of is the Geologic Summaries written for each volcano. They are occasionally written in a way that does not accommodate new activity, and need to be re-worded. They, along with some other areas of the website, get updated yearly. As far as "outdated," one of the main goals of GVP is to database and archive information about volcanic activity over the last 10,000 years. We are currently archiving data from volcanoes active in the Miocene as well. So, by design the archived information is "outdated!"
Seriously, if you see something on the website that seems incorrect, unfinished, or just leaves you scratching your head, please email me and I will certainly look into it.

Q: Why was the recent large eruption at Redoubt 2008-2009 removed from the list of larger Holocene eruptions? (from Riggs)
A: I am not aware that it was there and removed. The list of large Holocene eruptions consists of volcanoes with VEI eruptions classified as 4 or higher. Perhaps the Redoubt eruption in question was thought to have been a 4 or higher at first and then changed to a 3 once the activity and products were better understood.

eklemetti Thu, 08/12/2010 - 22:49

Tags

Global Volcanism Program

Q&A

Smithsonian Institution

@Erik Klementti:
We are most honored to have Sally Kuhn Sennert answering to our questions. Hope she will continue doing her wonderful job and that we may someday be able to provide some contribution from here. And hope she comes back again.
Looking forward to see the new improvements to the GVP site. It will be great to have 3d maps and footages to illuminate our volcanic discussions.
Thank you Sally and Erik!

I've obviously missed the opportunity to forward a question and I would like to make up to that.

I would like to know why a continuous red status volcano like ChaitÃ«n is left out of the report.

Thanks in advance for answering my question and the opportunity to ask questions in the first place.

Great opportunity, continue the good work.

And maybe we should thank her for another recent improvement to the GVP site: a vastly increased photo archive for many of the world's volcanoes

I'd like to thank Sally and everyone at the GVP for the weekly report. I always look forward to Wednesday afternoons!

Also, to echo mike @ #3, the GVP recently added thousands of volcano photos to the site.

Keep up the good work!

OT: For everyone that could answer. A volcano classified as a 'caldera' could be a 'stratovolcano' at the same time?
Because I think there are stratovolcanoes that have a caldera only as a morphologic feature caused by an individual eruption.

For stratovolcanoes that have calderas as well look no further than two of the largest eruptions of the last two centuries: Tambora and Pinatubo. Both volcanoes now have a substantial caldera but both also retain enough of a peak to still be a stratovolcano as well.

OT, a new episodic tremore slip (ETS) initiated in the northwest a few days ago. These events happen every 14 months or so and it was only a few years ago that seismologists figured out how to tease the tremor signals out of the background noise. The tremor seems to be associated with non ductile shearing and/or hydaulic movements in or near the accreationary wedge above the subducting plate. To me this sounds like part of the story of the ongoing uplift of the eastern Olympic mountains, but I haven't yet found a report that identifies if there is a vertical component to the tremor.

Here are two site that track the episode:
the blog, with near daily comments and links to previous events: http://www.pnsn.org/WEBICORDER/DEEPTREM/summer2010.html

the data map, updated daily with tremor location: http://www.pnsn.org/tremor/

Thank you ,Sally for answering our questions. I check the info periodically and I plan to check it more regularly again as I used to. Thank you for the work you do.

@R. de Haan: The ChaitÃ©n status was lowered to yellow a few months ago, although is still moderately active.

Thank you, Sally Kuhn Sennert, for answering our questions. Come back and see us!

Riggs is actually the name of my beagle, as is Sassy, I used them in my email addy.

CHAITEN Southern Chile 2008Â Â MayÂ 2Â 4
OKMOK Aleutian Islands 2008Â Â JulÂ 12Â 4?
KASATOCHI Aleutian Islands 2008Â Â AugÂ 7Â 4
REDOUBT Southwestern Alaska 2009Â Â MarÂ 22Â 4
SARYCHEV PEAK Kuril Islands 2009Â Â JunÂ 11Â 4

http://www.volcano.si.edu/world/largeeruptions.cfm

I read your post very impressed seen this kind of important informationâs. Really am interested to back to your blog again to gather some more informationâs.

I'm Sally's grandma, and LOVED the article she wrote ! Talk about a proud grandma ! Way to go , Sally Sue ! You are special , and much loved !

Hi Sally,
What a wonderful article. I had no idea I had such a smart, talented great niece! Your field has to be very exciting and interesting. Keep up the good work!
Virginia Norris, Fla.

Wow, Sally, I am impressed with all you do. Of course, I don't understand much of it, but I'm impressed nonetheless.
I have such a smart niece!!

What a great article and interesting career you have! I am ERUPTING with envy!!!!

I have been here before but this is among the best blogposts yet. continue the good work!

GVP Weekly Volcanic Activity Report for July 28-August 3, 2010

eklemetti — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 09:54:33 +0000

GVP Weekly Volcanic Activity Report for July 28-August 3, 2010

A new Weekly Volcanic Activity Report from the Smithsonian and USGS Global Volcanism Program!

Highlights from this week's report include:

Things are getting a little noisy in Colombia. I mentioned a few weeks ago about a possible explosion at Nevado del Ruiz. Now we have reports of increased seismicity under nearby Cerro MachÃn and ash plumes from Nevado del Huila. After a few centuries of relative quiet, it looks like the volcanoes of the Colombian Andes are looking more lively.
Also in South America, a gas plume was spotted at Chile's Planchon-Peteroa. This is the second time this year that increased gas emissions have been noted at the volcano that hasn't erupted since 1998.
Shiveluch on the Kamchatka Peninsula in Russia continues to rumble - ash plumes were produced from pyroclastic flows and steam-and-gas plumes reaching 4 km / ~13,100 feet were spotted as well.

eklemetti Thu, 08/05/2010 - 05:54

More activity in Wyoming just south of Yellowstone this morning, bringing the current EQ list to:
4.22010/08/05 14:59:28 43.646-110.416 5.0 34 km ( 21 mi) ENE of Teton Village, WY
4.82010/08/05 00:04:17 43.585-110.440 5.0 29 km ( 18 mi) ENE of Jackson, WY
3.02010/08/05 00:04:03 43.585-110.438 5.0 29 km ( 18 mi) ENE of Jackson, WY

though I can plainly see many aftershocks on this webicorder:
http://quake.utah.edu/helicorder/moow_webi_1d.htm
(for yesterday)

and this one for today:
http://quake.utah.edu/helicorder/moow_webi.htm

But there are still no updates to the earthquake map aside from the three larger earthquakes. What's up, USGS?

Hi Jen,

There may be no official statements from the USGS yet, but there is a bit of chatter on a local blog at:

http://www.jhunderground.com/2010/08/05/quake-watch-along-teton-fault/

I visited the place last summer, really interesting geology.

You can add another 3.2 at Wyoming @ 17:45 UTC. I can expect we'll see another swarm this winter.

The rumblings in Columbia, I'm wondering, if they're the effects of all the recent quakes in Chile.

Just came across the photo collection of Owen K. N. (as it seems he's a geologist) on Flickr, which has some outrageously spectacular aerial views of Bezymianny and Kliuchevskoi (or Klyuchevskoy) taken late July:
www.flickr.com/search/?q=klyuchevskoy&w=35670622%40N06&ss=1&s=rec
What strikes me most is the large cone that has grown within, and is now practically completely filling, the summit crater of Kliuchevskoi as seen in particular here:
www.flickr.com/photos/oneill244/4864468767/
The outline of the old crater rim is still marked by small knobs on both sides of the new cone.
Owen had the privilege to witness, from a safe distance, pyroclastic flows descending the southern or southwestern flank of Kliuchevskoi:
www.flickr.com/photos/oneill244/4864932936/
There are also spectacular views of a lava flow extruded from Bezymianny after its latest explosive eruption in May this year, like this:
www.flickr.com/photos/oneill244/4865084090/

Boris, just saw you on tv! Th Etna flank collapse program. Nice to put a face to a name!

Amazing pics, Boris, thanks a lot!

What Renato said - wish I'd been there; not only the volcanism, but also the fauna seems to be fascinating.

When I saw the equipment pics, I thought, "That must be KVERT stuff." ;)

Thanks Boris. I never thought a volcano could rebuild itself so quickly. What would be the mechanism? Super thick rhyolite? (ie so thick that it can't move?

Yesterday, I wondered if the August 4-5 strong solar storm might have any effect on magma flow on earth and therefore on earthquake activity. Or perhaps there may be more simple interactions between strong electro-magnetic (E-M) disturbances and the Earth's crust - which might result in tectonic movements and earthquakes.

I found that there were five magnitude 6.0 or greater (M6+) earthquakes during the solar storm's strong E-M disturbances of Earth's atmosphere and space environment. During the eight days from July 30 to August 6, there were only two other magnitude 6.0 or greater earthquakes, so there was a clear anomalously sharp increase in occurrence during the strong solar storm.

Note: Sometimes multiple numbers of M6+ earthquakes will be recorded within minutes or hours because they are at the same approximate location and part of the same tectonic event. But the five M6+ earthquakes recorded during the solar storm were not at the same location, but rather widely dispersed in locations around the pacific ocean.

This is only one correlation of a solar storm's E-M disturbances to the Earth's seismic activity, so no firm conclusions can be drawn. But the fact of the anomalously sharp jump in M6+ earthquake occurrences during the 33 hours of the solar storm's E-M disturbances upon Earth is very intriguing and should prompt for further study.

Here is the data:

----------------------------------------
E-M Anomaly In Earth's Space Environment:
----------------------------------------
Proton flux unusually high: Aug 3, 18:00 UTC to Aug 4, 06:00 UTC = 12 hours duration
E-M disturbance very high: Aug 3: 18:00 UTC to Aug 5, 03:00 UTC = 33 hours duration

Source: http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ftpmenu/plots/satenv.html

----------------------------------------
Quakes >= Mag 6.0
Eight Days: Jul 30, 2010 to Aug 6, 2010
----------------------------------------
* 2010/08/05 03:00:00 SPACE E-M ANOMOLY ENDS

6.0 2010/08/04 23:48:03 45.964 153.216 33.6 EAST OF THE KURIL ISLANDS
7.0 2010/08/04 22:01:44 -5.768 150.776 44.0 NEW BRITAIN REGION, PAPUA NEW GUINEA
6.4 2010/08/04 12:58:25 51.426 -178.607 27.0 ANDREANOF ISLANDS, ALEUTIAN IS., ALASKA
6.4 2010/08/04 07:15:33 -5.521 146.793 213.6 EASTERN NEW GUINEA REG, PAPUA NEW GUINEA
6.0 2010/08/04 04:46:22 -26.953 -177.148 23.7 SOUTH OF THE FIJI ISLANDS

* 2010/08/03 18:00:00 SPACE E-M ANOMOLY BEGINS

6.3 2010/08/03 12:08:27 1.243 126.277 42.8 MOLUCCA SEA
6.3 2010/07/30 03:56:13 52.461 159.902 18.6 OFF THE EAST COAST OF KAMCHATKA, RUSSIA

Source: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/quakes_all.php

William Boston

@ Chris - I would doubt there is any connection between volcanic activity in Colombia and the seismicity earlier this year in Chile.

If Cerro Machin does erupt it could produce some very impressive and dangerous pyroclastic flows. The quote below is from
http://www.volcano.si.edu/world/volcano.cfm?vnum=1501-04=

"Voluminous pyroclastic flows traveled up to 40 km from the volcano during eruptions in the mid-to-late Holocene perhaps associated with formation of the caldera."

We are in the Holocene now correct? So the pyroclastic flows may not have happened in the extreme distant past. Maybe they haven't been able to study this volcano as well as they have studied many volcanoes in the US and that is why the dating of the pyroclastic flows isn't as precise as some of us would like.

Now what are the odds that this increased seismic activity under Cerro Machin does not indicate that there will be an eruption there in the next few decades? This is where the experience of volcanologists is helpful in reading the physical signals given off by a long dormant volcano.

so informative, thanks to tell us.

Thursday Throwdown: Stromboli's tiny bubbles, Hawaiian lava flow update and recovering from EyjafjallajÃ¶kull

eklemetti — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 08:51:59 +0000

Thursday Throwdown: Stromboli's tiny bubbles, Hawaiian lava flow update and recovering from EyjafjallajÃ¶kull

Lots of little pieces of news I've run across ... time to play a little catch up.

Stromboli: A volcano after Don Ho's heart.

Every once in a while, my RSS feeds will dredge up some articles from years gone by ... and this week there were two New York Times pieces that are a few years old, but interesting nevertheless. The first is about research conducted by Dr. Robert Sohn at WHOI on explosive undersea eruptions. The second is work by Corr and Vaughan about finding subglacial volcanism in Antarctica. Both are interesting reads if you missed them (like I did) the first time around.
Yesterday I talked about lava flows - and specifically the Kilauea lavas that are in the Kalapana subdivision. Here is the current update from HVO on the flows along with some details from the local news (link has video).
We have a new Smithsonian/USGS Global Volcanism Program Weekly Volcanic Activity Report - again, filled with great information, including news from Rabaul, lava flows and a >6 km ash plume from Kliuchevskoi, and continuing strombolian activity at Pacaya.
There was some news last week about recently published research on the mechanisms for eruptions at Stromboli. I haven't had a chance to digest it all, but the long-and-short seems to be to think about these eruptions like Don Ho would: "tiny bubbles". The original paper was published in the Journal of Geophysical Research.
In case you haven't been visiting the NASA Earth Observatory page in a while, they posted an image taken last week of the current activity at Nyiragongo in the DRC. The image shows the sulfur dioxide-rich plume coming from the main summit crater.
And there have been a lot of articles this week with airlines reporting the cost of the EyjafjallajÃ¶kull airspace closures. The reports are all in the tens of millions of Euros, but across the board, the airlines say ticket sales are back on track. Funny how quickly businesses recover after something like this eruption (even after all their wailing and moaning at the time).

eklemetti Thu, 07/29/2010 - 04:51

Tags

Global Volcanism Program

NASA Earth Observatory

Smithsonian Institution

volcanoes and the economy

volcanoes in the media

volcanoes and the economy

volcanoes in the media

Never heard of the
PITTSBURGH SUPERCOMPUTING CENTER
http://www.psc.edu/research/graphics/gallery/earthquake.php

maybe some of you find some interesting animations.

How about that:
"RVO reported an eruption from Rabaul caldera's Tavurvur cone on 23 July, after increased seismicity likely beneath Tavurvur cone was detected the previous day."
New Britain's sequence of EQs started after a 7.3 Sunday, July 18, 2010 at 13:34:59 UTC
and then, on July 23rd the sequence of deep Mindanao EQs.
No correlation?
BTW: Another 6.6 aftershock today in Mindanao.
(Data from USGS)

Renato: It's a bit difficult to correlate a specific Tavurvur explosion with the New Britain quakes, since Tavurvur has been banging and thumping away on a pretty regular basis for most of the last fifteen years. (check previous GVP weekly reports) But maybe it's not impossible that the quake could have given magma in the conduit a good shaking up and encouraged gas bubble formation

Rio, you read this: Tectonic Setting and Volcanoes
of Papua New Guinea, New Britain, and the Solomon Islands

volcano.oregonstate.edu/vwdocs/volc_images/southeast_asia/papua_new_guinea/tectonics.html

Think about Ekohs informative posts, my elaboration on the Mindanao deep focus EQs, the Russkie Model and the proof presented in the marvelous Cocos plate subduction and deep folding.

The map of volcanoes active from 1900-1999 is interesting. From what we know of this area, most of the recent volcanic activity makes sense, although it's a tectonically complex region.

And then there are the out-of-the-blue sleepers, like Lamington, with it's sole recent eruption occurring mid-20th century. It was a VEI 4, lasting several years with unfortunate pyroclastic flow deaths over a very large area.

volcano.oregonstate.edu/vwdocs/volc_images/southeast_asia/lamington.html

From John Seach: Lamington is a major andesite volcano located in an area without a Benioff-Wadati zone. The magmas erupted from the volcano have unusually high levels of Nickel and Chromium.

That observation came from a 1983 publication, 'Ophiolite-contaminated andesites, trachybasalts, and cognate inclusions of Mount Lamington, Papua New Guinea: anhydrite-amphibole-bearing lavas and the 1951 cumulodome.', which mentions,

'Mount Lamington, together with three other major andesitic centers â Mount Victory, Mount Trafalgar and Hydrographers Range â rest on a northeast-dipping ophiolite sheet, the Papuan Ultramafic Belt (PUB); there is no evidence for a Benioff-Wadati zone beneath this part of Papua.'

