Eric Worrall writes: The British and Icelandic MET offices are expressing concern about the possible effect on the climate, of a potentially enormous volcanic eruption in Iceland.
According to The Express, a UK daily newspaper;
“BRITAIN could freeze in YEARS of super-cold winters and miserable summers if the erupts, experts have warned.
Britain could face a freezing winter if the Icelandic volcano erupts Britain could face a freezing winter if the Icelandic volcano erupts.
Depending on the force of the explosion, minute particles thrust beyond the earth’s atmosphere can trigger DECADES of chaotic weather patterns.
…
The first effect could be a bitterly cold winter to arrive in weeks with thermometers plunging into minus figures and not rising long before next summer.
The Icelandic Met Office has this week warned of “strong indications of ongoing magma movement” around the volcano prompting them to raise the aviation warning to orange, the second highest and sparking fears the crater could blow at any moment.”
The Bardarbunga eruption could yet be a fizzle – the climatic damage caused by the eruption very much depends on the scale of the eruption, the amount of sulphates and ash hurled into the atmosphere, and even the direction of upper atmospheric wind patterns.
But the potential for serious disruption to the climate – and potentially severe impact on Northern Hemisphere food production, even a new year of food shortages, such as occurred in 1815, cannot be dismissed.
The only silver lining is that, since Iceland is in the far North, the southern hemisphere will be to some extent insulated against any climatic disruption – so unlike the disasters in the 1700s and 1815, it should be possible for food from the south to help mitigate the effects of Northern crop failures.
One thing for sure – Dr. Bob Carter was right, when he warned that the world is unprepared for the very real risk of global cooling.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/09/13/prof-bob-carter-warns-of-unpreparedness-for-global-cooling/
h/t IceAgeNow
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
minute particles thrust beyond the earth’s atmosphere…………aren’t those called meteorites
Nope. Meteors are extraterrestrial. A meteorite is fallen meteor. It sounds like they mean terrestrial dust that is put into orbit. This sounds absurd to me. But it is a big change to see absurd alarms about global cooling. What a bunch of yo-yos.
No, meteoroids are outside the Earth’s atmosphere. Meteors are streaks of light from meteoroids that fall into our atmosphere. Meteorites are what they become when they hit the surface of the planet, including car windows and a few heads.
The Iceland Met office announcements I’ve seen are reasonable, I think they are actually somewhat understated.
I’ll go see if I can find a better reference.
BTW, I think Bárðarbunga is going to have a caldera collapse, in fact, it’s already started, but in a peaceful way. If the 850m of ice in the caldera is penetrated by magma, it’s going to melt fast, release a lot of pressure, and trigger some awesome steam explosions. Not good for Europe.
What about meteoric water? Also known as rain, snow, etc.
By “thrust beyond the Earths atmosphere” they presumably mean “lofted above the troposphere”. Journalists are near illiterate these days.
so you guys are oblivious to sarcasm…………and missed the obvious
No. A meteorite is a solid piece of debris, from such sources as asteroids or comets, that originates in outer space and survives its impact with the Earth’s surface. This would be more like floating particulates in the troposphere / stratosphere.
I prefer to think of “meteorites” as simply other, (hopefully uninhabited) worlds, that the earth lands on periodically, in a catastrophic (for them) event.
After all, it is those other worlds that get squished, and not us.
If large asteroid impacts Earth, the explosion could eject secondary impactors- I would call these secondary impactors, when they land, meteorites. Or these rocks are going at orbital and sub-orbital velocity.
A volcano can have comparable explosive power [rarely] as large impactor, or volcano can explode so violently that it create something like as “secondary impactors”, so I would call rock which volcano ejects at sub-orbital trajectories, meteorites.
But the dust from a volcano, is being sent into the stratosphere. So dust sort of like a high altitude balloon vs rocket launch.
Or the volcanic “secondary impactor” goes into space and the dust is just going to high atmosphere.
No, they’re called Tekkites.
Tektites actually.
Yes. Check out this example of a small volcano erupting explosively:
I’m certainly impressed.
That unfortunately would make our efforts difficult for years to come. The warmists would spend the next Decade telling everyone how much Worse things will be once the cooling caused by the eruption has passed.
