Guest post by Steven Goddard
The Washington Post reports today:
An undersea volcano erupts off the coast of Tonga, tossing clouds of smoke, steam and ash thousands of feet (meters) into the sky above the South Pacific ocean, Tuesday, March 17, 2009. The eruption was at sea about 6 miles (10 kilometers) from the southwest coast of the main island of Tongatapu an area where up to 36 undersea volcanoes are clustered
Besides the unusual feet to meters conversion in the quote above, I found it interesting because the SST maps show a warm anomaly in that region, and extending off to the east. Is that anomaly a result or coincidence?
http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sst_anom.html
How much influence do volcanoes have on local climates?
We know that the Antarctic Peninsula (advertised as the fastest warming place on the planet) is a volcanic chain which has seen recent activity.
Noted Antarctic expert Eric Steig tells us that Volcanoes under the ice can’t affect climate on the surface, 2 miles above! This is indeed true and interesting, because CO2 on the surface reportedly can affect the melting of the basal ice, two miles below.
According to some of the best AGW minds, increases of 0.0001 atmospheric CO2 concentration may be more powerful at affecting localized micro-climates than are 2000 degree volcanoes.
In another volcanically active area, the Gakkel Ridge, which was shown to have eruptions last year, the possibility also exists for localized warming. Here is a schematic of the Gakkel Ridge sea floor:
However in that case there is the claim by oceanographic experts that it is impossible for the sea ice above to be affected due to stratifed water layers and thus making the released heat “unable to communicate” to the surface.
Perhaps that is true, but does that stratification remain in a steady state? And is such an inability to “communicate” heat from the depths a feature of our oceans globally?
What is that anomaly to the east of Argentina?
I don’t know, but it has been a persistent feature of the SST anomaly map for about the last 2 years that I have noticed.
Generally, its less than1,000Ks across and centered at or near the mouth of the River Plate.
Currently, its somewhat larger and centered further east.
It might result from freshwater outflow from the River Plate (My guess). Although, I have no idea if there has been a large enough increase in freshwater outflows to account for this feature.
BTW, the Pacific warm anomaly is too far east to result from the current volcanic eruptions.
Strange also that in Melbourne, they’ve had two earth tremors of about 4.5+ in two weeks.
Smokey,
From your source….
Hence, the ‘count’ is essentially an unknown. It is good that they made a distinction of physical height. Some are counting, in the millions, every little vent in the ocean floor as a volcano. Greater resolution in the definition of ‘volcano’ needs to be addressed.
We both appear to have similar thought. Two thirds of the earth is covered with oceans. The oceans play a huge role in the climate. We understand very little about the oceans. Yet.. the IPCC, Gore, and Hansen pretend that they have a full understanding of the climate.
Tim Clark,
You are correct in regards to heat energy exchange. That would be the same regardless of the depth of a volcano.
mareeS (09:55:25) wrote:
“We sailed through the porphiry from the last eruption in 2006. It swept across the seas to the north islands of Fiji., But the eruption was nearer to tonga and there’s a new island forming.”
I claim the new island for the nation of Tuvalu. They’ve been shopping for a new home, don’t you know.
Nick Stokes,
What’s amazing is the emphasis on eruptions and not taking into account the heat released from continuous venting.
The Tonga-Kermadec Arc has been studied intensely over the last several years to map out the extent of the subsea geothermal system. Sea floor vents occur at depths of 500 m to 1000 m, other vents occur along the sides of cone volcanoes and caldera walls.
The vents release gases about 200 to 265 C. If 100 tonnes per day of volcanic gas are vented, you’re looking at about 1×10^11 J per day of water heating. By the way, Mount St Helens was venting about 100 tons per day of SO2 in 1983, three years after it erupted.
