Volcanologist Simon Carn is quoted by Smithsonian as saying “SO2 mass ejected was about ~2 orders of magnitude than the 1974 eruption, which had a significant stratospheric impact. “
It is well known that sulfur dioxide ejected into the stratosphere has a global cooling effect.
From NASA:
Fuego in Guatemala is one of Central America’s most active volcanoes. For years, the towering Volcán de Fuego has puffed continuously, punctuated by occasional episodes of explosive activity, big ash plumes, lava flows, and avalanche-like debris slides known as pyroclastic flows.
Just before noon on June 3, 2018, the volcano produced an explosive eruption that sent ash billowing thousands of meters into the air. A deadly mixture of ash, rock fragments, and hot gases rushed down ravines and stream channels on the sides of the volcano. Since these pyroclastic flows often move at speeds of greater than 80 kilometers (50 miles) per hour, they easily topple trees, homes, or anything else in their path. According to news reports, more than two dozen people were killed. As a precautionary measure, thousands of other people have been evacuated.
The Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite (VIIRS) on Suomi NPP acquired this image of the ash plume at 1 p.m. local time (19:00 Universal Time) on June 3, 2018, after the ash (brown) had punched through a deck of clouds. A report from the Washington Volcanic Ash Advisory Center estimated the plume’s maximum height at 15 kilometers (9 miles). Imagery from a geostationary satellite showed winds blowing the plume to the east. The eruption deposited ash on several communities surrounding the volcano, including Guatemala City, which is 70 kilometers (40 miles) to the east.
In addition to ash, the plume contains gaseous components invisible to the human eye, including sulfur dioxide (SO2). The gas can affect human health—irritating the nose and throat when breathed in—and reacts with water vapor to produce acid rain. Sulfur dioxide also can react in the atmosphere to form aerosol particles, which can contribute to outbreaks of haze and sometimes cool the climate.
Satellite sensors such as the Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS) on the Aqua satellite and the Ozone Mapping Profiler Suite (OMPS) on Suomi NPP make frequent observations of sulfur dioxide. The map above shows concentrations of sulfur dioxide in the middle troposphere at an altitude of 8 kilometers (5 miles) as detected by OMPS on June 3.
Upon seeing data collected by AIRS several hours after the eruption that showed high levels of sulfur dioxide in the upper troposphere, Michigan Tech volcanologist Simon Carn tweeted that this appeared to be the “highest sulfur dioxide loading measured in a Fuego eruption in the satellite era.”
-
References
- Discover (2018, June 4) Rocky Planet: Deadliest Eruption of 2018. Accessed June 4, 2018.
- NASA Global Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Home Page. Accessed June 4, 2018.
- Smithsonian Institution Global Volcanism Program (2018) Fuego. Accessed June 4, 2018.
- The New York Times (2018, June 4) Guatemala’s Fuego Volcano Erupts, Killing at Least 33. Accessed June 4, 2018.
- U.S. Geological Survey Pyroclastic flows move fast and destroy everything in their path. Accessed June 4, 2018.
- Volcano Discovery (2018, June 4) Fuego volcano news & eruption update. Accessed June 4, 2018.
NASA Earth Observatory images by Joshua Stevens, using VIIRS data from the Suomi National Polar-orbiting Partnership and OMPS data from the Goddard Earth Sciences Data and Information Services Center (GES DISC). Story by Adam Voiland.
In a special bulletin from 0600 on 3 June INSIVUMEH noted increased activity at Fuego. Strong explosions were accompanied by rumbling sounds, and shock waves that vibrated local structures. Dense ash plumes rose 2.3 km above the crater and drifted SW, W, NW, and N. Pyroclastic flows descended the Seca (Santa Teresa) drainage on the W flank, and possibly other drainages, though poor weather conditions prevented clear views of the summit area. Ash plumes drifted in westerly directions, causing ashfall (on roofs and cars) in Sangre de Cristo (8 km WSW) and San Pedro Yepocapa (8 km NW). By 1000 pyroclastic flows were descending the Cenizas (SSW) drainage. Ashfall was reported in additional areas including La Soledad (10 km ESE), Quisache, and the municipality of Acatenango (8 km E).
