Scientists confirm existence of largest single volcano on Earth – Massive underwater volcano rivals biggest in solar system

Seafloor 3-D image showing size and shape of Tamu Massif
Seafloor 3-D image shows size and shape of Tamu Massif, Earth’s largest single volcano. Click for Larger Version

From the National Science Foundation newsroom:

September 6, 2013

The summer blockbuster movie Pacific Rim told a fanciful tale of giant monsters rising from the deep in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.

Now, scientists have confirmed that the northwest Pacific is home to a real-life giant of a different type: the largest single volcano yet documented on Earth.

Covering an area roughly equivalent to the British Isles or the State of New Mexico, Tamu Massif is nearly as big as the giant volcanoes of Mars, placing it among the largest in the solar system.

“This is an amazing discovery, and overturns previous conclusions that Earth cannot support the development of such giant volcanoes because it lacks a thick and rigid planetary lithosphere,” says Jamie Allan, program director in the National Science Foundation’s Division of Ocean Sciences, which funded the research.

“Much remains to be discovered about our planet,” says Allan, “with scientific drilling offering a means of observation and discovery into otherwise inaccessible parts of the Earth.”

Located about 1,000 miles east of Japan, Tamu Massif is the largest feature of Shatsky Rise, an underwater mountain range formed 145-130 million years ago by the eruption of several underwater volcanoes.

Tamu_Massif_map1
Image from Google Earth – annotated by Anthony Watts

Until now, it was unclear whether Tamu Massif was a single volcano, or a composite of many eruption points.

By integrating several sources of evidence, including core samples and data collected on board the JOIDES Resolution, scientists have confirmed that the mass of basalt that constitutes Tamu Massif did indeed erupt from a single source near the center.

The results appear today in a paper in the journal Nature Geoscience.

“Tamu Massif is the biggest single shield volcano ever discovered on Earth,” says lead paper author Will Sager of the University of Houston.

“There may be larger volcanoes, because there are bigger igneous features out there such as the Ontong Java Plateau. But we don’t know if these features are one volcano or complexes of volcanoes.”

Tamu Massif stands out among underwater volcanoes not just for its size, but also its shape.

It is low and broad, meaning that the erupted lava flows must have traveled long distances compared to most other volcanoes on Earth.

The seafloor is dotted with thousands of underwater volcanoes, or seamounts, most of which are small and steep compared to the low, broad expanse of Tamu Massif.

“It’s not high, but very wide, so the flank slopes are very gradual,” Sager explains.

“In fact, if you were standing on its flank, you would have trouble telling which way is downhill.

“We know that it is a single immense volcano constructed from massive lava flows that emanated from the center of the volcano to form a broad, shield-like shape. Before now, we didn’t know this because oceanic plateaus are huge features hidden beneath the sea. They have found a good place to hide.”

Tamu Massif covers an area of about 120,000 square miles.

By comparison, Hawaii’s Mauna Loa–the largest active volcano on Earth–is a mere 2,000 square miles, or less than 2 percent the size of Tamu Massif.

To find a worthy comparison, one must look skyward to the planet Mars, home to Olympus Mons. That giant volcano, which is visible on a clear night with a good backyard telescope, is only about 25 percent larger by volume than Tamu Massif.

A composite image of Olympus Mons on Mars, the...
A composite image of Olympus Mons on Mars, the tallest known volcano and mountain in the Solar System. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The study relies on two distinct yet complementary sources of evidence: core samples collected on Integrated Ocean Drilling Program Expedition 324, which tested plume and plate models of ocean plateau formation at Shatsky Rise in the northwest Pacific Ocean in 2009, and seismic reflection data gathered on two separate expeditions of the research vessel Marcus G. Langseth in 2010 and 2012.

The core samples, drilled from several locations on Tamu Massif, showed that thick lava flows up to 75 feet thick characterize this volcano.