Assuming a 45 degree cone of influence, the sea surface area affected is PI * (depth/2)^2. Given the subsurface imagery of some of these vents and chimneys, that seems to me to be an extremely conservative estimate on the high side. See http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explorations/07fire/logs/july31/media/brothers_blacksmoker.html
The heat flux at the surface for a 100 tonne per day vent, 500m deep, and 250 deg C warmer than surrounding water will have surface heat flux of about 6 W / m^2
Something tells me the water near the surface is going to warm a heck of a lot more than 1 / 10^6 C. The South Equatorial Gyre would carry this warmed surface water in the direction of the observed anomaly.
Your assumptions and mileage may vary. Is this proof of SST anomaly being due to volcanic warming? Hardly, but it is a plausible mechanism.
“Barry L. (08:39:08) :
Underwater volcano’s could be the next hot topic.
Underwater volcanos
http://www.iceagenow.com/Ocean_Warming.htm
From a report on Hydrothermal vents, a quote:
Temperature and velocity measurements
obtained within a few centimeters of focused vent orifices yield
power outputs which range from less than 1 to nearly 100 MW,
http://www.nwra.com/resumes/pruis/Pruisetal_deepsea_2004.pdf”
What is now Lake Taupo (Pronounced Toe-pour) in New Zealand was a volcano. It still is, but submerged. The lake level rises and falls now and then with activity beneath. The lake was formed when the vocano blew itself to bits, the explosion was several times bigger than Krakatoa (Sp?) and in certain areas you can see the exposed ash layer, which is about 400mm (Maybe more) thick I think. I have pictures of it too.
Mt Tarawera errupted in in 1886 and buried, among other things, The Pink and White terraces. In fact you can get on a boat on one of the nearby lakes, sail almost right up to side of the volcano wall, and feel the heat, see and feel the steam and smell the sulphur eminating from the rock face.
You can track a line through the active volcanic regions from Tonga, right down through White Island, Taupo, Mt Tongario and Mt Ruhapeu. You can see Mt Tongariro and Mt Ruhapeu from Taupo, quite impressive when you understand how that region was formed.
Sam the Skeptic (14:03:40) : 5C with 41F
Haven’t seen the print but assume you mean they meant “five Celsius degrees” and not “five degrees Celsius” so the conversion should have yielded 9 F degrees. This is the issue of a change in temperature (a range) properly written as “n C degrees” versus an actual temperature (a point) which is written “n degrees C”.
None of that article makes much sense to me.
Part of my daily trip to and from work is via an underground arcade, which has a very large and relatively modern building on top of it. Whenever it rains, there is an area which is fenced off due to a leak. In over ten years, the source of the leak has not been found and fixed. It’s a problem with water and buildings: if there is a way for the water to get through, it will find it, notwithstanding how convoluted the path may be.
And yet the prevailing theory appears to be that heat etc from undersea or under-ice volcanoes just sort of sits there, percolating around the volcano site, not able to find a way through water or ice. Oh, and coincidently, the one area in the Antarctic which shows signs of warming is the one area experiencing volcanic activity, but the warming is caused pretty much by everything other than the volcanic activity.
Please forgive the sarcasm, but the idea of “However in that case there is the claim by oceanographic experts that it is impossible for the sea ice above to be affected due to stratified water layers and thus making the released heat “unable to communicate” to the surface” is just so remarkably dumb I couldn’t let it pass.
Pamela Gray (15:47:16) : & Smokey,
A nice follow on to what Pamela wrote is :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guyot
Guyot being the term for the flat top undersea mountain formed as you describe.
One of my favorite maps I have is a large (way bigger than I am) satellite image of the world without the water. I use a magnifying glass to explore the oceans bottoms. The volcanoes that are known, mountains, valleys, ridges, stretch marks, and cracks are all labeled. I haven’t yet explored the entire thing and I have had the map for about 6 years.
The climatic significance of this eruption is not whether it heats enough sea water to make a difference to SSTs, it is because it has the potential for a Krakatoa sized (or bigger)eruption.
The fact the volcanos peak is below sea level will make no difference* in the event a large plinian eruption occurs. It will have same cooling effect as a large land based volcanic eruption.