Based on information from multiple agencies, the Washington VAAC reported an ash plume rising to 9 km (30,000 ft) a.s.l. at 1130 from an explosive eruption. In a report from 1340, INSIVUMEH described large pyroclastic flows traveling down the Seca, Cenizas, Mineral, Taniluya (SW), Las Lajas (SE), and Honda (E) drainages, producing dense ash plumes that rose 6.2 km above the summit (or 32,800 ft a.s.l.). A news article stated that the pyroclastic flows traveled at least 8 km and reached temperatures of 700 degrees Celsius. Tephra and lapilli fell in areas more than 25 km away, including in La Soledad, San Miguel Dueñas (10 km NE), Alotenango, Antigua Guatemala (18 km NE), and Chimaltenango (21 km NNE). Ashfall was reported as far away as Guatemala City, 70 km E. Explosions rattled structures within 20 km of Fuego. The La Aurora International Airport closed at 1415. Eyewitness accounts described the fast-moving pyroclastic flows inundating fields people were working in, overtaking bridges, and burying homes up to their roof lines in some areas. San Miguel Los Lotes, Alotenango, and El Rodeo (10 km SSE) were the worst affected.
According to Simon Carn, satellite data analysis showed that the event produced the highest SO2 loading measured from a Fuego eruption in the satellite era (since 1978), and therefore most likely the highest since the major 1974 eruption. He went on to note that the SO2 mass was about ~2 orders of magnitude than the 1974 eruption, which had a significant stratospheric impact.
h/t to WUWT reader “johndo”
The title and the conclusions are somewhat misleading. Measured were high sulfur values in the middle and higher troposphere, but as far as the article suggests, measurements from the stratosphere are missing. And that is what it is about. In the tropics, the tropopause is much higher than in the higher latitudes, thus would have in volcanic eruption more than 10,000 meters high to have an effect on the stratosphere. But certainly a large amount of sulfur is enough in the upper troposphere to have a light and short effect on the temperatures. But certainly not a big and longer lasting.
To add to that, ocean heat content is not a good proxy for eruptions apparently, local heat content poorly correlates with eruptions though global is a slightly better correlation.
In the end it’s correlations, I used to think science was more than that, but it turns out, this makes up most the bulk of many fields of science.. ugh
A word, such as “greater,” has been omitted from two sentences containing the expression “orders of magnitude [greater] than . . .” It could, of course, be “less,” though the sense of the sentence favors “greater.”
I think “less”. The previous sentence says
“therefore most likely the highest since the major 1974 eruption”.
“According to Simon Carn, satellite data analysis ………………”
.
“He went on to note that the SO2 mass was about ~2 orders of magnitude than the 1974 eruption, which had a significant stratospheric impact. ”
.
IF……. SIMON CARN…….is………..their………….”SPOKESPERSON”
AND he can’t manage to CLEARLY ARTICULATE A SINGLE SENTENCE
without causing SO MUCH CONFUSION , then it speaks volumes about
the garbled THOUGHT PROCESSES engaged ( or not ! ) and
the poor CHOICE and QUALITY of SCIENTISTS that are involved in
informing the PUBLIC on such matters.
NO WONDER that “everyone said it took them by surprise” !
HE may well have been engaged to keep them informed ,and even
have done so , BUT in an unintelligible form.????
ANYWAY , what is 2 magnitudes either way ?
WHO CAN TELL ????????????? OBVIOUSLY NOT Simon Carn !!
Possibly Nick Stokes’ reasoning is correct ! ( or ??????? nah ! )
Possibly John M ( Beware ! ) Ware has nailed it !!?????
Anyway……..it’s a good thing that Guatemala is a LONG WAY AWAY
from me !!
Pierre DM
Give Simon a break, he is a Yopper. They leave out lots of words when they speak.