That caused a bit of difficulty for subduction zone modelers, but a new regional model,

New SW Pacific tectonic model: Cyclical intraoceanic magmatic arc construction and near-coeval emplacement along the Australia-Pacific margin in the Cenozoic. (AGU 2008 Wattman et al)

www.agu.org/journals/ABS/2008/2007GC001710.shtml

was published recently.

'A new model is presented whereby the PUB, New Caledonia, and Northland ophiolites formed and were emplaced in a cyclical fashion above an extensive NE dipping Cenozoic intraoceanic arc system which diachronously propagated (N-S) along the entire eastern margin of the Australian Plate.'

Chris, at Highly Allochonthous, has a great descriptive tectonic map of the region.
all-geo.org/highlyallochthonous/2010/07/fridayish-focal-mechanisms/

And that's what set us off exploring deep focus EQ mechanics. After reading our posts here, it should be a nobrainer to see the depth of these quakes and understand that stretching/thinning and folding quakes will be ongoing, once the Big Crackers released the potential energy of what must be a major fold forming.

An aside: for those who were met with the inevitable NYTimes login webpage after clicking his hyperlinks to the articles on Antarctic subglacial volcanism, see

www.science20.com/news_releases/first_evidence_of_sub_glacial_volcano_i…

and the original letter-article abstract by Corr and Vaughn, Nature Geoscience 1, 122 - 125 (2008), 'A recent volcanic eruption beneath the West Antarctic ice sheet'.

www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v1/n2/full/ngeo106.html

@mike don #3: this was a speculation we were arguing about on that day of New Britain's quake. Just wanted to post this as a reminder. Thank you.
@Passerby: I haven't yet finished all my homework and you're already providing us with ever more precious information. I must confess it's a bit confusing to understand all mechanisms involved in plates/subduction over that specific area, but I'm getting closer. I'ts a big honor to have you here to help us. Many thanks.

Not to worry - the mention of Lamington was to point to the evolving understanding of the mishmash of plates and mechanisms at play in the New Britain-PNG area; SE Asia-South Pacific region IS tectonically busy - and confusing, if you don't tease it apart.

To pick up on the links above, to the research conducted by Dr. Robert Sohn at WHOI on explosive undersea eruptions, and the work by Corr and Vaughan about finding subglacial volcanism in Antarctica, I was interested to see the links between volcanism and global warming being explored. It is not yet accepted that volcanoes might release the heat currently warming the globe, before the earth will cool back down again. The 60 meter rise of the polar region could possibly be a linked factor, and the melting of methane hydrates might well contribute to the explosivity of undersea volcanoes. There are interesting articles on hydrates on pages 64-67 in Google Popular Science.
Interesting times we live in! Thanks Passerby for the explanation of the deep quakes under Papua New Guinea and the Phillipines. There are so many different parts of the world working in different ways. The deep hammer action of the inverse Himalayas is not going to be anywhere near that sort of depth but do you think it has influence on the weaker gravitational field over India?

Interesting that Nevado del Ruiz was removed from the new Smithsonian/USGS Volcanic Activity Report. And we just had a 69km deep 5.0 EQ about 90 km SE of Ruiz. Let us see if it will give a "kick" and trigger volcanic activity.

I don't like to insist on the subject, but steam activity in EyjafÃ¶ll is quite vigorous. There are too many clouds, but you can see how fast it's pushed up from the rim, from ÃÃ³rÃ³lfsfell cam. You can also compare it with other cams, weather permitting.

You mean, do magnetic anomalies map to subduction zones?

Yes. Also to isotactic (glacial) rebound.

But you can verify this for yourself by mapping the geoid against global tectonic maps.

First Complete Image Created Of Himalayan Fault, Subduction Zone. Science Daily September 2009.
www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090911164435.htm

Underplating in the Himalaya-Tibet Collision Zone Revealed by the Hi-CLIMB Experiment. (2009) Science 325:1371-1374. DOI: 10.1126/science.1167719

Fig 2D. Interpretative cross section of the India-Eurasia collision zone. The graphic shows cross-sectional depth to 200Km, but you know it goes MUCH deeper, from the intense blue (the gravity is pushed down) over India as seen in the colored graphic of the new June 2010 ESA GOCE Satellite Geoid Map (see links below)

Click on the righthand panel, Figures Only link to see the Tibet-India plate interaction graphic.

GOCE Map
www.esa.int/esaLP/SEMY0FOZVAG_LPgoce_0.html

Tectonic map showing India Plate extent
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Plates_tect2_en.svg

Thanks Passerby. I have learned a lot from these last 2 threads and you have confirmed what I suspected re India and conversely the Icelandic rifting. The layers within the Earth are very uneven...

@Renato: You missed the numerous other earthquakes and eruptions. No correlation, just numerous coincidences because these things really do happen all the time.

@Passerby

The part that had me curious, is that there was an article a few months ago that indicated that a mid depth segment of the Himalaya range was flowing northward. The basement is moving south, and the surface is moving south.

From the links you provided, this flow would seem to be associated with the Lhasa and Qiantang blocks. The flow evidently turns off towards SE Asia.

This appeared in an article that equated the massive height of the Himalayas with the high rate of erosion on the southern face of the range.

http://www.pgi.gov.pl/pdf/sad0806Hodg2p.pdf

Region: Mindoro, Philippines
Time: 2010-07-30 00:22:17.3 UTC
Magnitude: 4.8
Epicenter: 120.74Â°E 13.29Â°N
Depth: 115 km

http://hisz.rsoe.hu/alertmap/read/index.php?pageid=seism_read&rid=184017

(pffffft. pops opens a tall boy)

*squinting at EQ Map, USGS, Mindano/Moro Gulf*

Couldn't find any quakes, regardless of magnitude, at shallow depth in this cluster of 22 events. They are all deep.

earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Maps/10/120_5.php

The mapped 2010 quakes appear to be associated with the deep focus seismic events.

USGS Map, historical seismicity, maps 1990-2010 and 2010, Moro Gulf, Mindano, Philippines.

neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/neic_zhbe_h.html

http://geofon.gfz-potsdam.de/db/eqpage.php?id=gfz2010otlz

Night Passerby and everyone. The tall boy has spoken to me.

|-o

----------------------------------
For followers of the night life there is sex, drugs or rocking with rolling off the Kamchatka peninsula to entertain you.

geofon.gfz-potsdam.de/db/eqinfo.php

Unusually high steam plume on Eyjaf!

Oh - as for a few tens of millions of euro lost for each operator? Hah - peanuts! They could easily have been spending over 30M euro per plane that flew through the volcanic debris. My suppressed evil ego is wishing they had flown after all - looking at available data after the fact, there is a good chance there would be no crashes and the operators could have discovered for themselves how their profits are affected by choosing to fly or to ground their fleet. Ultimately the market would have "rewarded" the operators who made the correct decision - those who didn't fly would have made much smaller losses than those who flew. Unfortunately there are no existing tools that would allow pilots to make appropriate decisions while flying in space with volcanic debris and, contrary to popular belief, what you don't know *can* hurt you.

Garry Hayes at Geotripper referenced this blog today. It covers, in detail, the current Kiluea lava flows, as well as a comparison to past flows:

http://hawaiianlavadaily.blogspot.com/

OT for Erik Klemetti, Boris Behncke or anyone of comparable knowledge.

I have run across several mentionings of different crust blocks "now welded to" another crust block. For example the Jan Mayen continental fragment now being welded to the Eurasian plate or the Yucatan Basin being welded to North America.

Is this just a cessation of fault activity or is there an actual process involved in making these welds? Or is it more of a case where the jagged edges become so snagged on each other that effectively no more movement is possible?

Again removed from the list:
Code Red the (still) ongoing eruption of ChaitÃ©n Volcano:
http://www.aipchile.cl/camara/show/id/14

According to icelandic news yesterday, there is a good chance that EyjafjallajÃ¶kull has gone dormant already and is now just cooling off.

Here is the news, www.ruv.is/frett/eyjafjallajokull-i-dvala

Translate at own risk with Google translate.

Re. Airline losses, to paraphrase a comment once attributed to the founder of the New York Herald, "if you're running an airline at a profit, you need a new accountant"

Is China's Riskiest Volcano Stirring Or Merely Biding Its Time?

Author: Richard Stone
Science 30 July 2010:
Vol. 329. no. 5991, pp. 498 - 499

AAAS ... Advancing 'science' by hiding behind a paywall

Raving: What's the odds this is a rehash of an article that has been mentioned (and linked to) several times already on this blog?

From the article:

Science 30 July 2010, 329:498-499
DOI: 10.1126/science.329.5991.498-a

'Chinese volcanologists keep a close eye on Changbai; they say an eruption does not seem imminent. From 2002 to 2005, the volcano's magma chamber evidently was filling, says Xu. In quiet periods, seismometers register about 100 small tremors a year around the mountain, he says. In 2003, Changbaishan Tianchi Volcano Observatory recorded 1293 tremors. By 2006, the frequency had receded to background rate, and in the first 6 months of 2010 the station recorded 58 tremors.

The mountain rose about 6.8 centimeters in 2003 and 2004, and the ratio of helium-3 to helium-4â"a good indication of magma activity because the source is the mantle," Xu saysânearly doubled during that time. Changbai has been largely quiet since 2005, says Xu, who expects it to kick into another "active phase" again in the next few years. "But that doesn't mean it will erupt," he says. Miyamoto agrees and notes that it is extremely unlikely that the next eruption would rival the millennium eruption.'

There will be a 3-way meeting of scientists to 'get to the bottom' of the North Korean's assertions of eminent eruption. The North Korean scientists have limited, non realtime, access to seismic data. That's one of the problems. The other is China's secretive nature over volcano observatory upgrades and operations close to the border. Their specific desire is to limit data access to science use only - a charge that North Korea may not be willing to adhere to.

China has magnanimously offered to build a seismic station and integrate observations in North Korea. That offer was declined.

First, we need background on this volcano. Fortunately, the Chinese have published a useful background study on-line.

www.mantleplumes.org/Changbai.html

The paper has a couple of familiar themes, eh?

A related paper, cited in the Changbai article above, that answers questions of recent seismicity off the coast of China.

So you see, my Droogie-Droogs, there won't be any of the old volcanic ultraviolence at Baekdu anytime soon. An elevated rate of tremors? Assuredly.

Why? The aesthenosphere is in an active deep upwelling period, as our good friends at IMO/IES have quietly opined.

Summer rainfall is very high at Baekdu; winter regional precipitation has been near or above historical records (despite the area being typically xeric in winter).

Pore-pressure, gravity flux and major mountain-side erosion on the North Korean side. These should be points of discussion when China and the Koreas meet to discuss Baekdu concerns.

The ESA 2009 GOCE Gradient Gravity Map is a useful thing to study to for a regional context of the Changbai tomography graphic.

www.esa.int/images/gradient_picture.jpg

So you see, my Droogie-Droogs, there won't be any of the old volcanic ultraviolence at Baekdu anytime soon. An elevated rate of tremors? Assuredly.

Why? The aesthenosphere is in an active deep upwelling period, as our good friends at IMO/IES have quietly opined.

Posted by: Passerby | July 31, 2010 5:37 PM

Surely not a subterranean DEW line. Get bent hoser why don't you eh. beauty

Interesting that the science is on a sufficiently firm footing now as to be confidently obvious? It might be so. ...

Subterranean DEW line?

I'm having a hard enough time equating "..there won't be any of the old volcanic ultraviolence at Baekdu anytime soon. An elevated rate of tremors? Assuredly..."

with "...The aesthenosphere is in an active deep upwelling period, as our good friends at IMO/IES have quietly opined."

With the other observations, I can agree with the increased seismic activity, but can not see how it rules out potential activity at Baekdu.

I think the parked slab is a pretty wild event though.

The Chinese, with their sophisticated monitoring program at Baekdu, know 'typical' from 'atypical'. 100 shakes per year is typical. We're just a hair over that for the year. Nothing like 2004-05, when the inflation and shakes, and chemistry, showed clear evidence of magma chamber filling.

Since then, it's gone back to being quiet.

The Aethenosphere plays a role in tectonic seismicity, near surface. Also in geothermal activity.

Mass slumping and erosion, and unusual precipitation, lend pressure stress to susceptible stress-strain loaded faulting.

Changbai has deep focus quakes and shall quakes. In order to suss out the cause, you need several layers of data.

Well, if your getting at there being a lack of inflation or a lack of a copious amount of quakes moving in a direction, then I follow that.

I can also see the mass wasting as being contributory to the seismic noise.

I just couldn't make out increased aesthenosphere activity as being indicative of a non volcanic threat.

Probably a brain fart on my part for not picking up on that.

hi all, i was having problem with pc.i was watching a film last night called 'scorcher' were china were doing a nuclear test in there ocean,which sent the Earth of its Axis towards the sun,then had to to use 2 nukes underneath LA to correct the earth could this actually happen when North Korea were testing i think 2008/9 or 10 not sure

@Leon, not a possibility. The quake on Dec. 26, 2004 was of such magnitude that we cannot build a bomb of the equivilent power. That quake was strong enough to affect the rotation of the earth a tiny bit as in microradians (I could be wrong on that term so Passerby correct me if I am wrong :-)) So the posibility of a bomb large enough to tilt the earth's axis is total nonsense. Movies are just that---movies. Most are just for entertainment and what you saw was for entertainment. As far as I know, there has not been a movie from Hollywood or anyone else that has been accurate about volcanoes. Documentaries are much better, especially when they talk to the people who are in the field of geology. Even then, sometimes there can be a bit of overkill. The best on volcanoes are the videoes and pictures of the real thing. Each eruption has a story to tell about the volcano itself and we learn from them. So don't worry about the earth's axis being thrown off by a bomb.

BTW, the earth actually does have a wobble in its axis that takes thousands of years to make a full revolution on that wobble. It is just a natural part of the movement of the earth in rotation and orbit around the sun. The magnetic north pole also changes position. The earth doesn't need us to affect anything it does. We do sometimes out of ignorance such as when we cut too many trees as the clearing in South America and our industry, but the earth moves and quakes on its own.

I hope you don't worry about what you saw in that movie. It was just a movie.

No.

For the sake of argument, lets say that Earth was whacked by another object... much larger than a standard Mk1 mod-0 asteroid... say, the size of a dwarf planet. A 2410km object moving at 45km/s and striking at 45Â° will generate a seismic event of about Magnitude 15.1.

According to the Earth Impact Effects Program,

http://impact.ese.ic.ac.uk/ImpactEffects/

"Major Global Changes:
The Earth is not strongly disturbed by the impact and loses negligible mass.
The impact does not make a noticeable change in the tilt of Earth's axis (< 5 hundreths of a degree).
Depending on the direction and location of impact, the collision may cause a change in the length of the day of up to 15.3 hours.
The impact does not shift the Earth's orbit noticeably."

So.. I would say that the movie is stretching it a bit.

You are most likely to see a perturbation to Earth's orbit if you add to or take away mass or momentum, and as the simulation notes, even a 2410km diameter rock doesn't make much of an effect. (other than killing all life with the possible exception of few extemophiles that can ride out the melt period on debris slung into space)

Earthquakes don't add or subtract to the momentum of Earth in it's orbit. They can affect the compactness of Earth and change the rotation speed... making days longer or shorter.

That was in response to leon. Diane N CA hit the button before I did.

Subterranean DEW line

I interpreted the 400-600km deep quakes as breaking/flexing of the subducted plate. .. which is fine because the source of signal has been identified.

Given that energetic activity is taking place at 400 km depth, it takes time for the convection to carry it to the surface.

@32: earth rotational axis wobble has a period of 433 days. See Chandler Wobble page, Wikipedia.

@35 Not sure I'm following you on convective transfer of energy from deep quake upwards.

A sort of Subterranean DEW line does exist: a deep ocean boreholes seismic and geomagnetic monitoring network

(Japan) Ocean Hemispheric Network Project (OHP),
eri-ndc.eri.u-tokyo.ac.jp/en/ohp/index.html

Article abstract describing use of OHP borehole seismometers to model subduction beneath the Pacific and Philippine Plates.

Seismic Evidence for Sharp Lithosphere-Asthenosphere Boundaries of Oceanic Plates. Science, April 2009
Vol.324, pp.499-502.
www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/324/5926/499

Good graphics, via Figs Only hyperlink, right panel.