Seismic data from the Langseth cruises revealed the structure of the volcano, confirming that the lava flows emanated from its summit and flowed hundreds of miles downhill into the adjacent basins.

“This finding gives us new insights about oceanic volcanism, the way in which oceanic plateaus form, and the operation of the mantle-crust system,” Sager explains.

“Volcanologists debate about the eruptive centers of what are called large igneous provinces. I think most would tell you that they probably come from multiple, distributed fissure eruptions.

“But apparently not at Tamu Massif.”

-NSF-

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

50 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Aphan
September 6, 2013 5:50 pm

MacTKnife-
It’s “inactive/dormant” as far as I can find.

Gail Combs
September 6, 2013 6:03 pm

For what it is worth. Info on ‘nearby’ mainland Asia. It has a map showing Holocene volcanoes in the area.

…. Kamchatka leads the world in the number of eruptions forming lava domes, led by repeated dome growth at Bezymianny and Shiveluch volcanoes, both of which have undergone large-scale edifice collapse producing debris avalanches in historical time. Kamchatka also has the largest number of shield volcanoes (44), mostly in the Sredinny Range on the western side of the peninsula. Many volcanoes in this range were considered to be of Holocene age due to morphology and degree of glacial modification, but later work has cast doubt on the age of these volcanoes, many of which could be of late Pleistocene age. Their Status has been downgraded in this compilation to ‘Holocene?,’ reflecting the uncertainty of their age in the absence of dated eruptions…
http://www.volcano.si.edu/region.cfm?rn=10

What I was trying to get across in my first comment is you can not take the present location as meaningful given the age. The Geologists can give us a better idea of whether or not this area was above or under water when active. However I seriously doubt it was as far underwater as it is now. I know just enough Geology to realize the earth did not look as it does now but I am no sure what it actually looked like 145-130 million years ago.
Heck it could be just the base rock left of a much larger formation although it is a bit young for that.

September 6, 2013 6:27 pm

By comparison, Hawaii’s Mauna Loa–the largest active volcano on Earth–is a mere 2,000 square miles
Guess again. Go to Google Earth. Measure baselines below sealevel where the slope meets the abyssal plain. I can easily get a triangle of 134 miles on a NW baseline and a 124 mile cross line to the Maui Channel. Conservatively, that is greater than 8,000 square miles.
I can get a convex parimeter of 450 miles, Roughly square. Divide by 4 and square. Greater than 10000 square miles.
The caveat is that I’m including all volanos on the Big Island as one volcanic massif. But I think that’s a fair comparison.

September 6, 2013 6:49 pm

The massif that the Cook Islands and Suvarov peek above water looks larger than Tamu. It could be 450×450 mi or 200,000 sq miles. And 17000 feet from base to peak.
10S 161W.
It might be a plate fragment, but with volcanic parts.

Allencic
September 6, 2013 7:50 pm

Anyone want to bet on how long it takes for someone to claim that the Tamu Massif is caused by man-made global warming?

Bill Parsons
September 6, 2013 9:11 pm

Comparison to Yellowstone caldera
Tamu Massif is 120,000 square miles, the size of New Mexico.
The Yellowstone Caldera is 1500 square miles, the size of Rhode Island.
http://thesizeofrhodeisland.blogspot.com/2010/04/yellowstone-caldera-is-size-of-rhode.html

September 6, 2013 9:58 pm

Frank “Anyone have a mechanism?” (for spreading)
Pat, try Undara lava tubes, Queensland. System covers some 55 sq km, with tubes longer than 100 km. Seems like this eruption was on fairly level ground also.

Chris Schoneveld
September 6, 2013 10:37 pm

Maybe, at the time of eruption the massif was subaerial and only later subsided to become part of the pacific ocean floor.