That would require their 100% erroneous predictions to pass well into 3 decades – how gullible do they think the rest of the world can be? They will be like the ragged doomsayer with his tattered “The end of the World is nigh” sign around his neck standing forlornly on a street corner.
Give it away snakey kidz , the jig is up.
they don’t have to convince the public, just the politicians. Phrases like ” the people are demanding action on climate change” , that sort of thing. Since this issue is close to dead last in opinion polls, I wondered who the people are they are talking about.
The warmists will say that GHG caused the eruption. And what volatiles expell an ash cloud? Why..
CO2 and H2O
I agree.
It is very important that there are no major eruptions over the next 5 to 10 years, so as not to muddy the waters. We need a clean record so that natural variation (ocean cycles, quiet sun etc) can be studied.
Yet there are so many historical instances where volcanic and tectonic events coincide with the weak phase of the Sun. From that I would say that there is a strong probability that we will witness some amount of strong natural events. It also makes sense in that if the volcano/s is strong enough, in the right location, and strikes at the right moment to impact NH temperature just prior to the onset of a quiet Sun, then these events will influence the depth of the solar grand minimum that follows.
Meanwhile, average middle-class folks freeze in the homes during harsh winters because electricity and natural gas prices double from the EPA’s War on Coal and campaign against CO2 as a hazardous pollutant? I don’t think so. Elections matter.
Fortunately, no one can control the climate, the sun, or the volcanoes. It does what it does. And mankind does what is necessary, we adapt.
Absolutely. I’ve written a brief email to the Head of Volcanoes, so please consider the next five years, at least, sorted.
Mod – do I need to add /sarc?
Auto
We STILL got time to AVERT such a GLOBAL DISASTER-SACRIFICE!!! http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/08/27/should-we-bomb-icelands-bardarbunga-volcano
Please see mine above re ‘Email to the Head of Volcanoes’.
Have a grand day.
Auto
You can counter that nonsense with “if you’re right, then think how much colder we’d be if there was less CO2.”
Exactly. They will probably blame any continuing “pause” – or possible solar-minimum-induced declines – on the volcanic action, too.
“minute particles thrust beyond the earth’s atmosphere can trigger DECADES of chaotic weather patterns.”
Oh dear, I think the messenger has mangled the message. Anything thrust beyond the Earth’s atmosphere (what are they using for a definition?) and isn’t maintaining orbital velocity is going to fall back out quickly.
The probably meant “stratosphere”, and even there, things settle out in a year or two. I think Willis says that even that doesn’t have much impact, at least he was quite dismissive of my write up about 1816 in New England.
Actually, this is the first I’ve heard of volcanic eruptions and chaotic weather patterns. I’d like to see some references. I think 1816 had a pronounced meridional flow, hence the pattern of some decently warm weather followed by a cold front and freezing weather behind it. Also, I think the storm track was displaced southward, aiding the active weather.
Oops – I meant beyond the troposphere and into the stratosphere. Aerosols in the troposphere wash out quickly, the stratosphere is the only region where aerosols settle out slowly.
We knew what you meant. And your facts are directionally correct. I have a chapter on volcanic aerosols in the satellite era in the upcoming book. Main purpose was to expose atrocious science by press release from none other than UC, home of UCAR. Busts the pause caused by volcanic aerosols thesis.
Several commenters above have mentioned the possible connection of volcanic and tectonic events, and a weaker Sun,
I believe the New Madrid earthquake occurred in 1815.
Any comments on possible relataions to solar activity?
Other volcanic eruptions have a cooling effect primarily on the following summer, and then a greatly diminishing effect through only the next few years. But this volcanic eruption will have a much longer lasting effect?:
“Depending on the force of the explosion, minute particles thrust beyond the earth’s atmosphere can trigger DECADES of chaotic weather patterns.”
Perhaps someone is hoping for a way to explain the weather not living up to certain expectations!
The eruption in 1783 lasted for 8 months and emitted 14.7 cubic km of material. Here is a good read on past eruptions from the area….http://www.wired.com/2013/06/local-and-global-impacts-1793-laki-eruption-iceland/
If only they had had this excuse in 2000.