Graphic of the Lithosphere-Aesthenospere at divergent (spreading) ridges and volcanic/tectonic activity.
www.windows2universe.org/earth/images/earths_crust_gif_image.html&edu=h…

Hypothetically, thermal/geomagnetic pulses migrate upward through near-surface aesthenosphere upwellings, spreading forces propagate through the crust with tectonic release at fissures and also under adjacent volcanic centers.

Sorry to throw a spanner Passerby, but Diane referred to the phenomenon of *precession* - http://www-istp.gsfc.nasa.gov/stargaze/Sprecess.htm The - discovered by Hipparchos some 2000 years ago. According to this site, the period is 26,000 years but in older Astronomy textbooks, I've seen a figure of 27,000 years.

Leon 31: Just curious, here; the plot of that film sounds very like the corny disaster-movie classic "The Day The Earth Caught Fire" (except that there the nukes were American and Russian, and the detonation to put things right was under Siberia). Just shows that you can't keep a scary-but-ridiculous idea down.

Dunno if it's real, dunno if it's photoshoped, but this screen cap of EyjafjallajÃ¶kull coming up on "Who Wants to be a Millionaire" is priceless.

http://i28.tinypic.com/4rakao.jpg

@ Lurking #38. Magic! I would love to have heard the host/questionmaster actually ask the question..... and the given alternatives!

@Passerby #36 and Henrik #37. I was referring to the procession (though I didn't know what to call it), and I didn't know about the wobble that takes 433 days. Thank you, gentlemen for letting me know what I was talking about. LOL

Passerby, what is the 433 day wobble all about? Will you go into a bit more detail on that? Thanks.

37: In her *exact words*
'BTW, the earth actually does have a wobble in its axis'

She didn't type the word 'precession'. I suppose she was referring to the Chile EQ that changed the LOD, but as Lurking pointed out, it's not a change in the rotational axis.

So I deliberately named one of a couple known free nutations. The decadeal-variation is called Markovitz Wobble. The primary excitation component appears to be atomospheric.

The Excitation of the Chandler Wobble (JPL, 2000)
trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstream/2014/18398/1/99-1877.pdf

In 2006, the Wobble paused briefly for several weeks. Stopped all movement, and caused quite a bit of consternation.

Indeed, there appears to be a connection between the change in amplitude of the Wobble cycle and excess LOD over time. USDOD-Navy data webpage.

maia.usno.navy.mil/plot-eop.html

Unfortunately, doomsday prophesy idiots have decided that the wobble has arcane significance. *sigh* You have to wade through their drivel when searching for papers on the wobble trends over time.

Not surprisingly, several papers published in the past decade have related Chandler Wobble variation to significant earthquakes events at subduction zones.

Iceland under "attack":
"After EyjafÃ¶l goes dormant, giant mosquitoes threaten webcams!"
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/MdAiNiSdzXQIIY_KlJaHzA?feat=direct…
(from: http://www.simnet.is/jonfr500/earthquake/vefmyndeyjafjalen.html)

Diane, see the JPL paper and the Wikipage.

The mechanics of the Wobble are...complex. More so than the JPL paper suggests. This webpage supplies a reasonable laymans synopsis of Atmospheric Angular Momentum.

Atmospheric Angular Momentum
http://www.examiner.com/x-17371-Raleigh-Climate-Examiner~y2009m8d30-Atm…

It describes the piling up of air masses at mid-latitudes and effect on LOD. We are emerging from a low-AAM pattern that spanned the last 3 years.

Your original choice of wording was apt, as it does appear to pertain to variation in Wobble, rotation rate/LOD and plausibly, to earthquakes at subduction zones located under the air mass anomalies.

Others have posited Wobble causative components in glacial isotactic rebound and polar ice-cap melting.

I suspect that glacial rebound has more to do with intraplate fault earthquakes (New Madrid fault and St Laurence Seaway quakes) than with the Wobble.

Earthquakes: Climate and intraplate shocks. Nature July 29, 2010.

www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7306/full/466568a.html

Triggering of New Madrid seismicity by late-Pleistocene erosion. Nature 466: 608â611 (2010).
DOI:10.1038/nature09258
www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7306/full/nature09258.html

I'm a bit skeptical of writing off the NMZ to a purely erosion activated feature. Granted, it probably played a large role in it, but there is a measurable slow wave zone underneath it.

From "Fossil flat-slab subduction beneath the Illinois basin, USA" Heather Bedle, Suzan van der Lee; Tectonophysics 424 (2006) 53â68

"b) a northeastâsouthwest transect that roughly aligns with the Mississippi River. All four cross-sections show the low velocity region beneath the Illinois basin in the uppermost mantle, and b) shows the slow upper mantle structure attributed to the Reelfoot Rift."

Part of Figure 6 from that document (the "b" part):

http://i32.tinypic.com/904tjt.png

lol films are films and Documentaries are facts i just never heard of nukes moving the Axis.in fact i watch two documentaries on the Haiti earthquake 2010 and 2004 boxing day Tsunami on sunday morning which i found very sad for both.thanks for all your info though intresting read and yeah this film was cheesy but good.

@45:
passingstrangeness.wordpress.com/2009/01/16/reelfootrift/

Interesting, a Mag 3 shake in Southern Louisiana, at 5 Km depth. Zero historical activity going back to 1900, hence an ultra low seismic hazard rating.

Manmade?

Leon was a bit off on the plot of the 2002 Sci-Fi dud, 'Scorcher'. The Chinese bomb tests supposedly cause a rupture at the lower mantle-core interface, shifted the mass of large plates, and the resulting 'immense pressure' is thus endangering Earth by catalyzing a 'global eruption'. *eyes rolling upward*

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scorcher_%28film%29

Nothing about axial precession, the Sun, etc.

Axial precession is at one of the scale of polar motions, having a very long period and being associated with the Milankovitch_cycles that affect large shifts in climate, and nutation is at the other end that is thought to be caused by short quasi-periodic climate patterns.

I thought that it might be a 'teachable moment' to segue chitchat towards recent publications on the causes of polar nutation and possible relation to seismic and volcanic activity.

Polar Motion (Wikipedia): The slow drift, about 20 m since 1900, is partly due to motions in the Earth's core and mantle, and partly to the redistribution of water mass as the Greenland ice sheet melts, and to isostatic rebound, i.e. the slow rise of land that was formerly burdened with ice sheets or glaciers. The drift is roughly along the 80th meridian west.

strong Earthquake in Northern Norway today :

3,5 scale

http://www.nrk.no/nyheter/distrikt/nordland/1.7233555

@#49 Thor,
Perhaps in the Norwegian scale of things is was big, otherwise, no. In the article, they even gave it a big M 5 splat on the map, and clearly, the article was about the feelings of exited people, "Wow! I was in an earthquake!"

The good point is that in the comments the people blame the gummint for the quake... ;)

Shop Holiday soon past, and the first geologists have begun opining that Lady E has not only hit the snooze button, but also turned the clock off as well.

@Kultsi - [50] Those that aren't blaming Statoil, that is. Waddya think... privatising EQs in .no is surely gunna make'em more expensive overall for the average Norwegian?

Rana Region EQ activity > post-glacial uplift, with local factors (last time this happened, I noted heavy precip preceded the event).

See abstract: Seismic activity, inferred crustal stresses and seismo-tectonics in the Rana region, Northern Norway. Quaternary Science Reviews (2000) 19(14-15):1423-1436.

Related paper you can read; The 31st of August 1819 LurÃ¸y earthquake revisited. Norwegian J Geol. (2004) 85:245-25.

www.geologi.no/data/f/0/07/60/7_22301_0/Bungum_et_al.pdf

@Passerby [47]

It wouldn't be the first time. Natural Gas production is all through that area.

The Wiggins Uplift is to the east of there, and from what I've read may be a fragment/shard from Gondwana.

According to "Alleghenian Reconstruction and Subsequent Evolution of the Gulf Of Mexico, Bahamas, and Proto-Caribbean" by Pindell in Tectonica, vol. 4, no. 1, January 1985:

"The probable suture zone, from east to west, lies between the Appalachians and the Mauritanides of western Africa; crosses Georgia between the Suwannee Basin and the Southern Appalachians; continues north of the Wiggins Arch and Sabine Uplift, following approximately the trend of the Gilber town-South Arkansas-Mexia graben system" (Pg 17)

http://i25.tinypic.com/2yudovb.png

Figure 1 from pg 2.

In the figure,
SU = Sabine Uplift
WA = Wiggins Arch
JD = Jackson Dome (old core of a volcano)
MU = Monroe Uplift

But, the basement there is anywhere from 8 to 10 km deep, so this event was up in the sedimentary layers above that at 5km depth.

Hmm...

Now ya made me ponder that a bit.

Roughly 81 myr ago, there was an impactor just North of Montgomery AL near a town now known as Wetumpka. The scar is still manifest on the landscape. Most opinion is that it hit in a shallow sea since most of the Mississippi embayment was... pretty much under water at the time.

I grew up in Jackson, and had always heard about there being an extinct volcano down there. Jackson was originally LeFluer's Bluff and was a trading post on the Pearl River. The whole area is hilly, something that was attributed to the old volcano by my peer group. (drunk teenagers) Most likely it was in part due to the really nasty "Yazoo Clay", which has a HUGE volume change as it absorbs water or dries out. Building foundations usually suffer quite a bit from that. In later years, I figured that this clay was from altered rock... but it turns out that it has more to do with whatever critters were living in that ancient sea.

So.. while digging around for info in that last post, I ran across this:

...Monroe and Toler (1937) described both extrusive and intrusive igneous rocks from the Jackson Dome. Harrelson and Bicker (1979), Harrelson (1981) and Saunders and Harrelson (1992) subsequently studied these igneous rocks. Harrelson (1981) interpreted that doming of the Jackson structure was initiated in the Jurassic, based ostensibly on stratigraphic relations. The doming, which was due to plutonism, continued through Early and mid-Cretaceous time until several volcanic vents opened to the surface, causing explosive volcanism. The volcanism continued almost to the end of the Cretaceous (Saunders and Harrelson, 1992). The volcano is capped by the Jackson âGas Rock,â a reef consisting of bryozoans, foraminifera, and corals (Harrelson, 1981). K-Ar geochronology indicates that the igneous rocks of the Jackson Dome range from 79.0 Â± 2.9 Ma to 69.2Â±2.9 Ma, although dates as young as 65.8 Â± 2.7 Ma (Cook, 1975) and as old as 91.3 Â± 3.4 Ma (Sundeen and Cook, 1977) are reported from other areas of Mississippi. These data indicate that the northern margin of the MISB was an area of intense tectonic activity throughout much of the latter part of the Mesozoic Era...

"Basin Analysis of the Mississippi Interior Salt Basin and Petroleum System Modeling of the Jurassic Smackover Formation, Eastern Gulf Coastal Plain", Ernest A. Mancini, University of Alabama, 1998.

So evidently, when Wetumpka got whacked by the meteor, there were already a lot of things going on with volcanoes and other seismic events.

As if we didn't have enough to worry about.

"Spacequakes" Discovered in Earth's Upper Atmosphere

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/07/100730-science-space-sp…

So, who is going to plot these? ;)

Yazoo clays = Pachuta Marls. Laid down in a marine environment.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marl
a-c-s.confex.com/crops/2008am/webprogram/Paper48317.html

Good general gab on Alabama Geology. I spent quite a bit of time at the Alabama Museum of Natural History (Smith Hall), back when it housed the Geological Survey, on the Univ. Alabama campus.

Tuscaloosa was a handy place to be, for geological diversity.

vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/LivingWith/VolcanicPast/Places/volcanic_past_alabama.html

I know the Black Warrior Basin and geology and soils of the Gulf Coast tolerably well.

Gawd I hate that "Volcanic Past" site. It has that "lets toss up a boilerplate to at least have something for them to look at" sort of appeal.

*shrug*

The State Geologic Survey has a decent geologic map. I didn't post another link that was dumbed down.

www.gsa.state.al.us/gsa/geo_mapping.html

UA Geological Sciences Dept has a better rendering:
http://www.geo.ua.edu/algeomap.php

The wiki page on geology of Alabama is too brief to be useful, but they do mention the Wetumpka impact. Confirmation of it's existence was published well after I had left 'Bama for the PNW.

Looks like 'Bama is going to be the next phase of a national rolling detailed seismological survey, for the next two years.

www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20100723/NEWS/100729880/1007?Title=State…

Smart idea, and not so far removed from the ocean crustal borehole program (OHP) that the Japanese are conducting throughout the western Pacific Plate and coastal Asia region.

@48 i think it was the actors in the film who said it. your site lead me to this site The national Academies press,Effects of nuclear-earth-penetrator weapons,and other weapons[2005] http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?records_id=11282

"...rolling detailed seismological..."

Very cool. Being in the armpit of Alabama we can't help but be included in the survey.... by proxy.

(P'cola)

You might consider contacting the PIs to help them scope out sites in southern AL. Might get you inside the project with respect to cranking through data (eg, paid position). You're obviously experienced at working up data.

The grad students are newbies. I've been locating/siting and planting remote environmental sensor systems for many years. They need pointers for safe sites that won't be molested - not an easy thing where the locals like to get drunk and shoot at new and interesting targets, like gubermint equipment housing, or solar panels to power them.

Just ask any of the HIGHLY UNDERPAID and UNDERVALUED USGS state water quality hydrology techs.

*Clint Eastwood squint*

Mobile is the armpit; the sugar sands of Pensacola Bay (Redneck Riviera) is heaven by comparison.

Nope... Pensacola spends all it's time trying to be Destin.

Well suited geologically for commerce (natural deep water bay), they do everything they can to drive it out so that they can put in condos and try to attract a tourist industry. Pensacola is truly wedged in the armpit, though it may not be the armpit.

Ref [62]

I'm probably ill suited for that position. My back road knowledge of Alabama is how to get across it when the roads are clogged with evacuees. MS back roads I had good working knowledge of, but that was 30 years ago. NW Florida I could do, I roam these roads on an almost daily basis... but I rarely get below 40 mph (have to make sure the traffic is clear on the other side of the combines and tractors that you occasionally run across) He##, I even found a Darlington Florida once. A few houses, some barns and a stop sign.

As for the shooting... I'd be more concerned about being related to any one there. Recently just North of Graceville FL up in AL, a recently laid off worker went on a spree taking out anyone who he had a grudge with ... including family. That went on for about 15 miles before they figured out how to track him down.

Amazing content=) I will require a bit of time to ponder your points.

Training also embraces scripts, handling objections, presentation, following up, closing, and different MLM qualified prospects topics. Often times there are HOT MLM prospects web pages around that really delivered on this fine of MLM sales opportunities training.

You'll have not supposed to take action, however I believe you might have managed to specific the mind-set that lots of people are in. The sense of wanting to assist, however not understanding how or the place, is something numerous us are going through.

Wow! Thank you! I always wanted to write on my blog something like that. Can I include a fragment of your post to my website?

Friday Flotsam: Kilauea continues to flow, volcano tourism worldwide and a refined geologic timescale

eklemetti — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 02:58:36 +0000

Friday Flotsam: Kilauea continues to flow, volcano tourism worldwide and a refined geologic timescale

Tourists hiking next to an active lava flow on Pacaya in Guatemala in 2006.

I'm flying back to Ohio today after a successful few weeks of fieldwork/paper writing. Apparently I have a pile of tomatoes waiting in our garden in Granville ... !

On to news:

To go with the news that lava flows from Kilauea creep ever closer to structures in Kalapana, the NASA Earth Observatory posts its first volcano image in a bit. The shot shows the steam-and-gas plume from the Halema`uma`u Crater in Kilauea's summit caldera. You can also see some video of the lava flows near Kalapana as they move along the road.
Want the latest geologic timescale - at least the one used by the USGS? Well, you can download USGS Fact Sheet 2010-3059, which sets out the latest definitions and corrections for the geologic timescale. It is the first update since 2007, where new fossil correlations and dating of rocks allows for refining of the boundaries between the epochs, ages and periods. It is a must for any true geophile.
Three articles I found recently tackle volcano tourism - the plusses and minuses - in Java (Indonesia), Guatemala and the Congo. The volcanoes in both countries are relatively easy to approach, but are still very dangerous. This is especially true for people trying to visit Pacaya as officials in Guatemala are reporting an increase in seismic activity at the volcano that erupted earlier this year.

eklemetti Thu, 07/22/2010 - 22:58

Considering that the eastern DRC/Rwanda/Uganda area near Nyiragongo has been in effect a war zone for much of the last fifty years. I wonder how many visitors that tour company is expecting?