And so can Google Translate
From the “Tweet”:
“This is the highest SO2 loading measured in a #Fuego eruption in the satellite era (since 1978) & so most likely the highest since the major 1974 eruption. But the SO2 mass is a lot lower (~2 orders of mag) than the 1974 eruption, which had a significant stratospheric impact.”
It appears that Smithsonian mangled the quote, I quoted the Smithsonian article verbatim.
I wonder if the Smithsonian peer reviewed their work?
Volcanic eruptions recent enough for there to be anything near decent information on both the eruption characteristics and weather effects have a very time limited effect on weather, not more than about five years with the maximum effect being withing one to two years. That is definitely weather, not climate (average or 30 years or more) although it may effect the average of some longer period which includes it. Therefore, such volcanos de not really cause a climate shift of any significance.
It has been an observation of mine that climate and weather are one in the same.
I agree — “climate” is an abstraction, an average. The only thing real is moment to moment weather.
Exactly so. Near the equator the stratosphere starts at 18 km (59,000 feet, 11 mi). wiki As far as I can tell from the article, the emissions have not even come close to the stratosphere.
I usually get a lot of down votes when I suggest that.
Climate is the weather you expect, while the weather is what you get.
You have a small chance of predicting weather to a small degree of accuracy over very short periods.
You have no chance at all of accurately predicting future climate except in very broad terms such as ice ace or no ice age sometime in the next quarter million years or so.
I agree with that statement 100%. That is all climate really is, the weather you expect.
And never get.
The height of the tropopause over Guatemala exceeds 15,000 meters.
That graphic shows some very interesting features. For instance, there is a fairly abrupt shelf along the northern borders of Oklahoma, Texas and New Mexico, while an atmospheric cone is formed along the SE coast of Baffin Island, with the central point shown as lower than 6000 meters.
Contrast what is shown here with the photos taken from the ISS, which appear as a uniform blue atmosphere around the Earth, without distinguishing the ridged and variant heights as shown here.
Thanks for the post, ren.
This is a snapshot of today. The trops over mid and higher lats go up and down by 100s and 1000s of meters, daily, weekly, monthly etc…The tropical regions flux little but they do flux too…lower in winter, higher in summer.
Use this page. It is useful for predicting convection.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/strat_int/
I second that. Seems like this is more of a pre-emptive excuse to cover for the fact that tropospheric temps are back to their “pause” levels.
Agree. I am not seeing anything that would suggest any injection of SO2 into the stratosphere. Tropospheric SO2 gets washed out quickly.
“Volcanic Ash Advisory Center estimated the plume’s maximum height at 15 kilometers”
so 15km not 10 .
Sounds like it only just made it to tropopause. May explain why it does not seem to have spread much. Shame we need another decent stratospheric event to properly monitor it’s effects on incoming solar and stratospheric ozone.
following Mt P. the CERES data was not that reliable since it has a massive alias of the diurnal cycle due to silly assumptions about tropical cloud being roughly constant throughout the day.
Despite that I did find that the long term effect seems to be more transparent stratospheric and long term WARMING, not sim0py the short term cooling which is widely talked about.
https://climategrog.wordpress.com/2015/01/17/on-determination-of-tropical-feedbacks/
How much sulphur dioxide was introduced to the atmosphere when the Kuwaiti oil fields burned out of control for many months…did it have a measurable impact?
Volcanos that erupt have a Volcanic Explosivity Index VEI that rates how high the plume goes. If the plume does not leave the troposphere for the stratosphere, then any pollutants would get washed out by rain within weeks or months. SO2 that makes it to the stratosphere takes years to be removed. Its effect can linger with diminishing returns for 7 years. — John M Reynolds
Not pollutants floating on the sea surface.
This explosion may affect the amount of rainfall in this area.
Tropical storm over Guatemala.
Hi Sudbury,
Yours is the only comment to date on this thread about the VEI of this volcano. Good question.