No, no, no, volcanoes irrelevent. The only thing on earth that affects climate is CO2, I mean wait, wait, the only thing on earth that affects climate is man-made CO2. There that’s better and eveyone knows that. If they don’t know that, they probably don’t know to read or add numbers past 50.
end tag /smug
Meanwhile did Gore really build his carbon spewing mansion near the shore? If so, ain’t that all the proof we need that the sea-level rising crisis is a myth? Gore likes making money and he knows shore property values will remain at a premium into the foreseeable future or more likely til the end of mankind.
About Al Gore’s house. I think you are referring to a place in Montecito, CA that existed and was purchased for the then soon to be ex-Mrs. Gore. It is tucked nicely in the hills, not along a shore. If you have information of him building a mansion near a shore for his own use, can you provide a link. Thanks.
John you are right about the $9 Million Ocean-View Villa
…but maybe Alx was thinking about algore’s $4M condo on the shore at Fisherman’s Wharf, San Francisco.
At least we’re sure it isn’t the $2.3M mansion in Nashville with the $40K per year utility bill. Hey, that one made Snopes! http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/gorehome.asp
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/03/29/al-gore-snubs-earth-hour/
Always prefer warming over cooling, mind you if it cools we can burn what we like
Fun to speculate, but as has been noted, decades of chaotic weather (whatever that means exactly) is a stretch to say the least.
It’s possible the alarmists are setting up an excuse for the cold weather that seems to be coming. This way the IPCC warning might still seem credible
Equatorial volcanos can cause longer term climate disruption. With enough sulfur rich atmospheric material to cause a thick veil, and additional volcanic belching to keep it restocked, the normal recharge function of the solar-oceanic connection around the equatorial belt is disrupted. Then, as the disrupted less-recharged ocean circulates around the globe, there is a domino affect on weather patterns.
Curt, I meant this reply for pokerguy. Hit the wrong reply button.
Yup.
The Thing is… If future cooling of the planet is next, there have been lots of Solar explanations put forward years ahead of any volcanic forcing, this silliness need to stop. Volcanoes go off all the time, there are hundreds erupting at anytime around the planet, people are playing with several minor gas forcing scenarios to counter act and balance their own illiterate nonsense/claims, as if one gas blocks the sun and another magnifies the sun.. It’s still the sun.
The Icelandic Met office hasn’t gotten very excited yet. Their most recent status is at http://en.vedur.is/media/jar/Factsheet_Bardarbunga_20140919.pdf and says:
Their most likely scenarios are unchanged:
I’m no volcanologist, but magma from more than 10km implies more dissolved gases =’s more problems at the surface. Deeper magma flow means more extensive sourcing more heat. Corrections anyone?
Actually the composition of the magma is not dependent on the depth of the magma chamber. It is determined by other factors. There is little basis for supposing that this situation will lead to the sort of disastrous event sometimes caused by an explosive ash type of volcano
Here’s hoping that this attempt at weather forecasting proves to be as accurate as the Express’s last effort :
http://www.express.co.uk/news/nature/493781/SHOCK-WEATHER-FORECAST-Hottest-August-in-300-YEARS-on-way-as-jet-stream-BOILS-Britain
Yep, the Express has form on this. Paul Hudson’s blog has an interesting post on this , 20 Daily Express headlines predicting extreme weather, all wrong, often embarrassingly so.
If the world is heading for a cooling phase then maybe the alarmist are hoping for a mega eruption so that the volcano can be blamed for the cooling and that they and their models are in the clear
Basic Geology and plate tectonics calls into question their doomsaying. 1815 was caused by the eruption of Mount Tambora, in the Indonesia. Which is on a convergent ocean to ocean boundary between plates. This type of boundary tends to erupt the most violently. Iceland on the other hand sits over two plates moving away from each other, a divergent boundary which tend towards magma upwelling more than anything else. So just a bit of alarmism at its best.
Perhaps, but the comparison is with the nearby Laki eruption. While the current fissure eruption in the Holuhraun lava field is far smaller than Laki at this time, there is a substantial chance it will get much bigger than it is now. No one (except The Express) is speculating exactly how big it will be.