The volcanoes mentioned are far less dangerous than the risks involved in getting to them - such as the risk of a fatal car or bus crash, or of getting robbed or worse. I remember hiding from gun-toting bandits on Pacaya and then later, at the summit while minor explosions hurled lava bombs above me, feeling that the crater rim was far safer than the base of the cone, where the bandits were firing their pistols directly at fleeing tourists.

To help Iceland cash in on the volcano tourism, I vote we set up a pipeline to the EyafjallajÃ¶kull crater and pump in some smoke generating volatiles. As the sun shines on the smoke column near midnight, add thunder sound effects = Profit.

There is a continued earthquake swarm in Iceland at the Tjornes fracture zone with 2 large quakes of @3.4 and 4.1.

I am curious about how you can tell if this is tectonic or volacanic in origin- which graphs show depth of quakes? Many thanks

Correction - the graph now only shows ONE large quake at 4.1, so perhaps this was an error they corrected.

@ Birger! Ha! failproof!

@ JulesP all the data you need are on another tab on the IMO site here:
http://en.vedur.is/earthquakes-and-volcanism/earthquakes/#view=table

I'm surprised noone has been up to Lake Eyjafjallajokull
and posted photographs since it's more placid these days.

Not really sure where to put it, so I guess this will work.

Perspective View - Grimsey, quakes for the last 2 to 3 days

i25.tinypic.com/33yqqmv.png

Grimsey, time vs depth, 18th to 23Â½ July

For comparison, same plot but for the the last batch of activity uptick in Grimsey, 26 May - 1 June

i28.tinypic.com/1z67dpj.png

Suggestive plots Lurking, thanks! Wonder what the Icelanders will call the new island? ;) ;)

Update from Long Valley Observatory, as of today:
http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/lvo/
Hmm, the two largest quakes in this sequence are among the three biggest since 2000. Still, "This level of activity is considered normal for the area."

@Lurking [8] -
The comparison plot URL is there but the July plot URL has gone missing...

The perspective view does, indeed, suggest a pipe; would including the previous swarm be a bother?

Ta for the Mozilla link up-blog, Raving. That might very well be the cause of the Flash hang-ups, as I almost always use multiple tabs in Firefox. Heh. I'll just use it as an excuse for disabling Flash in 'Fox, and then use Flock for Flash content.

If you follow the hyperlink in #10, above, you'll see that the USGS does indeed listen attentively to public feedback and respond quickly and affirmatively.

LVO Friday July 23rd activity update..included the desired mention of other data collected at Long Valley but not referenced in their weekly reports of the last several years.

THANKS USGS-LVO webteam! You GUYS ROCK!!

a 6.9 EQ off the coast of the Philippines http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/us2010zbbz.php and a 3.5 off the Californian coast near SF.

@Lurking: you got another deep-focus to add to your plots. 603.8 km 6.9 mag. MORO GULF, MINDANAO, PHILIPPINES (USGS)

@13 Passerby, I noticed the new detailed update as well. Thanks LVO team.

USGS have upgraded the Philippines to a Magnitude 7.3

#15 Magnitude for Philippines EQ upgraded to 7.3. If it weren't for the depth it would have caused pretty big damage.
@EKoh: when you have a free time you could tell us something about these deep focus EQs typical to subduction zones. :)

@Kultsi, Askola, FI [11]

Odd...

Here is the missing link. Dunno where the other one went to.

http://i25.tinypic.com/2ujjspc.png

Could have been a brain f@rt on my part... this has been an odd Karma day. Had a tractor tailor rig go into a jackknife 40 feet in front of me in driving rain today... he saved it but the pickup that had just cut me off nearly soiled himself. The rig saved it, the pickup pulled off to clean his drawers, and I made it around the whole non-mess. I'm still trying to figure out if it was good or bad karma. Bad that it happed, yes, but everything finished up with no damage other than nerves... and a pair of soiled underwear. That would be good karma.

Deep Focus EQ mineralogy catalysis technobabble from Geology.com

geology.about.com/od/earthquakes/a/aa_deeEQs.htm

I too would like to hear from Ekoh on the more recent developments in this field.

So there have been 2 aftershocks that are greater than 7 magnitude...are such large aftershocks normal for really deep earthquakes like that?

I am an obsessive worrier...

#21 It's a cluster of 7+ deep focus! Amazing!

Renato ... the USGS Twitter EQ feed agrees:

http://twitter.com/usgsted

Strange stuff in the Philippines.

Truth is that we know very little about our planet. How can we talk about fluid mechanics being applied to the mantle, when we have thrust EQs occurring so deep?

In the meanwhile, PHIVOLCS finds time to "commemorate"...
"16 July 1990 Luzon Earthquake Marks Its 20th Year
To commemorate its 20th year, PHIVOLCS will be holding a symposium on 15-16 July 2010 at PHIVOLCS Auditorium, Quezon City."
http://www.phivolcs.dost.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1

#25 I mean, there's no update on EQs activity in the website.

Actually, there have been three large quakes, varying in depth from 575-616 Km in depth, 3 at 7.3-4 Mag!

Quite interesting. Background reading:

Quickie abstract, that mentions similar type deep quakes in the same location, but with respect to the devastating shallow earthquake in this bench/trench. What happens if it's a shallow quake: the most destructive quake in modern times in the Philippines.

The 1976 August 16, Mindanao, Philippine earthquake (Msw 7.8) â evidence for a subduction zone south of Mindanao.
Geophys. J Royal Astronom. Soc. 57:51 - 65

Summary. The Philippine earthquake of 1976 August 16, is one of the largest to have occurred world-wide in recent years (Mw=8.8; Ms=7.8; seismic moment, Mo= 1.9 Ã 1028dyne-cm). It is, however, associated not with the Philippine Trench, which is the dominant tectonic feature along the eastern Philippine Islands, but with a much less prominent trench system in the Moro Gulf, North Celebes Sea, south of Mindanao. In this area most of the seismicity is at depths greater than 500 km, associated with the westward dipping Benioff zones of the Sangihe and Mindanao arc systems. This event, however, has a shallow focus and caused a locally destructive tsunami. ...Bathymetric data indicate the presence of a trench striking north-south in the region of the Moro Gulf, and seismic reflection profiling indicates disturbed sediments east of the trench showing evidence for subduction. In addition, the geological structures mapped on the island of Mindanao are consistent with this mode of deformation. The only other known large earthquake in the region on 1918 August 15 (Ms=8.0) probably occurred along the same subduction zone, on an adjacent segment, to the south of the recent event.

Note the dates. It is also instructive to recall that the large EQ under Granada Spain in April 2010 was also very deep, at ~630Km (estimated by IGNV, USGS and Harvard). A previous deep quake hit the same location in 1954, also at a deep depth of ~650Km.

This webpage also describes the same Moro Gulf EQ described in the abstract above, but has a useful geological setting descriptive/graphics section at the bottom of the page.

www.drgeorgepc.com/Tsunami1976Phillipines.html

@Passerby: thank you very much for the feedback. Hope there won't be damage from these ones. USGS "Did you feel?" map shows it has been felt as a mag. 5+ at the surface. Deep Focus EQs are the only type of big ones we have in Brazil, up to mag. 7 along the subduction of Nazca under S. American Plate. Since they happen in the middle of the Amazon forest, it's never really felt. A mag. 8+ occurred in La Paz, Bolivia, with little damage as well. But these quakes can be felt from very far away.

Yes, there was a very large deep focus EQ in Bolivia, in the mid-8s Mag range. It's mentioned on the geology.about.com webpage.

What intrigues me is the fact that the mantle isn't supposed to be that brittle at such depths and I don't quite understand the mineralogical explanations I've been reading, saying there's a "changing" in the brittleness of mantle at these depths. But it kind of puts all plate tectonics theory at stake, don't you think? In other words, mantle could be that brittle elsewhere. I don't know if I'm being quite clear about this.

http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/eq_depot/2009/eq_091004_mia8/neic_mia8_d.html

Magnitude 6.6 MORO GULF, MINDANAO, PHILIPPINES
Sunday, October 04, 2009 at 10:58:00 UTC, depth 620Km.

So, USGS, we have 3 abutting ruptures?

Number of global EQs on USGS map jumped from 535 to 834 in 20 min.

According to EMSC there have been six big jolts, all 500-600 km deep. It's a thrust faulting pattern, isn't it?
http://www.emsc-csem.org/index.php?page=home#2

#31 Wow!

@33 Technical issues with the website autoupdating.

@Passerby: the technical babble happens to be very interesting, indeed. If you allow me I'll paste some of it from
http://geology.about.com/od/earthquakes/a/aa_deeEQs.htm
"Over a wide depth range averaging 410 km, olivine begins to change to a different crystal form identical to that of the mineral spinel. This is what mineralogists call a phase change rather than a chemical change; only the volume of the mineral is affected. Olivine-spinel changes again to a perovskite form at around 650 km. (These two depths mark the mantle's transition zone.)
Other notable phase changes include enstatite-to-ilmenite and garnet-to-perovskite at depths below 500 km.
(...)
Then the great Bolivia deep earthquake of 9 June 1994 occurred, a magnitude 8.3 event at a depth of 636 km. Many workers thought that to be too much energy for the transformational faulting model to account for. Other tests have failed to confirm the model. But not all agree. Since then, deep-quake specialists have been trying new ideas, refining old ones, and having a ball."

Not much to look at... but here they are:

Mindanao, Philippines

View North

http://i28.tinypic.com/24cco7o.png

View East

http://i26.tinypic.com/nwjzo0.png

>But it kind of puts all plate tectonics theory at stake, don't you think? In other words, mantle could be that brittle elsewhere. I don't know if I'm being quite clear about this.

Huh??

Stop babbling. Start reading.

Mechanism of Deep-focus Earthquakes Anomalous Statistics
March 2010.
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1003/1003.4448.pdf

@Lurking: I knew you were already working on this!
BTW, Where did you get the shallow ones from?

@Passerby #37 You bet I will. I promise this is it (my babbling) for now: lot of homework to do. I'll be munching on this overnight. Thanks again.

@38

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/quakes_all.php

#40 @Lurking, sorry, I didn't get the shallow ones. These data are all from today's activity? I only see deeper than 500 km.

And @Lurking, I'm sorry for the bad day you had. You're lucky to have an efficient "guarding angel".

Luckily, Ekoh prepped us for this.

Tectonic setting of a composite terrane: A review of the Philippine island arc system. Geosciences J. 12:7 â 17, March 2008.

www.geosciences-journal.org/home/journal/include/downloadPdf.asp?articl…

Sakurajima's been erupting pretty much constantly the last half hour or so....

http://webcam-svo2.pr.kyoto-u.ac.jp/local/camera.html

Those Philippine quakes show up really well on the Redoubt Webicorder, with a lag-time of around 11.5 minutes.
http://www.avo.alaska.edu/webicorders/Redoubt/RSO_EHZ_AV.php

Seismology and mantle dynamics are not my specialty. However, these deep focus quakes were known before subduction was understood, in fact the dipping plane of very deep quakes, known as the Wadati-Benioff zone, was one line of evidence for subduction. What is happening is that you are thrusting colder and more brittle oceanic crust deep into the mantle.
Now as for the exact quake mechanisms and patterns of quakes, we'll need to heat from a geophysicist.
BTW, the tectonics of the Philippines are complex to say the least. I believe there are two subduction zones converging on either side of the islands.

@Renato Rio

Not necessarily today's quakes. I plotted the entire list then set lat/lon boundaries to get the Mindanao area. If they were in the list, they are in the plot.

As for the bad day... it's a Karma thing, and like I said it's hard to call if it was bad or good. Everybody recovered control and nothing was damaged. So that would be good.

Let's just call it and "interesting" day.

A Perspective Plot of Grimsey area looking North East.

A very interesting plot, sort of looks like layers of faults with the nearby stacks.

http://i31.tinypic.com/15gq9dx.png

nice perspective, thanks Lurking.
Whats about changing the color bar from depth to time.
At your last one it could be a too much data, but at #36 it would increase the information.
Sorry if i missed it, had you also plotted the Fox Islands, Alaska quakes?
Thanks again for this great blog, interesting ideas, nice comments and wide knowledge.

6.4 in Iceland!
Saturday
24.07.2010 12:04:15 64.038 -21.231 1.3 km 6.4 mag 55.894.7 km SSW of HrÃ³mundartindi

The EQ occurred at Reykjanes ridge, but neither EMSC nor USGS say anything about it.

#50 Ok, they've just downgraded it. I think they've switched the figures (depth x magnitude). False alarm.
Saturday
24.07.201012:04:1564.048-21.2406.2 km-0.299.03.9 km SSW of HrÃ³mundartindi

http://hraun.vedur.is/ja/englishweb/eqlist.html
12:04:15,464,038-21,2311,36,455,89 4,7 kmSSWof HrÃ³mundartindi

here its still the 6.4

I'm happy it was no 6.4. At this depth (1,3 km, as the original plot) it would have been a mess at the surface.
But we got some small ones in Godabunga and Hekla.

Chris Rowan over at Highly Allochthonous has an interesting discussion of the complexity of the Phillippines fault area:

http://all-geo.org/highlyallochthonous/2010/07/fridayish-focal-mechanis…

@Dennis

I generally stick to simple scatters plots, but since the view only uses 2 axis, I can cheat and make the 3d into a time stamp. Sort of cumbersome since two separate plot runs have to be done, but possible.

View North

http://i30.tinypic.com/10mk6dd.png

View East
http://i27.tinypic.com/2wg6psw.png

Google translated from IMO website:
"07/23/2010: Earth tremor cycle began island northeast of the second part yesterday and it still stands.
So far this day has been recorded more than 70 earthquakes in this region. The largest quake was at this morning. 08:38 and he was four points.
No reports have been received from the island to the quake has been found. Most of the quake are 10-13 km depth. Earthquakes are common in this area."
http://www.vedur.is/um-vi/frettir/2010/nr/1962

From the last thread, on the quake off shore near SF, it is on the San Andreas and probably doesn't mean much. It is near the '06 epicenter. The one they now say was the epicenter of the '06 quake is almost dead center off the Golden Gate. They used to say the epicenter was on Pt. Reyes were Earthquake Trail starts. I have walked the trail and it is interesting to see the offset fence, the escarpment and the spot where you can straddle the two plates.

Will there be a big one? One of these days there will be. Nobody knows when so any chatter about it is just that. Chatter. I wish there wasn't so much hype about it. The best anyone can do right now is have some plan of what to do when it does happen. Other than that, we can't live in fear all the time.

I live in an area where there is a fault. Several in fact and I can see them in the road cuts. There is a spring that is above the road in one place and the spring is on top of the hill. At times, water will drain through a crack in the road, but for the time being it is dry.

Another thing about another area of CA that is near me is the drain that was put in to drain a mine on which several homes and appartments are built. The two holes that drain the mine run down the side of the road to a drainage and it is always running (more like trickling) and is some pretty nasty stuff with a lot of iron in it because of a lot of stuff was left in the mine. If a major quake hit the area, that part of town would look like No Name City.

Right now, I have decided to embark on my own exploration of the geology in my neck of the woods and learn more about it. I already know a bit, but I want to know just what I am looking at in the road cuts and also underneath. I can do that partly with a geologic feature map, but I want to do some field work on it, too. There is a lot of different stuff here. I want to document it even if it has been done before. There is a feature near where I live that most of the people around here don't know about. I would like to get an article about it in the local paper. Eh, some day.

#56 It seems clearer now, Lurking. At least to me. It gives the impression the subducted slab is "sinking" northwards and is bent at its deeper edge. But this is a total guess.

@Diane: nice summer plans, for what you say. It would be nice to take some shots of the observed areas and keep them as a comparison for when you go back next time. Of course, you must have that already in mind, but I remember my father doing this kind of work. He was an Engineer, specialized in Soil Mechanics and a Geology freak. I wish he had lived longer so I could have learned more with him. Still keep his photo collections, but don't find the references to them. He had predicted, back in the 70's, landslides and other hazards that are taking their toll to people living on slopes in Rio today.

#55 #56 @parclair
Thank you for the link, I've just read it to learn my interpretation of @lurking's plots is incorrect. The slab is supposedly moving westwards, for what I could understand. Better shut my mouth and leave the interpretations for experts. But @Lurking, thank you anyway.