Previous ratings for Fuego were ~VEI 4. What is it this time? Does anyone know yet?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volc%C3%A1n_de_Fuego
Volcano Magnitudes:
The 1982 eruption of El Chichon was VEI5.
The 1991+ eruption of Mt Pinatubo was VEI6, roughly an order of magnitude higher.
Both El Chichon and Pinatubo caused significant global cooling. A VEI4 event – typically, not so much cooling.
The scale goes up to VEI8, which is open-ended – a VEI8 volcano is going to do more than cool the planet – it’s pretty much going to ruin your day.
Best, Allan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcanic_Explosivity_Index
The frequency of VEI4 events on Earth is about 18 months.
But VEI index is not a good index of the amount of stratospheric sulfate and global weather effect. Some large VEI volcanic eruptions put very little sulfate in the stratosphere, like Mt. St. Helen.
In the present Volcán del Fuego eruption, so far it appears that there won’t be any noticeable effect on global weather.
Hi Javier,
Agree that VEI is a crude index.
Mt. St. Helen’s in 1980 was a VEI5 event – but VEI it is an exponential scale, so that is a wide order-or-magnitude range. Also, the St. Helens blast had a large horizontal component.
This chart shows data back to 1982 – when the red line falls well below the blue line, that is usually due to high levels of cooling volcanic aerosols. Too bad it does not go back to 1980.
Best, Allan
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1030751950335700&set=a.1012901982120697.1073741826.100002027142240&type=3&theater
You are correct Javier – here are Sato optical depths for 1980 to 1985:
Mt St. Helens (18May1980) and El Chichon (28Mar and 4Apr1982). Both VEI5.
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/modelforce/strataer/tau.line_2012.12.txt
Global and Hemispheric Mean Aerosol Optical Depth at 550 nm
———————————————————–
year/mon global N.Hemis S.Hemis
1980.042 0.0052 0.0052 0.0052
1980.125 0.0048 0.0048 0.0048
1980.208 0.0044 0.0044 0.0044
1980.292 0.0041 0.0041 0.0041
1980.375 0.0038 0.0038 0.0038 Mt St Helens 1980.3781
1980.458 0.0039 0.0043 0.0035
1980.542 0.0044 0.0056 0.0032
1980.625 0.0049 0.0066 0.0032
1980.708 0.0051 0.0069 0.0033
1980.792 0.0052 0.0069 0.0035
1980.875 0.0054 0.0066 0.0042
1980.958 0.0052 0.0062 0.0042
1981.042 0.0051 0.0060 0.0043
1981.125 0.0049 0.0056 0.0043
1981.208 0.0047 0.0052 0.0043
1981.292 0.0045 0.0048 0.0043
1981.375 0.0044 0.0044 0.0043
1981.458 0.0049 0.0053 0.0045
1981.542 0.0055 0.0062 0.0049
1981.625 0.0055 0.0058 0.0052
1981.708 0.0051 0.0054 0.0049
1981.792 0.0051 0.0055 0.0047
1981.875 0.0051 0.0056 0.0047
1981.958 0.0051 0.0056 0.0047
1982.042 0.0057 0.0062 0.0052
1982.125 0.0057 0.0062 0.0052
1982.208 0.0057 0.0062 0.0052 El Chichon 1982.2384 and .2575
1982.292 0.0245 0.0438 0.0051
1982.375 0.0427 0.0800 0.0054
1982.458 0.0534 0.0954 0.0114
1982.542 0.0681 0.1118 0.0245
1982.625 0.0741 0.1157 0.0325
1982.708 0.0782 0.1174 0.0390
1982.792 0.0843 0.1214 0.0472
1982.875 0.0901 0.1255 0.0548
1982.958 0.0978 0.1338 0.0618
1983.042 0.0960 0.1304 0.0615
1983.125 0.0939 0.1270 0.0607
1983.208 0.0959 0.1329 0.0590
1983.292 0.0912 0.1247 0.0577
1983.375 0.0863 0.1165 0.0561
1983.458 0.0794 0.1072 0.0516
1983.542 0.0731 0.0987 0.0475
1983.625 0.0673 0.0908 0.0437
1983.708 0.0619 0.0835 0.0403
1983.792 0.0569 0.0769 0.0370
1983.875 0.0524 0.0707 0.0341
1983.958 0.0486 0.0651 0.0322
1984.042 0.0451 0.0599 0.0303
1984.125 0.0416 0.0551 0.0281
1984.208 0.0383 0.0507 0.0258
1984.292 0.0352 0.0467 0.0238
1984.375 0.0324 0.0429 0.0219
1984.458 0.0302 0.0395 0.0208
1984.542 0.0282 0.0363 0.0200