More on Laki is at http://alexandrawitze.wordpress.com/2013/06/07/laki-the-forgotten-volcano/
Laki, a massive Icelandic eruption, is believed to have caused a significant drop in temperature in 1783.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laki
Laki is thought to have put 15 cubic KM into the air over a years period, 1815 eruption of Mount Tambora put like 100 cubic km into the air all at once, the two are not even comparable. Laki was regional, Mount Tambora was world wide. Laki brought famine to Europe, Tambora brought famine to the world. Could this current volcano do a repeat of a Laki, and cause some disruption sure, though a year long eruption would give us time to figure out ways to deal with those problems. What we wont see is worldwide famine such as another mount Tambora.
If you look at the reference to Laki, one of the “regions” affected was North America – Benjamin Frankly recorded in his observations that he believed ash from Laki was the reason for the cold summer and bitter winter that year.
So I agree Laki was smaller than Tambora, but you don’t need a Tambora to produce significant problems over a large area. If Bardabunga causes a drop in food production in Europe, North America, Canada and Russia, thats a pretty big dent in global food production.
Actually LARGE fissure eruptions are extremely nasty. Read up on Laki 1783, and that was actually smallish in a longer perspective, but it is the largest fissure eruption that has occurred in historical times.
Sulfuric acid can stay in the stratosphere for longer than a year. So much so that we actually have a background continuous level of Sulfuric acid in ice cores, from which spikes tied to volcanic eruptions rise above background levels. Sulfuric acid reflects incoming solar light very well. Climate disruption is considered to be a given when these sulfur dioxide rich volcanos blow their top with a big enough bang to send sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere in large quantities where it forms sulfuric acid droplets known as a volcanic “veil”.
http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/climate.php
Therefor A volcanic eruption of that type will actually cool the planet more than it was already going to cool, see Climate Science is easy, just make it up as you go along. 🙂
Sparks, I fail to follow your comment. My comment on the volcanic veil and its known affects is not made up science. The reduction in solar insolation can be mathematically calculated and correlated with observations.
Made up science? More like misapplied science.
BTW, the lead photograph is of another volcano from 1996, see http://rses.anu.edu.au/~hrvoje/Bardarbunga.html
The caption is Gjalp subglacial eruption (3 October, 1996). Photo taken by Oddur Sigurdsson, Iceland Geological Survey. See an airplane in the photo for scale.
This is the only recent caldera photo I’ve seen, not at all like the lead photo http://earthquake-report.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Screen-Shot-2014-09-13-at-23.47.59.jpg
This looks like a great area to get some research grants. “the earth’s atmosphere can trigger DECADES of chaotic weather patterns.” Salivating! Decades!
Laki was a killer
Very interesting video – thanks for the link.
“Laki was the biggest Icelandic volcano in 1,000 years.” I don’t think there is a volcano named Laki, I think it’s the name of the village that had a front row view. The Laki eruption was a fissure eruption, much larger than the current eruption which is also, for the time being, a fissure eruption.
Most everything else in the first 15 minutes was more reasonable, though it suffers from not having video of the Laki eruption (obviously). While I won’t hazard a guess as to what the current eruption will be, I will look forward to the TV program summarizing it. As of now, air space is open around the fissure, I expect some great video is being accumulated.
I’ll watch the rest later.
The latter two thirds was fairly British-centric. I think it could have had more to say about the deaths of people and livestock in France, but it is from the BBC and England did have better records.
A couple weather notes that I would like to see more backup for. The summer of 1783 was very warm, a high pressure system further east than normal brought wind over Iceland, Scandinavia, central Europe and into England. The winter was very cold. I don’t know if that’s a typical followup after warm summers. By then the eruption was over, but the video claims SO2 made it into the stratosphere despite there seeming to be no explosive activity. It does estimate that as much SO2 was released every three days as was released in the Pinatubo eruption, so perhaps the convection alone was enough to reach well into the stratosphere.
The video didn’t report on weather changes further away, e.g. the low flow in the Nile that year.
Whatever the current unpleasantness turns into, there’s going to be a lot of stuff to watch. I think I’m happy to be on this side of the Atlantic!
Also interesting, and has brief notes about more distant effects. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeDYtj1TYOk#t=14
“. . . it should be possible for food from the south to help mitigate the effects of Northern crop failures.”
What area, or areas, in the south can replace a large percentage of the grains grown in North America?