For Diane:

Over this USGS seismic map
earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqscanv/

with this CA-NV geothermal plant location map
www.nevadageothermal.com/i/maps/operatinggeothermal.gif

to view location connection between clustered EQ activity and geothermal field proximity.

If any of you are in England this summer, there is a fabulous exhibition of Volcano art from 16th Century engravings through the genius of Turner to the sublime wonder that is Warhol.
On until 31st October
http://www.comptonverney.org.uk/?page=exhibitions/volcano&type=banner1

There's a whole lotta shakin' going on! First it was Fox Island with very consistent 10km depth quakes, then California, and now a lot of shallow quakes around Greece and the Med, interspersed with the very deep ones near the Phillipines. Hopefully it will settle a bit now.

#63 Thank you, @stigger. It makes me curious as to see Warhol's view over volcanoes.

@All

Coming up with the bright idea of trying to replicate Figure 6 from the "Mechanism of Deep-focus Earthquakes Anomalous Statistics" document linked by Passerby [37], I first ran a quick depth vs Mag plot to see if there were enough points in the USGS database for this little area to make it worth the trouble.

There aren't. But it does make a nice plot. Bounding box of 123E to 124E - 6N to 7N, USGS listed quakes 1973 to present. Recent activity plotted in blue.

Depth vs Magnitude.

http://i28.tinypic.com/29y4jut.png

@Dennis

Sorry, I misread your question about the color = time and mistakenly thought you were referring to the Mindanao quakes.

I can do a similar plot of GrÃmsey, but can't get the whole shebang to work in a 3D view. I haven't mastered the 4D aspect of the program, and each time I try I get something I didn't expect.

@Lurking: Thanks again. I can see two clear depth lines: one from quakes ranging from ~35-65 km and another from ~590-620 km. right?

Renato #60, thanks for the cudos. I forgot to write down where I got the first set of pictures :-}, but at least I can find them again. And I didn't take enough film! Rats. Next time. I need to get a digital camera!!!

@Passerby #62, thanks for that map of the geothermal plants. I had no idea there were that many. I can say the one that is the Geysers generates a lot of quakes. I was suspecting the Coso plant to have something to do with the quakes in Long Valley, but I am not sure just how far the swarm is from the plant. I have occasionally seen a small quake or two where I think the plant is, but I am not sure on that. Right now I am suspecting some hydrothermal activity in Hot Creek which is normal for that area as there can be a deadly rise in water temp without warning. I guess people still want to take their chances, but since I have been there, I think they have blocked it off so you can't get into the water. That water can go from nice warm bathtub temp to over boiling in seconds.

I still want to go back to Long Valley, but there is a lot of interesting geology at home. So I will be taking pics and documenting what I find in a better form than I have been as of late. This is something that I just got the idea to do so it is a work in progress.

Hi all, still alive here.
@63 stigger I happen to be in England at the moment. I would love to be able to go see Compton Verney, but it is the wrong way from where I am in Basingstoke, west of London. Have been gone since 14 July. Am enjoying the cooler weather (actually, been cold on more than one occasion) and also getting away from the oil news. Although I still keep up on what is happening, it has taken a back seat to my vacation. Still have a couple of more weeks before getting back to the homestead.

Cheers
(I think I'm finally getting the hang of this language over here) :)

@69 Dan (Florida in UK). Coincidence! I only live 12 miles from Basingstoke and yes, it is fairly cool weather at the moment. Compton Verney is only 2 hours by car (I went yesterday) saw it advertised whilst visiting the University of Warwick and called in on my way home. Worth a visit if you could arrange it.

@Renato Rio

I wouldn't rally call them "lines".. more like groups. Also, you might take the depth values of the shallower quakes with a grain of salt, when they start coming out all at the same value I grow suspicious of instrument errors... especially when you are also looking at 37 years of technology changes in the data.

Shallower quakes are more difficult to nail down due to the higher levels of noise introduced by the strata. (more reflection points etc...)

Though not a geologist I am very aware of the difficulties of digging a signal out of clutter.

@70 stigger Small world isn't it?
And "fairly cool weather" is a relative term. :) But I must say, even when it warms up, I love the dew point/humidity here.

@72 Dan: 'tis a small world indeed!
Are you on holiday or working over here?
Only visited Florida once but yes, the humidity is very different in Hampshire.

@Dan, I'm glad to hear your fairing well in the "foggy" city. Wait till the "storm" is over and I'm hoping that, at the end, it will all have been but a nightmare. :)
@Lurking, thanks for the precious info. As we have seen earlier today, we can't thrust shallow-quake plotting.
@All Saturday night fever here in Rio, so you won't be hearing from me till tomorrow. Have a good night! <:}

So we can do a little bit of comparison, graphically. First, we go to the tsunmai webpage and pull the figure

Distribution of earthquake hypocenters along a section of the Cotabato Trench subduction boundary (After B. Bautista 1996, PHIVOLCS)

www.drgeorgepc.com/Tsunami1976Phillipines.html

This gets flipped on it's side, so depth is on the x-axis.
We then paste in Lurkings figure and stretch it to match the depth axis readings from the figure above. They are laying side by side, with Lurkings on top.

Then we go to the elegant Russkie paper, Mechanisms of Deep Focus..from my post (38), Fig 6, which we grab using a graphics capture program. We paste it into our figure, right on top of the other two, about in the middle, and we shift it's layer transparency to allow us to see the underlying figures.

What do we see?

We see that the Russkies are indeed correct, in fact, we've proved their model with the data from Phivolcs and USGS - that the effective plastic deformation length, gamma, is indeed at 200km, because our graph shows that below the surface brittle layer fracturing at 50klicks, we have EQ nodes (clusters) at 200, 400 and 600 kms.

Freaking unreal.

I've written to the authors to let them know. We've just made a bit of science history. Good job!

To be politically correct, the authors institutional affiliations are in the Ukraine, Bulgaria and Macedonia.

I'm going to start pointing to other Sciblogs that are I have found to be exemplary in their quality, subject choices and professionalism. Some have been posting for years, some are relatively new.

One of them is the SETI blog.
http://scienceblogs.com/SETI/

I hope they continue to post here.

BTW Passerby... if you need an of those data points knocked down in size to a facilitate there use, feel free to ask. I used a bit larger symbol than normal to get them to stand out.

How did that parody of Metallica go? Oh yeah, "Beer Good, FIRE BAD!!!"

Let me try that again:

"BTW Passerby... if you need any of those data points knocked down in size to a facilitate their use, feel free to ask. I used a bit larger symbol than normal to get them to stand out."

Dude, I don't care what you say, Katla is getting ready to blow. It will start like Eyjafjallajokull with a fissure opening on the northwest flank. When? Probably before the end of this year. I'm guessing sooner. Take that.

Gonna need some quakes to evidence that.

Katla blows when Katla blows. Does it quite often... but only does it when she's ready. On average, about every 64.5 years, give or take a few standard deviations (48.3years).

The last was in 1999. Can it happen? Yup. But your gonna need a flurry of activity to accurately say "here is comes."

Lurking, people tend to believe what they want to believe no matter what the best interpretation of available evidence by the most qualified specialists. In one respect Mark T Burns is correct - every volcano not currently erupting is "getting ready to blow". Eventually, even once-only events such as cinder cones will blow too, albeit it may be 5,000,000,000+ years before their material is thus regurgitated. Within 10,000,000,000 years, the area where NYC of today stands will have been flattened by a large meteor, asteroid or comet. The surface and oceans of Earth will be vaporised and disappear into space when our sun dies. In 10 to the 135th power years, even the most massive black hole will have evaporated. The Universe itself will die given enough time.

You and I know that we will never witness these events (bar possibly an eruption of Katla, which *may* erupt before the year is out even if that's unlikely), yet there are people who want to believe that this will take place soon, within our lifetime. What is of interest though, is the undelying psychological motivations for such wishes...

;)

Katla will, blow when Nature let her blow,. before that, I holds my bets On EyjafjÃ¶ll, she is more belivable to make a new appearance...

even VatnajÃ¶kull can make an appearance,and every other Volcano on Iceland conected to the Mid Atlantic Ridge,..

If you look at Iceland as a large volcano it get's a bit easier to predict an eruption:)
The statistical chance based on eruptions during the last 1000 years and then adding some outlayers for those volcanoes that haven't erupted during that time but figures exist for then you get an 83% chans of eruption withing 5 years, and 9,7% that Iceland will blow before july 2011.

Likelihood of Katla bopping statistically is 1,8% per year, and if you count in the low activity at Katla then we are really down in the statistics. So if someone wants Katla do dance the Bopp-a-lula then you will have to give her a Beer.

My preferred candidates of an eruption are in order of likelihood, Askja, Reykjaneshryggur, Bardarbunga and Lakagigar.
Among those that would produce "The most interesting times" would be Bardarbunga, Lakagigar and Askja. Both Askja and Bardarbunga are showing some signs of increased risk, such as land rising upwards and increased quakiness (slight).

Perversely enough, I really would like to see a new ultra-scale fracturing that permited all the pent up energy-potential of the 60+ metre uplifting of Iceland to be released. Then we would see something like 5.200 cubik kilometres of lava being pushed out:) We could always name it Nornagigar;)

@Carl on the Sea

Wait a minute...

"...all the pent up energy-potential of the 60+ metre uplifting of Iceland to be released..."

Your kidding right? Is that in the Bardarbunga area?

60 meters uplift. That's a lot of magma, or a sizable crustal rebound.

"GÃ³Ã°an dag allir!"
For what I can tell, you people are pretty much in an Icelandic mood today. Time for a question: why isn't HvolsvÃ¶llur cam working for me? There's a very interesting fog over Gigi today (frÃ¡ ThÃ³rolsfÃ©lli) and I wish I could see more of what's going on. As for Eyjaf, my hopes on a revitalizing are fading away. Katla? Nothing, but a wonderful peaceful view from the cam (hope it stays that way, which is quite likely).
@Henrik, Swe:
"What is of interest though, is the undelying psychological motivations for such wishes..."
I have my own speculations over the subject, but posting them would be too much off-thread. Interesting the way you summarized it, though...

@Carl on the sea: Why isn't Hekla on your list? It has erupted in a ten year interval before (1970, 1980, 1991 and 2000). I wouldn't discard Hekla from my list (not a wish here, Henrik, mere speculation on previous evidence). ;)

@Renato -

The HvolsvÃ¶llur cam seems to be on the fritz, does not work for me either. Nothing so see, anyway, as verified by the ThÃ³rÃ³lfsfell and MÃºlakot views.

@Kultsi: Thank you very much. I didn't know that MulakÃ³t cam was back. Let's hope Mila will fix HvolsvÃ¶llur's so we can go on speculating.

Did I ever say this place is the coolest place in town?
really, great stuff. I've got two papers downloaded for bed-time reading tonight and looking forward to it.

Re these Philippine quakes:
I'd love to know what's happening down there at the transition zone. They say the lower mantle is much less viscous than the upper mantle so the first idea is that the quakes are the result of the subducting plate ramming into something harder and tougher than itself. Whether this is locally the case though is moot. I could also imagine that a subducting plate is so cool that it just ploughs straight down into the lower mantle like those images we saw of the Farallon plate under North America without being particularly affected by the transition zone. The question then would be, why the quakes? At that depth there is probably not a lot of bending going on unless of course, (back to first hypothesis) the plate is indeed colliding off the denser lower mantle at this depth. hmm. fascinating stuff.
Got the Romanian/Ukrainian paper for bed tonight. Perhaps that sheds some light on it.
You guys rock!

5.6-magnitude quake hits Taiwan
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapacific/view/1071417/1/…

hi all together

i've been in iceland for the last two weeks and enjoyed the wonderfull landscape.

as point of interest i made a hiking tour with my father up to the thorolfsfell tablemountain and to the webcam.

that must have been on monday two weeks ago. i hope somebody was able to see that the cam was cleanded a bit :) there was some dust and dry water drops on the lens and myself as a watcher wanted to give all the people who watch eyjafjallajÃ¶kull a nice clear view to the volcano.

i try to post a picture of the webcam/mobilestation later, so that you guys at least get an idea how it looks up there. the volcano itself is still emitting quite a bit of steam, but nothing more :)

another one in the Philippines. 5.1
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/us2010zdbj.php

Whole lot of action in the Philippines; variable depth
# KURIL ISLANDS (Map: bit.ly/90m9Bf ) 2010-07-25 12:57:00 UTC | Depth (km): 119 | Mag: 5.8 | #Earthquake 1 minute ago via apiaccess

# MORO GULF, MINDANAO, PHILIPPINES (Map: bit.ly/d92uVs ) 2010-07-25 08:18:29 UTC | Depth (km): 618 | Mag: 5.2 | #Earthquake 1 minute ago via apiaccess

# TAIWAN (Map: bit.ly/cPPLj9 ) 2010-07-25 03:52:12 UTC | Depth (km): 36 | Mag: 5.4 | #Earthquake 1 minute ago via apiaccess

# TONGA (Map: bit.ly/aYfRn8 ) 2010-07-25 03:39:23 UTC | Depth (km): 47 | Mag: 6.0 | #Earthquake 1 minute ago via apiaccess

# SULAWESI, INDONESIA (Map: bit.ly/ceW1jZ ) 2010-07-24 23:51:12 UTC | Depth (km): 33 | Mag: 5.1 | #Earthquake 1 minute ago via apiaccess

# OFFSHORE O'HIGGINS, CHILE (Map: bit.ly/ar9el5 ) 2010-07-24 21:46:36 UTC | Depth (km): 10 | Mag: 5.2 | #Earthquake 1 minute ago via apiaccess

# CHAGOS ARCHIPELAGO REGION (Map: bit.ly/ac5vhe ) 2010-07-24 20:28:09 UTC | Depth (km): 33 | Mag: 5.4 | #Earthquake 1 minute ago via apiaccess

# NORTHWEST OF AUSTRALIA (Map: bit.ly/aGVfzq ) 2010-07-24 19:17:54 UTC | Depth (km): 2 | Mag: 5.0 | #Earthquake 1 minute ago via apiaccess

# KEP. MENTAWAI REGION, INDONESIA (Map: bit.ly/bfv1vM ) 2010-07-24 15:17:50 UTC | Depth (km): 30 | Mag: 5.0 | #Earthquake 1 minute ago via apiaccess

# MORO GULF, MINDANAO, PHILIPPINES (Map: bit.ly/bkhKuH ) 2010-07-24 11:56:25 UTC | Depth (km): 606 | Mag: 5.1 | #Earthquake

Seriously... all you are gonna have to do is wait around a bit. There will be another.

From a compilation of the eruptive histories from www.volcano.si.edu of four of the volcanoes in the area:

2010 - EyjafjallajÃ¶kull
2000 - Hekla
1999 - Katla
1991 - Hekla
1981 - Hekla
1980 - Hekla
1970 - Hekla
1955 - Katla
1947 - Hekla
1918 - Katla
1913 - Hekla
1878 - Hekla
1860 - Katla
1845 - Hekla
1823 - Katla
1821 - EyjafjallajÃ¶kull
1766 - Hekla
1755 - Katla
1725 - Hekla
1721 - Katla
1693 - Hekla
1660 - Katla
1636 - Hekla
1625 - Katla
1612 - Katla
1612 - EyjafjallajÃ¶kull
1597 - Hekla
1580 - Katla
1554 - Hekla
1550 - Katla
1510 - Hekla
1500 - Katla
1477 - TorfajÃ¶kull
1450 - Katla
1440 - Katla
1440 - Hekla
1416 - Katla
1389 - Hekla
1357 - Katla
1341 - Hekla
1311 - Katla
1300 - Hekla
1262 - Katla
1245 - Katla
1222 - Hekla
1210 - Katla
1206 - Hekla
1177 - Katla
1170 - TorfajÃ¶kull
1158 - Hekla
1150 - Katla
1104 - Hekla
1050 - Hekla
950 - Katla
934 - Katla
920 - Katla
920 - EyjafjallajÃ¶kull
904 - Katla
870 - TorfajÃ¶kull
820 - Katla
800 - Hekla
780 - Katla
750 - Hekla
690 - Katla
680 - Katla
650 - Hekla
610 - Katla
590 - Katla
550 - Hekla
550 - EyjafjallajÃ¶kull
540 - Katla
500 - Katla
400 - Katla
350 - Hekla
290 - Katla
270 - Katla
260 - Katla
250 - Hekla
200 - Katla
150 - TorfajÃ¶kull
130 - Katla

@Stefan #92: Yes, we all noticed the cleaning of ÃÃ³rÃ³lsfell cam and we are most grateful to you. And yes, I would love to see the location of the cam and the other angles from there. Thank you very much.
@Stigger and @Lurking: Thank you for the updates.