1984.625 0.0260 0.0335 0.0184
1984.708 0.0239 0.0308 0.0170
1984.792 0.0220 0.0283 0.0156
1984.875 0.0202 0.0261 0.0144
1984.958 0.0188 0.0240 0.0136
1985.042 0.0164 0.0178 0.0150
1985.125 0.0160 0.0175 0.0144
1985.208 0.0141 0.0146 0.0135
1985.292 0.0138 0.0141 0.0135
1985.375 0.0128 0.0128 0.0129
1985.458 0.0126 0.0118 0.0133
1985.542 0.0121 0.0109 0.0133
1985.625 0.0116 0.0108 0.0124
1985.708 0.0102 0.0107 0.0098 Aaaahhhhh!
has to be one of the worst events Ive seen apart from the tsunami
poor people didnt stand a chance to get away and well over 200 dead was the latest reports i read..missing meaning dead n not managed to find pretty much in this case
It might seem callous but 200 dead is pretty mild for a nuée ardente eruption in a densely populated area like the Guatemala highlands.
The problem is that volcanic soils are very fertile, so a lot of people live high on the slopes of the Guatemalan volcanoes. Not that it is easy to avoid volcanoes in the Guatemalan highlands which are practically all volcanoes.
Let us just hope that one of the big ones around Mexico City doesn’t blow.
The only question is when.
“tty
It might seem callous but 200 dead is pretty mild for a nuée ardente eruption in a densely populated area like the Guatemala highlands.
The problem is that volcanic soils are very fertile, so a lot of people live high on the slopes of the Guatemalan volcanoes. Not that it is easy to avoid volcanoes in the Guatemalan highlands which are practically all volcanoes.
Let us just hope that one of the big ones around Mexico City doesn’t blow.”
_________________________________________________
Thanks tty – and that’s exactly the situation the municipia Napoli is in.
The city of Naples has evacuation plans for the case “vesuvius eruption”.
But how do you evacuate a city of Millions when the outgoing streats are blocked by the cars of “volcano fugitives”.
_________________________________________________
On the other hand: it’s forbidden to settle on the slopes of Vesuv.
But lavatic soil is very fertile -so illegal settlers cooperate with Mafia to settle anyway.
_________________________________________________
All the municipality can do: official “forbid settlement” – so they and executive / police after all are in no way responsible for human losses.
“The troposphere extends upwards from right above the boundary layer, and ranges in height from an average of 9 km (5.6 mi; 30,000 ft) at the poles, to 17 km (11 mi; 56,000 ft) at the Equator. ”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropopause
If the plume rose 33,000 ft, it did not make it into the stratosphere.
and don’t go knocking sluphfer too much – it’s pretty important and vital stuff.
Make yer list of plant nutrients and top 3 = NPK
There is a very long list actually but sloofer is Number 4 on that list. As attested by UK farmers trying to grow the darling of green energy advocates- RapeSeed Oil (Canola)
(Just as well made into diesel and burned, utterly toxic if eaten)
Since UK air was cleaned of power station and other industrial smut, oilseed farmers have been forced to buy truck loads of the slufper stuff (the foresters of Scandinavia took a mighty hit to their bottom lines also. And tree-line probably too)
Does it filter out yellow light and thereby deprive plants of the signal telling them to ripen? Hence why years seem to go ‘without summers’
Not a problem, Great News in fact if you eat a proper diet like humans evolved to eat. Because you won’t be eating ‘stuff that ripens’ and what you do eat (cow, sheep & pig) will be loving all the extra greenery that sloopher generates.