Who will decide what population eats and what ones starve?
Who?
My guess is those with the largest number of Abrams main battle tanks…..
Africa may soon be one big Ebola quarantine zone. That leaves South America and Indo-Australia.
Sensational news reporting by The Express. The climatic effect of the Laki eruption in 1783-84 lasted until 1785 not decades. It did kill thousands of people from fluoride and sulfuric gas poisoning, famine and cold winters. Looks like Bardarbunga is one order of magnitude less powerful judging from 200-600 kg/s SO2 emissions. But volcanoes can sometimes pull a surprise like Mt. St. Helens in 1980.
It is the Daily Express. I’m just amazed that they didn’t work the death of Diana, Princess of Wales and the effect of a volcanic eruption on house prices into the piece.
What is interesting to me is the process that produces Earths (Electric Magnetic Field) EM Field, it’s the same process that produces the suns EM Field, I’m open minded of the theoretical “Solar Dynamo” reversing the suns polarity, although I haven’t been convinced this processes begins from the outside in, on the sun, manifesting on a polarity reversal that resonates to its core, this seems back to front to me. The thing about the polarity of a magnetic field is that it can move an incredible amount of mass, and in return, the mass that produces the magnetic polarity will effect the polarity of an another nearby mass with a magnetic polarity.
When you calculate the mass of the sun and the power of its EM field, it’s polarities should not be effected by the outer mass of the sun, whereby faster rotation of mass at the suns equator can not produce enough polarity to reverse the much greater mass in the interior of the sun.
Of course, as a practical analogy, a small magnet can move a large magnet, But where does that leave the issue when the sun has planets?
Also there is a fact, when magnetic polarities interact over a period they eventually degauss them selves, and on a planetary scale even “polartize” themselves, either way this process should produce energy, Tectonic, Volcanic, warming, cooling?
Get a grip!
On one of the space stations labs, I’d like to see whether a molten spinning blob of iron produces a magnetic field.
According to my friends in astronomy, Jupiter has a larger magnetic field than the sun. Maybe they are pulling my leg. However, I’ve noted on the boards, Jupiter revolves around the sun almost in sync with the sunspot activity, and the earth’s magnetic field has decreased by 10% since 1840.
Resonates? We’ve (not you and I, the others) talked about sound. Is that what you mean? I’m just asking. I have a lot more questions than answers. And since you are probably familiar, iron when heated up looses it magnetic properties. The earth’s core is supposedly iron. Which leads to something else. Both Mars and Venus had magnetic fields, they do not anymore, and Mars is more of an umbrella like in places. Interestingly both had water at one time, lots of water.
I’m sitting here reading your 5 statements, thinking about gravity.. and fluid dynamics.
Jupiter has a large core of metallic hydrogen – a strange substance which is electrically conductive, and only exists under extreme conditions. But I doubt Jupiter has a significant effect on the sun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallic_hydrogen
I’m not quoting or researching on Wikipedia….if I do I verify it. Without observing and doing experiments, you don’t know whether Jupiter has an effect on the sun, if it does, then it would almost certainly have an effect on us. And of course our little world passes it 12 times in its trip. Richard Holle put out a piece, from the boards, that tied together the movements of our moon and tornadoes. I knew about the 18.5 year complete cycle, but never thought about it in the production of tornadoes. I understood immediately what it meant because I had been thinking about it. Now, we, collectively, may know things but not how they fit. It would be just as easy to dismiss the lunar cycle not related to tornadoes until somebody sees a pattern. I’m sure that there is a lot more that we don’t know.
Thank you rishrac.
I enjoyed your comment.
Iron has nothing to do with planetary solar magnetic polarity, this idea comes from an early idea that heavier properties such as Iron are the same between earths core and it’s surface, where heavier elements such as Iron sink to a planets core, mainly of weight and composition, a Huge miscomprehension, Most elements break down under such heat and pressure for a start, and when it breaks down it is certainly denser than Iron. lmao. I’ve seen worse. (Read any text book on the planets, Neptune and Uranus apparently have rocky cores surrounded by ice. incorrect theories.. Neptune, is hot compared to Uranus etc..)