@Lurking
BTW I was just trying to locate TorfjÃ¶kull and checking on recent quakes when I noticed another one near the glacier a few minutes ago:
Sunday
25.07.201020:19:0863.922-19.2131.1 km1.166.077.0 km N of Ãlftavatn
And there was another NE of Eyjaf, with a deeper focus:
Sunday
25.07.201019:26:5663.687-19.3718.7 km1.051.165.5 km ENE of BÃ¡sar

@90: If you read those papers, some of your questions will be answered outright and others by examination of the figures (map graphic of deep focus EQs, in particular; the cited paper will appear in the Europhysics Journal in August 2010) and text references.

See also: Chris' Highly Allochthonous Friday post and take a long look at his map graphic - compare it to the Moro Gulf tsunami webpage graphics map with tectonic forces marked. You will see that the sequence follows a tightly curved progression, which is why I questioned whether there was snapping at several short segments of this curve zone.

@Lurking / Post 95

There are also some pretty devastating eruptions of ÃrÃ¦fajÃ¶kull in the south-eastern region of vatnajÃ¶kull natural reservat.

they took place in 1362 and 1727.

the eruption in 1362 was the largest explosive eruption in the last 1100 years in iceland. the eruption was of about the same scale like the eruption of mt. pinatubo on luzon.

(in icelandic: http://www.islandia.is/hamfarir/jardfraedilegt/eldgos/oraefajokull.html)

pictures:

look towards thorolfsfell:
http://img801.imageshack.us/img801/2640/igp3886.jpg

look towards eyjafjallajÃ¶kull with the station in the bottom left corner:
http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/1118/igp3906.jpg
http://img840.imageshack.us/img840/1200/igp3909.jpg
http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/9285/igp3974.jpg

a closer look on the station:
http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/4734/igp3918.jpg

actually the two cameras (normal right and infrared on the left):
http://img840.imageshack.us/img840/9175/igp3940.jpg

figures in the ash:
http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/7020/igp3976.jpg

and a last look on eyjafjallajÃ¶kull:
http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/2218/igp3952.jpg

if there is a way to post thumbnails, let me please know!

There are some amazing images of Kilauea at this link:
http://hawaiianlavadaily.blogspot.com/
- looking at Leigh Hilbert's photography - linked from Highly Allochthonous.

@ Stefan (#92). We did notice, much obliged!

#99 @Stefan: Historical pictures for us over this blog. I'll save them all, with your permission. Thank you very much, indeed.

#100 @Alyson: Thanks for posting. Most amazing videos to the bottom of the webpage.

@Stefan

Thanks for the info and the nice shots.

When I first did my list I only had the volcanoes on the SIL chart for MÃ½rdalsjÃ¶kull to go by. (they were closest to the show and it was the source of the quakes I was plotting)

From the setting, I imagine anything going off in and around VatnajÃ¶kull would be significant.

@89: I didn't know that MulakÃ³t cam was back

It's not. Kulsti found and hacked the new site. It's offline to the rest of us for reasons of security/privacy.

We thank the webhosts at Mulakot for their patience and forbearance, in allowing us unfettered viewing access for four months.

@stefan, thank you so much for the pictures -you let us know what it is like in the area from other angles, great. A nice clean camera eye also fine! : )

Thanks from me as well to the Mulakot folks (sorry, on a traveling computer, no accents.)

@105 The camera is available thru JÃ³n's site now, just like before. Using that path does not add traffic - except at JÃ³n's site at http://www.simnet.is/jonfr500/earthquake/vefmyndeyjafjalmulaen.html

you can save the images if you realy want to ;) they are solely thought to be of a documentary character, therefor you can freely use them, exept selling them :)

interesting for me was, that around the southcoast almost all the farmland look ash-free. but when its dry and windy there is some kind of a strange dust-/ash-/sandstorm which is pretty dens in some places. (there was a pretty heavy duststorm last thuesday on the skeidararsandur betwen myrdals- and vatnajÃ¶kull)

Looks like this creature with the nym about attracting pieces of metal is spamming around trying to peddle the s*t. It copy-pastes a part of former comment to sound credible.

I'd rather die seeing a volcano then die eating junk food and watching junk TV all day....

Statistically, the car taking you to the volcano will more likely kill you.

Nanny states should be banned.

Statistically, the car taking you to the volcano will more likely kill you.

Posted by: Greg | July 26, 2010 8:32 AM

No kidding! Mules are safer. :D

Well, the flipping thing sure as @#$@# ain't me.

Generally when run across intrusive advertising it motivates me to avoid the product. I place advertising in the "theft of service" realm that is generally used for computer and network intruders. The advert impinged on my attention, and distracted me from more fruitful use of my thoughts and time.

My thoughts exactly, well said Lurking!

@85 (Lurking):
Nope, the average uplift of Iceland is 60+ metres above earth average according to a new satellite gravitometric study. Here is a nice map from the GOCE satellite.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8767763.stm

@87 (Renato Rio on Rialto):
I actually forgot to put Hekla on my likely to erupt list;) Of course it should be there. That if anything is a "take a beer and blow" volcano. But, it tends to be a bit on the foppish side when it goes.

this is ADORABLE. so pretty

Hey that's an amazing insight on the subject, thanks so much! never heard it more clear.

will miss you summer 09..we had alot of fun together...but..what happens in summer stays in summer and i dont want this to get awkward..so my number...lose it.

Just tested my "laws don't apply to me" theory at the airport. Homeland Security obviously doesn't follow me on Twitter.

There's a reason I can't do both at the same time: premature ejaculation

I've read some of the articles on your web site at this point. And I truely enjoy your style of blogging. I had it to one of my bookmarks and definitely will be checking very soon. Take a look at my web site too and let me know what you think about it.

Usually the thought of Monkeys with computers pops in my head when I usually browse the net as they call it, but this is actually one of the few constructed pages I've seen in a bit. Not only is it an admirable read, but it's also contructed nicely and visually appealing. If by any chance you need help operating this blog page or any other projects you have going on shoot me a email or a reply.

great! thank you very much for the blog post, i will keep it in mind next time

Hello, i guess these are down niche except in either case, i have been looking around close your online site therefore it to be able to tremendously fully fresh. We are building a more writings as fighting recover look good, once my partner and i make contact with a task and also spoil it. So how rough has been this particular to generate your webblog? Will possibly a friend at all like me while not live through accomplish this, moreover inject family members redesign book pages not having having destroying the item anytime?

Fantastic blog. Will take a bit of time to entertain this points!!

Great info. I am going to require some time to entertain your info=D

Iâve seen this page to be exceptionally insightful. Thank you for creating it. - I asked the girl if she could bring a sister for me. She did. Sister Maria Teresa. It was a very slow evening. We discussed the New Testament. We agreed that He was very well adjusted for an only child. Woody Allen Born 1935

GVP Weekly Volcanic Activity Report for June 30-July 6, 2010

eklemetti — Fri, 09 Jul 2010 01:35:13 +0000

GVP Weekly Volcanic Activity Report for June 30-July 6, 2010

So, I'm a little late with this thanks to a little hiatus, but I thought I would post the latest GVP Weekly Volcanic Activity Report. Thanks again to the Smithsonian, USGS and especially Sally Kuhn Sennert!

Some highlights include:

There were more ash explosions spotted at Ebeko in Kamchatka, producing ~1.8 km (5,900 foot) ash columns. This activity prompted KVERT to raise the Alert Status to Yellow. This goes along with news from a pile of other Kamchatka/Kuril Island volcanoes: Gorely, Tiatia, Karymsky, Kliuchevskoi and Shiveluch.
More activity at Arenal in Costa Rica - its almost always busy - including strombolian activity shaking windows up to 4 km from the vent.
Over in Hawai`i, activity at Kilauea continues, with the lava lake in the summit Halema`uma`u Crater and the growth of several rootless shield vents on the East Rift Zone.
Finally, light ash fall was observed around Soufriere Hills on Montserrat for the first time since February of this year - coincident with some seismicity underneath the volcano. Alert Status remains at 3 for the volcano.

eklemetti Thu, 07/08/2010 - 21:35

Rootless shield vents?

What is that? Would that be small shield volcanos never connecting to the magma-chamber or?
Feeling more stupid than ever. Could this be a topic for "Word of the Day"?

hi all can someone tell if katla ruv webcam is on live or switch off i tried codec9 windows and still not getting no images tried different codec but nothing just the web page with a blank webcam, using vista any help

look at lady E PLUME BIG

Thanks for keeping us updated!

Has a new fissure opened at Eyja? There's been a large plume for a while now...

Something has happened at E... What is up for grabs, but a 3km steam plume is a bit to large.

Could be shadow but looks like plume has got darker over last half hour, too.

Probably just shadow, the cloud is imense by now. It is a bit easier to see at the Hekla-cam. You can see the plume right above the barn.
http://www.simnet.is/jonfr500/earthquake/vefmyndeyjafjalen.html

For those of you who where sleeping when it started.
In just a few minutes the plume grew 10 times in height and about 100 times in volume, and it has now been going on for 3 hours without slowing, it is not a big burst of steam, it is an ongoing process. If I didn't know better I would say that E just decided to become Kilauea without even making a farting quake and foregoing any large tremors. I would guess that the tremors have been hidden behind all the storming during the last few days.

I think one can see it both on JÃ³ns helicorders now that one knows what to look for and here at HVO and ESK

http://hraun.vedur.is/ja/Katla2009/stodvaplott.html

I have started to see things that is impossible.
I think I just saw a couple of lava-bombs and a side vent opening up on the Thoro cam... which is impossible and probably an illusion, but what is clear is that the steam is not pure any more, definite smoke.
http://eldgos.mila.is/eyjafjallajokull-fra-thorolfsfelli/

http://www.weatherline.co.uk/cgi-app/volcanic?lang=en&am=1
web cam for lady E i have katla cam back on re installed windows media 9

Could someone take a look at this picture who is online.
EyjafjallajÃ¶kull is right above the red barn in the foreground. What is that thing to the left. Is that another plume? It couldn't be?

http://www.simnet.is/jonfr500/earthquake/vefmyndeyjafjalen.html

@Carl [10] -
Yes, you've started to see things. ;) For something to be visible at that distance (about 7 km from the cam to the shoulder, I think) it would need to be colossal. OTOH, not quite impossible: the hardened lava cracks open enough to let water in - remember the glowing insides of the FimmvÃ¶rduhals lava - and a relatively big bang might follow. There was, indeed, grayish steam for a while, but the sun is just on the opposite side, so anything, especially in the shadow of the other clouds, looks gray.

I just saw a helo up GigjÃ¶kull - now they are doing the check we just talked about. Did they read us?

the link above has 2 letters missing sorry
http://www.weatheronline.co.uk/cgi-app/volcanic?LANG=en&cam=1
maybe this will help

Or I could be seeing things, too. Anyway, something white up there, moving pretty fast horizontally.

@Carl [12] -
I think that nuke cloud is a nasty weather system - at least I hope it is, 'cause otherwise it's deep s*t.

I guess that a 3 kilometre steam-plume had them racing to have a look. You missed it Kultsi, it was rather spectacular seeing it develop. The Heklubyggd camera is very good for some lazy trigonometry in the morning:)

I would hazard a guess, we will have an update later today from Vedhurstofa Islands.

You can still see it, it is the thing right behind the red barn (swedish "lada"), the thing to the left that looks like a huge plume is probably just a cloud.
http://www.simnet.is/jonfr500/earthquake/vefmyndeyjafjalen.html

i can see white dots down moving to the bottom left of porol cam

@leon [15] -

What ARE you trying to accomplish? How would that map link help in anything? It's ages old, and there is no web cam in the location of the pointer in the map, not for two months, at least. I repeat: there is no web cam in that location.

Try eldgos.mila.is or www.ruv.is/katla and you'll get some pics of volcanoes in Iceland.

leons delivery-trucks, or whatever it was have driven away now. I guess that was a gang of party-goers, or take-away pizza. Â¨
Looked like thos coolish icelandic mega-trucks. Nice catch leon.

@Carl - an inside joke; I beg the others for pardon

Q "Var har Ryssen sin hÃ¶?"
A "I Lada."

@Kultsi:
Muahahaha! Had completely forgotten that one! (Sorry all, it would take half a day to explain that joke)

Something good came out of leons link, this movie really put the original Eyja eruption into proportion. Best photage I've seen sofar of the eruption.
http://www.weatheronline.co.uk/cgi-app/video?LANG=en&ID=54

Useles math excercise warning (Public health)

I just calculated that during Laki-eruption the average sinkage of Iceland was 2 decimtres. If we then take into acount that Iceland is 60 metres above average earth height and then imagine what would happen if all of that was released in a volcanic eruption, then that would release 5250 kubic kilometres of lava.
Why I should never have a friday off and no bear at home.

Mag 5.2 Quake adjacent to KrakaTau in Indonesia in the last hour. Now, there will be an interesting subject if some activity sparks up there.

@Carl, nice job! Good final product, an Eyja-main-eruption tutorial....

@Kultsi #22: Heh. Good'yin. For the Nordically-challenged, Lada is not only the Swedish word for 'barn', but also a Russian car make. Thus, "Where does a Russian keep his hay?" "In the Lada." gets a Swede grinning.

Aside: HeklubyggÃ° is a summerhouse village.

Waving at thorolfsfell camera. Guess some volcanologist up there, or tourists that are in luck.

@20 yes its old new but click onto it and click web cam then you get what i mean

Shame the clouds are closing in :( not stopping the party at Thoro cam tho!

Two interesting links for people who are interested in old earthquakes:
Graphical view: hraun.vedur.is/ja/viku/2010/vika_26/index.html#mark
table view: hraun.vedur.is/ja/viku/2010/vika_26/listi
You can change year and week in the URL and go back to 1996 this way.

@leon #29: No worries. It's the apron cam in MÃºlakot. I usually go to this page to check it: www.mulakot.net/myndavelar.html

Did they just steal the camera???
Must be german souvenir-hunters... My bad...

Back on and something is coming over the top of the glacier...

@32 lol its ok yeah my link is link to your link which i only just realized carl was asking some of us on line to check if there was a new plume eariler and thought this link could help but you got it with the main server mulakot cam

It has gone behind the white cloud now, but something was definitely flowing down over top of crest of glacier... v. strange.

Screen shots of the earlier plume in view here (scroll down through page): http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread561305/pg84#pid9180382

http://www.mulakot.net/images/myndavelar/14flugv.jpg
seems to have 2 plume's going on one at the regular location the other above the circular light spot on the side of the hill
but having been fooled by the dragon before i am a bit cautious to say for sure

Hi to all !,
Just got back from getting some provisions in and whats been going on !!! Carl,reading your posts from the last two hours,I was just on Mulakot and it definately looks as if another vent has opened to the right of the main plume,big brute too ! Of course,I could be completely wrong and it may be .....just cloud.
Keep this frequency clear.
Birdseye,im glad that you did,nt throw the towel in !
Hi Helen,long time no hear !

Been concentrating on left of crater via Thoro and I wonder if there has been a "leak" down that side as seems to be steam generation there (different formation and movement to the clouds).

Now I can see the white thing Helen saw earlier just below the rim.
Looks like a rather oddly placed fumarole.

G'day Adrian :)

2am here but I'm loathed to leave the screen - shame hubby won't allow the lappy in bed LOL

Not sure about the other vent, but something's going on - although no tremors or quakes to suggest movement of magma etc. Hopefully by the time I awake there will be more info.

@41 Carl - I'm certain it's steam now... it's constant and unmoving in location. I thought it might have been cloud hanging / rising from the crevice there but now I'm sure it's steam

It appears to be descending? Or do I need sleep?

its is a 2nd steam plume i think

@Helen:
It is definitly steam, not cloud. And I think it is descending slowly. And there looks like another fumarolic thingamabit quite far down.
There was two like that up on the right side earlier today.

Has already anyone mentioned, that there seems to bee a shift in earthquake activity towards Katla in the recent days? i'm just wondering what others think about this "develoment" or is it just some "nomal" activity?