RoHa!
September 6, 2013 11:49 pm

Giant volcano?
We’re doomed.

phlogiston
September 7, 2013 2:14 am

Caleb on September 6, 2013 at 3:22 pm
Upon contact with the water, I imagine the topmost lava formed a crust, and a lot of the lava flowing outwards only lifted the crust. More like an intrusion than an eruption. However it must have made for hotter water, and an interesting Pacific, 130 million to 145 million years ago.Things have gotten downright boring, lately, when you think about it. (Yawn.)

Does one wish to live in interesting times (geologically)? I think not.

September 7, 2013 3:15 am

Tectonics, tectonics and tectonics
has the required power to affect great ocean currents:
the Gulf Stream and its extension in the North Atlantic, Kuroshio-Oyashio currents system in the North Pacific and the equatorial currents in the Central Pacific.
AMO – Far North Atlantic Tectonics
PDO – North Pacific
ENSO (SOI) – Central Pacific Tectonics
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/TDs.htm
and
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NoaaD.htm

Ashby Manson
September 7, 2013 6:44 am

You can’t compare the caldera of Yellowstone to the shield base of this new volcano. I drove across country and passed through Yellowstone. I began noticing what looked like volcanic soils a hundred miles before I got anywhere near the Yellowstone caldera. I suspect the tephera in the badlands may be from Yellowstone.
http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/volcanoes/yellowstone/yellowstone_sub_page_54.html

TomR,Worc,MA
September 7, 2013 6:44 am

I have often wondered when watching tv specials about “supervolcanoes” (Yellowstone, etc) they say there are 5 or so on the planet. If 75% of the surface of the earth is covered by water, wouldn’t that mean that there must be 15 or so, under the seas?
What if the earths natural state is glaciated, and every so often one of these monsters goes off and heats the oceans to the extent that it warms the atmosphere for a while.(I must admit, ten thousand years seems a bit longish) The Holocene appears to have started warmer than we are now and has been getting colder since.
Just a thought.
Another thought …………….. I like pies. ; – )

johnmarshall
September 7, 2013 7:17 am

I recon that if the lava output is great enough then the lava would progress as a series of lava tubes which would carry liquid lava for some way. What rate of flow I have no idea

Geology1
September 7, 2013 7:48 am

Whenever I see these PR releases I am remindeg of this:
http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1174

September 7, 2013 7:50 am

Whenever I see these “PR” releases I am reminded of this:
http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1174
Especially if NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC is involved.

September 7, 2013 9:17 am

I checked carefuly using GE overlay feature the second seabed map image and after measuring the area it very much looks to me the area marked by the blue rectangle (-while still twice to thrice larger than the Tamu Massif really covers there) is about 160 thousand square miles.
Even way smaler is the area showed at the first 3D projection image – about 80 thousand square miles.
So to me a claim the “single volcano” Tamu Massif covers an area of 120 thousand square miles looks quite exorbitant and more like an overblown marketing of the research than a serious claim with sufficient scientific exactness, not speaking that to use such number for a comparison with the real volcano gigant Olympus Mons on Mars and compare the “25 percent” smaller Tamu Massive area explicitly to New Mexico area is quite weird, because although way higher and massiver than Tamu the Olympus Mons covers an area of not more than 100 thousand square miles (as anybody can check with Google Mars using elevation data there) which is an area smaller than Colorado.
A to-scale-picture how Tamu looks overlaid by Olympus Mons (its ~1000 meters elevation above Mars datum shape).
To help the comparison even more: in case the Olympus Mons would be there instead of the Tamu Massive, it would stick high out of the ocean all the way up to the stratosphere, still being almost twice as high than Mount Everest.

September 7, 2013 10:51 am

Pat – You’d probably get a bubbly glassy surface layer – like pumice – which would be a great insulator, the lava would stay liquid and flow freely underneath. It would be very similar to an “aa” flow on the surface, just with a different type of crust.

September 7, 2013 11:09 am

Now will warmistas stop saying that Prof Ian Plimer is wrong when he says at least 80% of volcanoes are under the sea and generate vast quantities of CO2 dwarfing any human emissions. PLIMER IS RIGHT!! (Monbiot call your office).