We’re talking about enormous mass and pressures, hydrogen alone can be packed dense under enormous gravity, but sticking with polarities and more importantly, “the fluidity”.
As it behaves both as a solid and as a fluid at the core of a planet or our sun. The interaction of mass and movement should reduce the strength of polarity. But we’re talking thousands of years for our sun, there is also another shorter term variability factor that the sun has related to the solar cycle.
Good job our Iron Sun man’s persona non grata around here, be having a field day!
Sparks, Are you related to Al Gore? He also mentioned the Earth’s interior was millions of degrees.
http://www.examiner.com/article/al-gore-thinks-the-earth-is-actually-hotter-than-the-sun
AlGore, “but two kilometers or so down in most places there are these incredibly hot rocks, ’cause the interior of the earth is extremely hot, several million degrees, and the crust of the earth is hot …”.
You sound like you two had the same science teachers.
When did I say that numb nuts? are you letting of steam again?
Oh I get it, You read the word “miscomprehension” and looked it up on google and seen a photo of your arch enemy Al Gore and thought we had to be related.
Is it true that Al Gore has a diploma in Maddening from Fool’s College?
Lots of nonsense in your comment. Here is how the Sun’s dynamo works: http://solarphysics.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrsp-2010-3/
Leif, are you suggesting I don’t know how the dynamo works?
The discussion or “debate” has moved on.
Sparks, your comment shows that you don’t know how the dynamo works.
Geomagnetic storms can produce over 250 nanotesla magnetic anomaly on earth’s surface. MRI machines can produce 3 tesla. Assume a volcano is 100 sq. km. in area. The MRI exerts greater magnetic force than geomagnetic storm. Put MRI on top of volcano and see if it will trigger an eruption. I don’t think so.
I know where you’re coming from, why build these “colliders” when the energy observed in them happens at much greater energies above the earth every second, why not observe that? I was told it is cheaper.
If you’re comparing an mri machine with hundreds of magnetic polarities and sensors to our sun, then this is not good at all, our sun has only two polarities. please elaborate.
The number of polarities is irrelevant. Magnetic pressure is directly proportional to B^2
magnetic field strength = B
Whether B is caused by a single magnet or thousands of magnets. We measure the effect B regardless of its cause.
It is virtually impossible to conduct controlled experiments with cosmic rays. That’s why they built the LHC
Since it is said that a single volcanic eruption can change climate abruptly and completely (albeit temporarily), I would like to ask those around here “in the know” to explain it in comparative terms to human pollution. Why does one matter and the other one doesn’t? The interest is honest.
(Paranoids and catastrophists, please stay away)
CO2 is not a pollutant and all charges laid against it have now been dismissed, volcanoes and Chinese industrial pollution are a different kettle of fish.
Volcanoes loft SO2 into the stratosphere where it can stay for a considerable time. SO2 and other poillutants in the troposphere are washed out quickly by rain. It takes a massive localized heat source to convect material into the stratosphere, a volcano can do it, but not humans (fusion bombs possibly excepted).
Volcanoes can force dust and gas beyond the tropopause by the explosive force of the eruption, plus a little convection. A good Plinian eruption can go to 50Km above the surface. Yellowstone erupted with this force on its last active period. Due another soon.
Yellowstone is [not] “due” for much of anything, certainly not a supervolcano eruption. Most of its magmatic eruptions have been relatively minor events.
lsvalgaard
September 19, 2014 at 11:44 pm
“Sparks, your comment shows that you don’t know how the dynamo works.”
That would be your problem Leif. how does perpetual motion work on a star?
It’s not Perpetual Motion as stars eventually either run out of fuel and go dark or become unstable and explode.
Think of a campfire as an analogy, either it runs out of wood and goes out, or it escapes and causes a forest fire and continues to burn until all the available fuel is gone.
A campfire doesn’t have rotating magnetic poles interacting with it’s own EM field. The “Perpetual” reference was about the suns magnetic field reversal not it’s source of energy. it was directed more towards Leif who would have understood it, as part of an ongoing interesting discussion.
I will point out Leif is highly regarded and knowledgeable on the subject, So my own curiosity and questions may appear daft at times, at least I ask or inquire so to speak 🙂
Is it the same as normal perpetual motion but scaled up a bit? 🙂