Are we looking at same thing? I don't think it's a fumerole, too big? I am looking at the steam rising from behind the slope of the "peaked" part of the lip of the crater - to the right of centre of horizon.

@47 maybe the magma is going toward that area i dont no for sure i just a bystander who has intrests in this stuff and learning from the above

My take on what's up!

I think that a crack opened up directly under the lake.
The cracking was probably so small that it didn't really register, but I think one can see when the water hit whatever is under and hot, both on JÃ³ns helicorder and at the spike on GOD (link below). Remember that even if the crack is just one square metre 9,82+ cubic metres of water would fall down into the hot crack, and I guess the crack is larger than that. The spike at GOD would then be the initial steam explosion when the water hit.

Something like that would make steam gush forth out of every nook and cranny in the mountain I think. I wouldn't even be surprised if it started to gush steam from one of the other two open craters when the water fell down from Eyjalake.

http://hraun.vedur.is/ja/Katla2009/stodvaplott.html

@various people wondering about steam down GigjÃ¶kull -
The way the water gets splashed from the crater (or crumbling of the lava channel walls) sends periodical steaming down the lava channel in GigjÃ¶kull. Often that stops before it reaches the shoulder of the glacier (I suspect there's an obstruction that stops the flow) but every now and then some of the water flows as far as approximately about 600 meters from the split rock.

It appears that the lava (solidified on the outside) is still plenty hot enough to steam away most of the water escaping the crater lake.

I don't know what's going on at the moment; the steaming, however, is very vigorous in the crater area and the uppermost part of the lava channel. Steaming downslope, however, is fairly recent and has been going on for about two hours at the time of writing this - that kind of steaming is not a new phenomenon, so don't get your britches in a twist because of it.

@Kultsi:
I guess it would take the bravery of a Finn to actually wear britches:)
I agree with you, I guess this is not enough excitement to put on a bungy-rope and shout cawabungah at;)

EyjafjallajÃ¶kull frÃ¡ Hvolsvelli far right side has huge white cloud or steam rising really fast

No twisted britches here :) - as I thought, steam, off to bed, hope she behaves overnight!

Hello, perhaps you wanted to see 'E' steaming quietly this morning? Click here!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvNtBxLQP8g
But if you want to see yesterday's storm clouds, click here!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1J9aoLDbCo

It would seem that Taal remains at Level 2

My appologies for Google Translate's (Tagalog?) unintended humor :-|

Taal Volcano, is still alert level 2
Posted: 11:52 AM 07/09/2010 Posted: 07/09/2010 11:52 AM

Defined by the Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (PHIVOLCS) in alert level 2 still Taal Volcano in Batangas even naitatalang shaking down around it.

PHIVOLCS Director Renato said Solidum continue to expand the bubbling activity on the lake with a recorded temperature of 34 degrees Centigrade.

Still heating the main crater and tumitindi more swelling of the volcano so that means you still aalburuto Taal Volcano.

In the past night, five volcanic quake recorded compared to yesterday but only two can mean a lower level of warning for them not only pinagbabasehan.

PHIVOLCS reminded of taboo still go to the main crater of Taal Volcano. Despite this, said Jing Segismundo, Public Information Officer of Batangas, the most evacuee, who going home to their home but also allegedly prepared the Provincial Disaster Coordinating Council (PDCC) in case required

Google translation of http://www.dzmm.com.ph/tabid/82/Article/10101/Taal-Volcano-nasa-alert-l…

@#56 Hi Raving,
Two points,(1)So Taal remains classified as Level Two and
(2)Im going to write a programme to translate
Google Translator......
Meanwhile,there are far too many clouds cunningly disguised as Volcanic plumes at Eyja.Hopefully,sigh,the cloud will clear.
Kultsi;I love your words of calm and objectivity in the face of,albeit,intelligent speculation.Thank you.
As for "twisted britches",I hope that the IMO have'nt been caught with their britches round there ankles....

On the live Katla website there is steam rising far off just left of the center of the screen. Here is the link,
http://www.ruv.is/katla/

Why is it I wonder..that every time I log on and see reports of new dramatic plumes from Eyja, I check the webcams and see only weather clouds (and maybe a wispy steam plume just above the crater lip)?

For those who didn't see it, a nice Hvol view of plume at http://www.ruv.is/frett/gufustrokur-ur-eyjafjallajokli along with Icelandic text available in english at Iceland Review, where I found the link. Also a Thorocam pic around 22:30 last night (cam time) showing steam picking up, a 'bump' in the cloud. http://yfrog.com/5dpicture12eyxp

@Mike don, it is probably the same reason it happens to me. I live in CA and I am late getting to the computer because I am still asleep! LOL

@Carl, #1, a rootless shield is caused by lava breaking out of a tube and flowing on top. If it keeps flowing on the top, it will form a shield and sometimes the lave will pool and form a lava lake on top of the shield. It will over-flow and that helps build up the shield. The reason it is called a rootless shield is because it does not come from a vent, but rather from a break in the tube system.

I hope this helps. I know Erik can provide a more in-depth explaination and he probaby will evenutally. Lots of things to discover here.

@Birdseye, glad you stayed around. I would have missed you!

Thanks for posting the pictures. It helped me to see what everybody was talking about earlier. I have to rememeber what time the posts were made about seeing what is happening because it is usually gone by the time I get online. Oh well...

Umm, I must be tired.Thanks birdseye for the "heads-up" re the ruv.is link.It got me thinking and I found this http://grapevine.is/Home/ReadArticle/Steam-rises-from-Eyjafjallajokull
Looks as if you were spot-on Kultsi.May'be they do read what we say lol.

@Birdseye [60] -

Heh. I like it better the way I got it from the Icelandic text, "...a lot of water in the kettle and the heat under..."

Of course, the words could be what are called "false friends", i.e. apparent cognates when they are not.

Ditto Mike Don

Too much weather to see anything conclusive.

Been watching these cams for months...look too long and stuff moves and mirages happen. We could watch these Icelandic cams for many years before the next VEI 4 eruption happens.

@Renato, #13 on the last thread, nooooo I have not been to Venice, LOL. I have this brain that sometimes goes against me when I am trying to remember a name, LOL. Sorry about that. :-}

@Birdseye [60] -

I looked at the pic at your link, http://yfrog.com/5dpicture12eyxp - and I got pissed off: why don't we get the same quality of feed? Look at that pic, sharp as a razor; not the pixel mush we are forced to look at!

Eruptions blog Volcano Word of the Day:

Rootless Shield
USGS definition
Rootless Shields are not a Gang of Nomadic Warriors
volcanoes.usgs.gov/images/pglossary/rootless.php
hvo.wr.usgs.gov/volcanowatch/2008/08_01_24.html

@Kultsi 67 - that was my screenshot - I don't look at the cams full-screen - and some times of day are definitely better than others,(once the sun comes around around and goes low in the sky, for instance) plus for once there wasn't any cloud or dust or fog!
@Adrian, DianeNCa, thanks. Couldn't not keep checking on the family, at least.

@Birdsyey [69] -

Well, the time of the screen capture is one of those when I prefer sleeping - midnight in Iceland is 3 am here.

I agree that the pic quality is very much a function of the available light - but I'd wish for more Kodak moments for me.

@#69 Hi birdseye,
Your more than welcome.Im glad your still here and Thank You for your comment.Friendship,even like this,means a helluva lot !
@#70 Kultsi,
Reminds me of a song.I want my,I want my,I want my Vodacam.
It's ok,im going back under my rock now...

@Adrian [71] -
lol! And how many of us have not been seeing things on the Vodacam? (The original was banned 'cause it was thought to promote hallucinogens.)

@#72 Kultsi,
Woops,I did'nt know that.Well,now that I have recovered my sensibility (sanity)I will see you on the new thread,'Bye.

@#55 Hi d9trotterdam,
Fascinating time-lapse as per usual.Thanks for those two,especially the one from today,Cheers !

Well, I've been so blasted busy I seem to miss all the fun. And of course as I am now getting ready to fly to England I come in here and find EyjafjallajÃ¶kull causing a little fuss. Guess as long as I only see white on the cams I'll be fine. At the very least, if things start kicking up and I get detoured, it can wait until my flight and I get stuck in Iceland so I could see things first hand. Wife kind of likes the idea. :)

@Adrian #71: That's the way to do it!

Screenshots for nothing and those pix for free!

Too right Reynir,there has to be a little humour at times !

Good points. I will require a bit of time to toy with this job.

love your blog, however it is obvious to me that to eliminate the

Warriors Against Claptrap

dblum — Tue, 06 Jul 2010 03:52:35 +0000

Warriors Against Claptrap

A couple days ago I received this note:

"There was an article in the Huffington Post not long ago about an extreme worst case scenario with the oil spill - that a giant methane bubble bursts through the sea floor, ignites, causes a huge supersonic tsunami that would wipe out all of Florida, followed by a vaporization tsunami.

I've heard this described as "disaster porn", and certainly, the scenario smacks of it. But, there have been extreme natural disasters in the past, and not being a geologist, I can't help but feel some alarm at this, as I'm currently a resident of Tampa. I have been trying to get a sense of the validity of these fears, but nearly everything I see only states that these are fears citing this article, and does not provide an in-depth critique of it. Could you or a well-informed colleague comment on this?"

A little quick research showed the epic-methane-disaster-theory to be spreading across the internet, blog to blog, in something of a viral fashion. Or at least a hyperbolic one, , if I go by titles such as "How the Ultimate BP-Gulf Oil Disaster Could Kill Millions." And posts such as "All Gulf residents LEAVE NOW."

If you look at these posts - and I'll start with the ridiculous one on Huffington Post - you'll notice that there's lots of references to "some geologists" warning of the risk, without providing any names of said geologists. There are so-called references at the bottom but if click on the one for "methane driven oceanic eruptions and mass extinctions" I only get an error message. And if I do further research on the subject I find a speculative scenario that doesn't any way resemble the current situation - it requires a body of water saturated with methane and then a handy asteroid event to ignite it.

Now granted, that reputable scientists have been saying from the beginning that the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is also a massive methane leak. But the concerns related to that don't seem to be of the asteroid-ignited-explosion variety. I find instead worries about chemical reactions leading to depletion of oxygen and, thus, the creation of major dead zones. But none of this is direct response to the millions dead in the Gulf scenario; I can find no evidence that U.S. scientists or scientific organizations or science agencies have made any effort to debunk this nonsense, even with sometime as basic as explaining that the geology of the Gulf sea floor is not a hollow chamber that houses bubbles but a complex network of rock and sediment layers.

Which brings me to "Warriors Against Claptrap", a session presented yesterday at the Euroscience Open Forum in Torino, Italy. ESOF is a European version of the popular science meeting hosted every year in the U.S. by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). Just to throw one more acronym into this paragraph, I've been attending as the North American board member of the World Federation of Science Journalists (WFSJ).

The warriors session is not about on the efforts of journalists like myself to debunk pseudoscience. It derives from the work of a U.K. charitable trust, Sense About Science, which has the mission of promoting "good science and evidence for the public." Scientists affiliated with this program have publicly entered controversial discussions about everything from vaccines to climate change. The claptrap session was organized by the trust's wonderfully activist program Voice of Young Science, which bands together smart, articulate and dedicated researchers early in their careers - often a time when scientists tend to be extremely cautious - who wish to make a difference in public perception of science.

Regarding the methane claptrap being circulated about the Gulf oil spill, where-oh-where are the comparable U.S. scientists? I don't know why I continue to be so naive on this subject but after I received the alarmed e-mail, I went to the obvious government science agency sites looking for some rational information on the subject that I could pass along. Figuring that if people along the Gulf coast were unnerved, our own warrior scientists would want to reassure them.

At one level, of course, this is an irresponsible internet rumor. But at another - and even a journalist like myself can get this - it's a great opportunity to educate people about the real risks - such as dead zones - about methane itself, and about the kind of research now underway to understand those dangers.

We absolutely need more warrior scientists in the U.S. Because when we hide from these confrontations, when we pretend we're too smart for the discussion, when we presume that we exist best above the fray, we concede the war to purveyors of claptrap.

(ps more about methane in the next post)

dblum Mon, 07/05/2010 - 23:52

Tags

methane bubble disaster

noaa

Sense About Science

USGS

Voice of Young Scientists

WFSJ

I'm all for 'warrior scientists' (especially with regard to climate change), but be slightly wary of 'Sense About Science'.

Although they do some good stuff, such as their work on homeopathy, and they are fronted by straight-up sorts like Simon Singh, they also have problems.

A quick look at Lobbywatch http://www.lobbywatch.org/profile1.asp?PrId=151 or Sourcewatch http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sense_About_Science shows their links to the particularly odd Living Marxism (which seemed to be far more about corporate libertarianism), via the Spiked website and the Institute of Ideas.
They hold very strong views about GM, and have very close links to the GM industry (who seem to supply most of their funding). Whatever your views on GM crops, its clear that SOS is hardly a disinterested party on the issue. A quick look at their website shows that on GM, nuclear, energy production, synthetic chemicals and food additives, you will get the company line. The list of corporate supporters is extensive and very much in keeping with this.

They might indeed be right on these issues, but look at their web page 'Energy Gap' (for instance). It declares that 'leading scientific institutions and learned societies in energy and related fields' have had a hand in putting together their report, and more information about them can be found by clicking on a link labelled 'nuclear information library'. You instantly know that this is not a group about to look at solar energy in a fair and balanced way.

They are extremely good at getting media coverage (the celeb science report being particularly effective), yet few journalists (apart from George Monbiot)wonder what their background or agenda is.

I remember the (extensive) coverage given to their climate change conference back in 2007. It all looked kosher, but yet it was apparent that the message that was being spun was that climate change coverage was guilty of exaggeration and 'Hollywoodisation'.

I think the idea of 'science warriors' is a great idea, but perhaps a little vetting might be no bad thing.

One starting point is to remember that anything posted on the Huffington Post is likely crap. If you read something there and cannot immediately verify the information independantly, it is made-up rubbish fit only for madmen (and madwomen). A good starting point is to simply never read the Huffington Post and when people tell you about things they've read there, laugh and say you have higher standards for your fiction.

Godamn it! When http://xkcd.com/748/ XKCD is no longer able to parody you, you've gone off the deep end of crazy. We were supposed to have until 2012 till the loonpocolypse

Clown George Noory of coasttocoast.com only put Richard C. Hoagland on with his magical methane dog and pony show because Noory's war on science fits in with the Limbaughs and Hanity's on the same stations.

Agreed, and I really hate it. The Huffington Post started out with such promise and I used to blog for them occasionally myself. Did one of my favorite pieces there - "Why My Dog and I No Longer Watch CNN" after CNN fired its science reporting team: http://huff.to/Yphk
But HuffPo has never had a good science editor, as far as I can tell, and now it's the weirdest mix of occasionally valid analysis and far too often not. This dopey methane bubble post is great example of the not. And my Scibling colleague, Orac, has done a great job of showing them up. My favorite was a recent post he did on raw milk: http://bit.ly/aYm3cG

Agreed. My idea of a warrior scientist has not yet been achieved. But at this point, I'd settle for just some warriors in training in the U.S. (hopefully avoiding some of the pitfalls you cited). I don't know why American scientists are so shy on these subjects but I wish they would realize that it often harms rather than helps.

Deborah, we really enjoyed your blog post â much food for thought about how Voice of Young Scienceâs approach could translate into other regions and some useful insights into how a story spreads. Also very much enjoyed meeting you at ESOF.
Mike B, Sense About Science is not part of any other organisation, formally or informally, and never has been. Simon Singh is a trustee. The climate publication you refer to was written and presented by leading meteorologists and climatologists, including several who had chaired sections of the IPCC. SAS has never received funding from the âGM industryâ (which is of course the same industry as the âorganicâ or âconventionalâ industry), never mind âmost of its fundingâ. In the year to April 2010, the majority of our funding came from trusts and foundations, from professional and learned societies, from individual scientists and members of the public (over 1200 donations) and from research publishers. Donations from other companies were (sadly) less than 5% of our income. None of these were from agbiotech, pharmaceutical or energy companies. We would really encourage people to engage critically with the work that we do and the routes and barriers to the effectiveness of equipping the public to weigh up scientific claims in the media, policy and advertising. We work with over 4000 scientists to do this, and it is amazing what a voluntary network like that can achieve, but our resources remain tiny and stretched and we would love to see other organisations beyond Europe take up the challenge.