* Some volcanologists think that underwater volcanos produce substantially larger eruptions because large quantities of sea water are flash evaporated by the heat of the magma, substantially increasing the amount of gas in the plinian column and hence its height and volume.
And how much material and how high it is injected into the stratosphere is what matters for the climate.
Basically, these volcanologists think underwater volcanic eruptions have bigger effects on climate than land based ones.
And BTW, we have almost no data on large underwater volcanic eruptions.
I, for one, find the sst anomaly in the vicinity of Tonga to be, at the very least, suggestive.
Along the same lines, I find the anomalous warmth northeast of Svalgaard to be suggestive of underwater vulcanism. While I’m at it, I find the pool of warmth (at the center of the cold horseshoe of the negative PDO), centered roughly on the Hawaiian islands, to be suggestive of vulcanism as well.
We can make calculations to our hearts’ content about whether eruptions warm the ocean. In so doing, we risk making ourselves into human GCMs, though, I fear.
We simply don’t know, and we probably won’t for a while.
This is one of the reason’s that I was asking about earths core temperature and such. It seems reasonable that a molten core, revolving inside a revolving planet, is going to exhibit hotter and cooler spots on the globe. I’ve kinda been wondering if this is where some of the ocean anomolies get started.
Noted Antarctic expert Eric Steig tells us that Volcanoes under the ice can’t affect climate on the surface, 2 miles above! This is indeed true and interesting, because CO2 on the surface reportedly can affect the melting of the basal ice, two miles below.
Talk about a poke in the eye with a stick.
Nicely done.
Jeff L (11:31:00) :
what about the heat from the rock on the sea floor.
the heat is not just the vent.
Ric Werme (16:03:29) : Mike D. (14:42:35) :
But where dose the heat go? it is not a small amount!
Bob Tisdale (15:59:52) :
There is a huge magnetic anomaly going on there as well, a hole in the earth magnetic field.
Hell_is_like_newark (10:09:59) :
Subduction.
For everyone else, this idea that undersea volcaoes are effecting the oceans and thus climate, you can get that notion out of your head. First off, the volume of water is HUGE HUGE HUGE in the ocean. Volcanoes may have a VERY local effect on the surrounding water, but this is short lived and will have no effect on the grand scheme of things.
Additionally, you can basically assume that volcanic activity is “constant” on the long term. Sure, you have local events here and there that gets media attention, but on geologic time scales, lets call it a constant rate of volcanism for the last 50 million or so years. Sure, there are times when volcanism is more active, but the rates are slow to change and happen on huge time scales to have an appreciable difference (e.g. high rates of sea floor spreading during the break up of Pangea, and more volcanism).
One more thing, not all volcanoes are the same. The style of volcanoes you find (as well as the eruptive style) will be very different in places like Tonga or the cascades, compared to places like Iceland of Hawaii. The products, the heat flow, the amount of gasses, the topography of the volcanoes, etc are all very different. Running up the middle of all of our oceans are ridges where the oceanic plates are pulling apart. From north to south in the Atlantic there is “volcanism” and volcanoes but these volcanoes are VERY different then what we see in the pictures of this article.
For all the folks that are claiming that the ice at the poles are melting because of volcanism, I implore you to look at a picture of some of the volcanoes in the cascades. Mt. Rainer for example. Here is an “active” volcano, that is covered in thick glaciers. There is appreciable heat flow here, but the glacier is doing just fine. Also, Mt. St Helens erupted on May 18th, 1980 that left one hell of a crater. You may recall not too long ago Mt. St. Helens started erupting again. At the same time during this active eruption, the glacier in the crater was continuing to grow.
A dated story from Fox News of all places about the growing glaciers during the eruption.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,135148,00.html
Off topic but relevant is that American adults fail at science.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090312115133.htm
This in itself has ramifications for the climate change debate as well as public policy.
Ben
Pofarmer (17:31:57) :
The heat from the core has to travel through ~2900 km of mantle to reach the crust of the earth. A solid mantle which convects at a VERY VERY slow rate.