Steve from Rockwood
September 7, 2013 2:37 pm

Gary Pearse says:
September 6, 2013 at 4:19 pm
————————————————-
Gary. Google komatiite rock and also check out some of the world’s komatiite nickel deposits including Raglan in Quebec, Canada. The Raglan horizon is over 100 km long and several hundred meters deep. It is basically a sill that was once flat and is now situated sub-vertical (due to tectonic movement). I’m not a geologist but I recall these things form as pools of molten sulphide on the surface of the ocean-bottom with the top-most layer quenching to glass and insulting the under-lying magma which is quite liquid and will flow great distances under pressure. In some places the flowing magma gouges out rivers and heavy elements (such as nickel-copper sulphide) sink to the bottom forming future mines. There is a progression of disseminated to net-textured to massive sulphide (from top to bottom) which is an easy marker for determining which way was up.

richardscourtney
September 7, 2013 3:12 pm

Philip Foster (Revd):
At September 7, 2013 at 11:09 am you say

Now will warmistas stop saying that Prof Ian Plimer is wrong when he says at least 80% of volcanoes are under the sea and generate vast quantities of CO2 dwarfing any human emissions. PLIMER IS RIGHT!! (Monbiot call your office).

Assuming Plimer is right that “at least 80% of volcanoes are under the sea” then they could be responsible for the recent rise in atmospheric CO2 but NOT because they emit CO2. Almost all the CO2 circulating in the carbon cycle is already in the deep ocean.
The pH of the ocean surface layer varies so much in space and in time that there is no possibility of detecting an average pH change of 0.1 in ocean surface layer (because the change is so small).
It is very, very unlikely that CO2 could induce a pH change of 0.1 in the ocean surface layer because of the carbonate buffer. But an injection of additional sulphur ions into the ocean surface layer could do it.
A change of only 0.1 in the average pH of the ocean surface layer would alter the equilibrium between atmospheric CO2 and oceanic CO2 concentrations to induce a rise in atmospheric CO2 which would be greater than the claimed rise from 280 ppmv to ~400 ppmv since the industrial revolution. Such a pH change could be (but probably is not) a result in variation of sulphur emission from volcanoes beneath the sea followed by the sulphur taking centuries before the thermohaline circulation conveys it to the ocean surface layer.
Volcanism is not constant. Variation in sulphur release from undersea volcanism could be responsible for ALL the recent rise in atmospheric CO2. And it could be responsible for the large peak in atmospheric CO2 around 1940 indicated by Beck’s data.
This possibility has serious implications whether or not it is the cause of the observed rise in atmospheric CO2. The fact of this possibility invalidates all the ‘mass balance’ arguments for an anthropogenic cause of the rise in atmospheric CO2.
Richard

Steve from Rockwood
September 7, 2013 5:50 pm

. Molten magma (containing sulphide), not molten sulphide.

AlexS
September 8, 2013 8:02 am

So only in XXI century we discover something like this?

Brian H
September 8, 2013 4:26 pm

Bill Illis says:
September 6, 2013 at 5:13 pm
It looks more to me like it a large igneous province/small chunk of continent that got left behind on the Pacific plate long ago and has slowly sunk into the mantle along with the Pacific plate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerguelen_Plateau

Looks rather similar, from 110 Mya, rose and sank 3 X, most recently 20 Mya. Thx.

Brian H
September 8, 2013 4:34 pm

richardscourtney says:
September 7, 2013 at 3:12 pm

This possibility has serious implications whether or not it is the cause of the observed rise in atmospheric CO2. The fact of this possibility invalidates all the ‘mass balance’ arguments for an anthropogenic cause of the rise in atmospheric CO2.

Geochemistry, another specialty the Jackasses of All Sciences, Masters of None have slipped up on. Quelle surprise!