Thank you for responding to my email! I thought it was probably a load of nonsense, but appreciate you taking the time to look into it and comment.

This reminds me of a story I heard when Three Mile Island was happening, that a reporter asked a scientist/engineer what was the âworst thing that could possibly happenâ.

The person replied that the water level could drop, the fuel could become uncovered, the fuel could then melt down into a puddle and become hyper-critical and release enough energy to blow up and rupture the reactor vessel and breech the containment building, releasing the entire core's worth of radioactivity into the atmosphere, and then at that precise moment, a tornado could be passing by and could pick up that radioactivity and then travel up the Eastern seaboard dropping the precise lethal doses in the highest populated cities along the way.

The reporter was listening with eager glee, until the bit about the tornado, which the reporter knew was unlikely in the extreme and then got angry at the scientist/researcher for talking credulously about such an unlikely prospect. The scientist/engineer replied that you didn't ask about likelihood, you only asked about the âworst thing that could possibly happenâ.

I have noticed this problem for some time among academics. Tenure is granted to those who write articles and monographs with an audience of colleagues in mind. They split hairs on the finer points. This, of course, is valuable. However, judging from the three institutions I have worked at, academics are often hesitant to condescend and address more pedestrian challenges.

I saw this first-hand while trying to convince a few academics of the value of addressing the pseudohistorian, David Barton. They tended to disregard this uninitiated dolt as irrelevant. The problem is that Barton has influenced many prominent national politicians as well as the school board of Texas.

In the same way, while scientists cannot run around dousing every spark, they should address those that have developed into full-blown infernos. Their rarefied work will be less and less relevant, and frankly, in danger of the loss of funding, if they cannot convince the public that they offer the best methods of discovering truths. They must deign to address the public, or someone else will fill the vacuum. We have all felt the effects of scientific illiteracy coupled with political power.

You can breath a sigh of relief because, no, the Gulf of Mexico will not explode.If methane gas manages to make it all the way to the surface of the ocean, it could certainly cause an explosion in the atmosphere (which is what actually did happen), but not in the water or in the rock formation. There is no oxygen gas there.

It is always good to promote good public understanding of science, but you have to remember that to someone who is ignorant of basic science, whatever he ends up believing is going to be a matter of faith rather than understanding. If it comes down to deciding whether to believe some anonymous (to him) group of scientists or some movie star spouting about Scientology, more often than not he will pick the movie star. Need to recruit some "Celebrities for Science" to get anywhere, I think.

I checked the density of methane and of air and methane is lighter. A vast bubble of methane, or a cluster of smaller bubbles might displace a significant amount of water, but the bubble(s) would rise rapidly into the atmosphere. There might be a tsunami effect but the bubble(s) would effect global warming more than anything else.

Thanks for following up - I had big plans to do more on methane and then got distracted by the recent kerfuffle (love that word) at Sb. And you are so right - the best analyses I've seen raise the global climate change issue as a far more legitimate concern.

Speaking as a geologist, I find this methane bubble scenario highly unlikely. I honestly don't think it is possible to almost instantaneously release that much methane in a single whallop and somehow ignite it when it makes it to the surface. The energy needed to ignite the methane would come from where? And there are oil wells that are active all over the deep sea floor of the Gulf of Mexico, and they haven't released these dreaded "giant methane bubbles" to wipe out California? This sort of nonsense is the equivalent of being concerned about an asteroid hitting Yellowstone, causing a giant "supervolcanic" eruption during an extinction-level impact. How this sort of stuff ever makes it into the news is beyond me - and no respectable geologist I know what ever support such an scenario saying that "anything is possible".

I get questions about outlandish volcanic scenarios all the time and I try my best to remind people about scientific reality, probability and that the planet is not run by Michael Bay. And if you're looking for reasonable geologists, you just need to pick up the phone and call one - not every question can be answered on the USGS website, especially when crazy scenarios get spread over the web.

If we do not yet have warrior scientists, then at least Orac should be considered the archtype for cloning.

Oh, completely agreed. His blog on science idiocy at Huffington Post and the raw milk claims is still one of my all time favorites: http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2010/06/mercola_and_raw_milk_faddism_…

Dear Deborah,

Thank you for posting here. Sad to say, the fact is that HuffPo has an anti-science streak a mile wide, as evidenced by their support of the Vaccine-Autism conspiracy theory.

I came here because some idiot posted this story on DailyKos. Said that the tsunami would go at most 600 mph, and then called it "supersonic." Sound moves at about 800 mph, of course... Teh stupid, it burns...

The major risk of apocalypse-woo is that it takes attention off the serious ecological damage that is actually occurring. Compared to an H-bomb-sized event, the actual impacts of the BP gusher on the Gulf ecosystems and public health don't seem so bad, do they? And that is exactly the point of spreading that crap. Always ask yourself, "who benefits?"

I'm all for science warriors, but please don't waste time chasing after astrology and suchlike obvious nonsense. The real threat is the religious right, because they have political power and a hunger for more. Keyword search "dominionism" and read up. See also Bruce Wilson's stuff about this on talk2action.org , he is a subject-matter expert on this and his work is meticulous.

Didn't this meme start as a parody on XKCD? The point was that the media wanted a sensational story, so they decided to ask Michael Bay about likely outcomes.

Life initates Art, it seems.

Ah. Here's the link:
http://xkcd.com/748/

Love this.

Love this example of the problem. Laugh out loud smart. Thanks.

There is excellent ongoing discussion of these wild disaster theories at The Oil Drum:
http://www.theoildrum.com/
Their site features experts and laypersons, of many disciplines and persuasions, exploring a wide range of issues related to energy. Like ScienceBlogs, it is a model of the internet at its best.

Thank you for doing this - I keep receiving email from people panicked by this, and I was just at the "must write a post telling everyone not to flee" stage when I realized you'd usefully done it for me. Thank you.

Oy.

Sharon

Very nice I checked the density of methane and of air and methane is lighter. A vast bubble of methane, or a cluster of smaller bubbles might displace a significant amount of water, but the bubble(s) would rise rapidly into the atmosphere. There might be a tsunami effect but the bubble(s) would effect global warming more than anything else.

very nice Thank you for doing this - I keep receiving email from people panicked by this, and I was just at the "must write a post telling everyone not to flee" stage when I realized you'd usefully done it for me. Thank you.

Oy.

Sharon

One problem, methane bubbles have happened before in modern times, killing lots of people.
If you want to be " warrior scientists" then at the very least do a literature review.
Here start with this one Geology 31, 741 - 744 (2003), written 7 years ago. Read it before you all start feeling warm and fuzzy about the being good warriors of skeptical science.
What responsible person sits back, ponders the motivations, after the fact, while ignoring events might fit into scenarios that qualified people have already studied, for no other reason then they happen to be geo-physicists, writing a paper, 7 years ago. And there are other journal articles, but I'll let you guys find them, then you can figure out how methane will ignite, and the speed of an ultra sonic tsunami, ....... calculating the density of methane and such.
The most one can hope from you warriors is you stop looking for your quid pro quo.

One problem, methane bubbles have happened before in modern times, killing lots of people.

The article you reference has this title:

Methane-driven oceanic eruptions and mass extinctions

It discusses the possibility of a release of oceanic methane in anoxic basins (which the Gulf is not) and refers to the mechanism of the Lake Nyos disaster which was a carbon dioxide release that killed 1700.

So the hypothesis in this paper has nothing to do with the occurrence in Gulf, excepting that both are associated with methane.

I can find no documented fatal 'methane bubble' explosions, suggesting that you just made this up, perhaps conflating Ryskin's hypothesis with Lake Nyos. Here's a helpful hint - at least read the references you cite.

The most one can hope from you warriors is you stop looking for your quid pro quo.

This sentence does not even parse in English; are you sure your meds are up to date? Better check.

In short, don't lecture geologists about geology.

Thank you, thank you. Great answer right down the the last line.

Sorry it took me a while I'm at work running between my office and the wet lab. This is pretty entertaining.
Ok ...
Yeah that was obviously a "great answer" but none of you still have done the literature review. I'll give you "warriors" another one to check out, the Norwegian Storegga slides. I believe they happened in the last 100,000 years. It was methane not CO2. Created a tsunami, not sure if it was super sonic or not. But you warriors want to spend your time criticizing other post, rather then reading and finding the articles in the science journals for yourselves. And when I give you the article to start with, you cut and paste it into your response? Fine. The article refers to gas being released in large quantities and the feedback mechanism that will cause the methane hydrates to reinforce its release in a geological instant. The saturation levels of CH4 are pressure dependent they don't care if there in the gulf, the arctic, a great lake (clue... here is the next one to look into), or a lab. That is the mechanism that is described, and the hypothesis. And instead of a thank you, the "geologist-warrior" asks if I'm off my meds? But you still haven't looked at this with a clear and unbiased scientific mind. So if you warriors want to some how be the bastion of scientific clarity for the masses, "the warriors" against apocolypto-science (go ahead poke fun of it I made that one up) then don't be guilty of the same things you claim occur on the other posts you hold in judgment. Your just playing the other side of the same coin.
But let's not forget it was a massive CH4 bubble that destroyed BP's blow out preventer from the well head, and that's a pretty big bubble. So its not like CH4 isn't blasting things around in the gulf, and once your accept the facts of this disaster, like this had never been done before as well. That article written 7 years ago isn't something to simply say "well he wasn't describing the gulf"

I'll rephrase "The most one can hope from you warriors is you stop looking for your something for something" (your quid pro quo).

Now since the "geologist-warrior" wanted to go off topic, and I'm too immature to let this go.. the only "ologist" I have ever seen that uses the term "as an ...ologist I.... (whatever)... is the one who plays an "ologist" on TV or with the rocks in his mother's garden.
DO THE LITERATURE REVIEW before you claim you know something about this disaster.....

Jo -

A tusnami caused by a local mass slump (as is the Norwegian case) is one thing, but if your hypothesis is that this can occur in the relatively flat depths of this blowout, then you'd need a bit of evidence. And I'd also have to point out that the impact of several kilometers of ice forming and then melting is a bit greater, in geological terms, than this relatively minor - in geological terms - oil leak.

The description that is was 'a massive CH4 bubble' that started all this seems a bit deceptive as well. It was an oil well blowout; these things are a hazard of the business (which is which they has a 300 tonne blowout preventer on the well). It's just that lax regulations meant that it wasn't up to the job.

Now.. if this was happening in the depths of the Black Sea - which really is a nasty anoxic basin - there could be some unlikely-but-nasty scenarios. But as far as the GOM goes, if you want me to believe that anything worse than a few million barrels of oil being spilt (bad enough IMO) is happening, then you will have so show a plausible hypothesis.

This drives me crazy. We have a massive disaster with huge environmental devastation, where people have died, and yet we can't seem to acknowledge it for it's real severity. Instead we must fear what else *could* happen, even though we are living in a "worst case" scenario. It's as if we are not capable of remorse, but instead we are a society that only understands fear.

DO THE LITERATURE REVIEW

...in the post that offers no references or links and conflates a well-characterized landslide with TEH METHANE KILLZ TEH GULF!!!!ELEVENTY111!!!!

As Andrew pointed out, the Deepwater Horizon catastrophe was due to (among other things) failure of a blow out preventer, not a massive methane bubble.

the feedback mechanism that will cause the methane hydrates to reinforce its release in a geological instant.

So, we agree that it would be over a few thousand years and not a few thousandths of a second as the apocalyptic e-mail posits? Then why are you whining?

And then there was this:

And instead of a thank you, the "geologist-warrior" asks if I'm off my meds? But you still haven't looked at this with a clear and unbiased scientific mind. So if you warriors want to some how be the bastion of scientific clarity for the masses, "the warriors" against apocolypto-science (go ahead poke fun of it I made that one up) then don't be guilty of the same things you claim occur on the other posts you hold in judgment. Your just playing the other side of the same coin.

followed shortly by:

Now since the "geologist-warrior" wanted to go off topic, and I'm too immature to let this go.. the only "ologist" I have ever seen that uses the term "as an ...ologist I.... (whatever)... is the one who plays an "ologist" on TV or with the rocks in his mother's garden.

I thought my snarky comment stood on its own, based on your earlier words, but thank you for making me look prescient.

The only information I have on this as a layperson is having watched this documentary on the Permian extinction:

bbc horizon: The Day the Earth Nearly Died
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scm9DyAMN3g&feature=related

If I got what this docu was saying, the temperature of the earth was first raised 5 degrees C by a basaltic flow eruption (that apparently took 30,000 years to happen, so scratch the "day" in the title and replace it with 100,000 years, which is how long they think the Permian extinction actually took). The raised temperture of the earth apparently was enough to start releasing some of the methane deposits (from where I am not sure).

Also, and I can't remember the exact source I got this from, I have read that there are large (the biggest?) methane deposits locked up beneath the continental shelf off the coast of Siberia. I have read that if global warming continues to melt the permafrost in Siberia, that there may be a danger of methane release. I don't remember reading about this being an explosive event, but instead that since methane's 'greenhouse effect' is supposedly 15 times greater than CO2, the danger of this is that it causes a faster increase in the earths average temperature.

So, can you guys comment on what's accurate about the methane deposits, and what it would take to release even some of the Earth's methane, and what, realistically the effect would be (without adding in hypercanes and basaltic flows and other near-zero-probability events)?

The original post were I point to the original work from 7 years ago describes the mechanism as occurring in perhaps weeks. And yet still no one has read the article or done a literature review. I wouldn't expect a lay person to sit down and dredge through it, but surely someone here knows what a literature review is. The lay person who doesn't label scientific work as being porn or somehow flawed because they can't dredge through it, is the best we can hope for. Do your best to understand the work, email experts with your legitmate questions, they'll answer, rebuild your knowledge base so you don't have to join a warrior movement to feed your desire to know.

And for the record I find this entire event a disgusting display of greed, spin, and ignorance. The death and carnage this spill has caused infuriates me to no end.

Now back to the little bit of science we started.

The mass slump was caused by CH4 being released, which caused a tsunami in Norway. The tsunami was caused by the slide which was caused by the methane, we're splitting hairs.
The work in Geology from 7 years ago as applied in our present day scenario, raises the question will the oil field dome collapse from a rapid and accelerating release of CH4 as a result of the mechanism described in the article. There is nothing wrong with the article, it is a matter of scientific debate as to whether the conditions in the Gulf could precipitate into an event you warriors consider scientific porn. This is the debate we should be having, and if we don't have the technical expertise at least be listening to and trying to understand why it can not happen this way. Then judge.
Now the reports from BP, as to what happened to the well, was a methane bubble. So there is gaseous CH4 in large enough quantities to destroy the well head and BOP. It is a matter of opinion whether you call it a small bubble or I call it it a large bubble, let's not "split hairs" again, it was big enough to cause this event. Now the scientific jury is not out as to how large the methane bubble under the oil field dome in the Gulf is, that will be the stuff of future scientific debate and research, examined in the conference forums around the world, and in peer the reviewed journals. We should examine for our own and on our own all journal articles from years past which describe the mechanisms, which through natural causes, can create a chasm or slides, those which release stored gases in moments or years. Resulting in voids collapsing to create a tsunami of massive proportions.

I have laid out no hypothesis of my own, only defended the works I have read for myself and understood. Those of whom the "warrior" class of this forum didn't even spend the effort to investigate, before deciding the work is scientific porn, I have far too much respect for the scientific work of the science community to be so brass.

The questions are: can drilling into the dome under gulf of Mexico at its present depth and pressures create the conditions (saturation levels) for the event described in the articles, which we know can occur elsewhere in nature. Is the fracture growing, and is the escaping methane and oil blasting away enough rock and debris as to precipitate this?

I don't think working scientists of America, are shying away from being warriors they are just not into being part of a discourse that is so quick to disregard legitimate science before examining the claims, less they expose themselves to over simplifying matters, and being personally attacked for trying to have a serious scientific conversation. Not talking about whether there is a conspiracy theory driving this whole thing, not how underground methane can ignite in the absence of oxygen, not what the speed of a super sonic tsunami is, not banter about meds, not why huffingtons post is bad, not all this stuff; that has either very little to do with the original scientific work or none what's so ever. But to call oneself a member of of a warrior class sounds much more honorable. To me it just sounds like being a member of another uninformed group. A group not that into "science porn" as was stated earlier. I hope my statements don't fall completely on deaf ears. Thank you for reading my thoughts on this.
And yes I am totally guilty of being gingerly immature at times, this being a glaring example.