Ben
From Adolfo Giurfa (10:00:17) :
“SOLAR-PLANETARY-CLIMATE STRESS, EARTHQUAKES AND VOLCANISM”
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19900066907_1990066907.pdf
We acknowledge valuable discussion with R. W. Decker, J. E. Hansen and J. E. Sanders. Work was supported by NASA.
Our good friend James Hansen.
There are many referances in the paper to the Sun and Climate.
“A good correlation exists between the long-term smoothing of the sunspot cycle, and Greenland temperatures – with cool temperatures corresponding to long-term sunspot minima”.
I found this paper facinating.
Working from one of the “Possibly Related Posts”, I made one more link click and came up with this little jewel from CNN:
“Polar bears resort to cannibalism as Arctic ice shrinks”, Marsha Walton, CNN
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/09/23/arctic.ice/index.html
“The Arctic sea ice melt is a disaster for the polar bears,” according to Kassie Siegel, staff attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity. “They are dependent on the Arctic sea ice for all of their essential behaviors, and as the ice melts and global warming transforms the Arctic, polar bears are starving, drowning, even resorting to cannibalism because they don’t have access to their usual food sources.”…
Later… “In one documented 2004 incident in northern Alaska, a male bear broke into a female’s den and killed her.”
I can see the next headline: “Global Warming causes Domestic Violence among Polar Bears says top scientist”
Any wonder we’re skeptical of environmental journalists? Sounds like Marsha has been drinking to much Kool-Aid.
Sorry for the above which I posted to the wrong thread.
Not my students, not on my watch. My middle school kids, last year, in a self-contained class for students with behavior difficulties and other special education issues, passed the state benchmark in science. And not by a small margin. I hammered in the basics. And built in a questioning mind. I also surrounded them with large table books filled with all kinds of scientific, electrical, and mechanical information, including detailed books on the history of war planes and jets, complete with schematics. We downloaded reports on everything. They studied weather, the universe, the Earth, Saturn’s moon, the Sun, and the early beginnings of how humans discovered how to melt, mold, and mix metals. They could, if asked, explain to you how the earliest blast furnace ever found was made and how old it was. And, they could tell you what the climate is on the lee-ward side of a coast mountain range at such and such altitude, on the 45th parallel, as well as why that climate will pretty much stay the same, regardless of cold or warm swings in this or that mechanism, or who/what is pumping CO2 into the air.
If there is one thing I love about kids with behavior problems, they are very smart cookies.
And then the budget crunch came along and whacked the program out. So I am back to teaching “readin, writin, and rithmatic”.
Take a look at 1815, the “Year without a summer” or “Eighteen hundred and froze to death”. Presumably caused by the eruption of Tambora in 1815. Oh well, that was only “weather”, I suppose.
All this meaningless yammerng about “climate” when it is actual weather events that kill.
A solid mantle which convects at a VERY VERY slow rate.
Well, considering all it has is TIME. Then there’s those pesky volcanic vents.
Hell, I Don’t even have a theory, I just figure there’s GOT to be something better than a trace gas that makes up .0003% of the Atmoshpere going to .0004%.
Benjamin P,
Convective heat flow through water occurs many orders of magnitude faster than diffusive heat flow through rock. If you don’t think that an erupting volcano can put out massive amounts of heat in a very short amount of time, then perhaps you are correct that the educational system has failed badly.
Read up on Pompeii, and if you are going to discuss Mt. St Helens perhaps you should imagine yourself there on May 18, 1980, before you make nonsensical analogies. Do you remember how the Toutle River flooded? That was due to the entire Mt. St. Helens glacier melting almost instantaneously when the volcano erupted.
Earle,
No, these sea vent figures aren’t comparable. Your vent is producing about a megawatt. There are computers that generate more than that. And if the surface flux is 6 W/m2, that’s only over an area of about 1/6 of a sq km. That’s not going to show up as a SST hot spot.