Ohhhhhhhhhh. Extra greenery?????
Alarm Bell sounds: Global Greening ding ding ding
What’s that all about then………….
In Indiana they are now advising farmers to test their soil Sulphur levels because levels are getting below optimum in some locations. They didn’t used to have to do that. In fact, testing for Sulphur levels is not even in the standard test battery. But what they once got for free when it rained, some must add to their fertilizer now.
Reason #5,927 for the Pause is now queued.
Exactly! 🙂
Definitely!
As I have said part of the cooling associated with prolonged solar minimums is an increase in explosive volcanic activity .
Again I maintain very low prolonged low solar activity equates to overall sea surface temperatures (due to less UV/NEAR V LIGHT), and a slightly higher albedo (due to an increase in global cloud coverage, snow coverage and explosive major volcanic activity) the result is global cooling.
Salvatore Del Prete, by what mechanism do you think that “prolonged solar minimums” cause “an increase in explosive volcanic activity”?
The ‘mechanism’ Dave Burton is electromagnetic. All seismic activity such as earthquakes and volcanic eruptions are triggered by external pressures being forced on the Earth’s magnetic field.
The stress that is put on Earth’s magnetic field begins at the ionosphere, which can be observed by the appearance of luminous phenomena very close to regions showing tectonic stress, seismic activity or soon-to-be volcanic eruptions.
The connection between prolonged minimum and maximum solar phases to large magnitude earthquakes and increased volcanic eruptions is supported by overwhelming scientific evidence that is easily found online.
There is strong statistical data which shows powerful correlations between major volcanic activity and numerous earthquakes of 8.0 magnitude or more on Richter scale to the Sun’s Grand Minimum states.
Over the last several decades scientific papers began to appear that clearly show correlations between galactic cosmic ray and low solar activity with a rise of destructive geological events like earthquakes & volcanic eruptions.
This has been supported by statistical evidence that extend back centuries.
A 1967 study published by the Earth & Planetary Science Letters discovered that solar activity plays a significant role in the triggering of earthquakes.
Then, In 1998 a scientist from the Beijing Astronomical Observatory, Chinese Academy of Science, also discovered a correlation between low solar activity and earthquakes.
Additional research by The Space & Science Research Center found direct correlation between solar activity and the largest earthquakes and volcanic eruptions within the continental United States and other regions around the world.
The study examined data of volcanic activity between 1650 – 2009 along with earthquake activity between 1700 – 2009 while utilizing solar activity data.
The findings of study said that there was very strong correlation between solar activity and the largest seismic and volcanic events – worldwide.
The correlation for volcanic activity was larger than 80 percent and 100% for the greatest magnitude earthquakes measured with Solar activity lows.
Moreover, the findings concluded that there was proof of a strong correlations between global volcanic activity among the largest of classes of eruptions and solar activity lows; with 80.6% occurrence of large scale global volcanic eruptions taking place during the Sun’s minimums and 87.5% occurring for the very largest volcanic eruptions during times of major solar minimums.
We are entering such a period of a Grand Solar Minimum with the start of solar cycle #25 – due to begin anytime between now and the year 2020.
When I forecasted back in 2006 that the world would enter global cooling just before the Sun entered its Grand Minimum and would see an ‘increase in large magnitude earthquakes and numerous volcanic eruptions, some conventional scientists derided me by saying that there was no physical mechanism.
This, despite the fact that I named that mechanism – which is electromagnetic and penetration of galactic cosmic rays into our solar system.
Then, two years later, in 2008, NASA announced that a close link between electrical disturbances on the edge of our atmosphere and impending earthquakes on the ground below has been found.
The finding fell into agreement with additional scientific studies performed by other space research institutes.
For example, orbiting satellites above the Earth picked up disturbances that were 100 to 600 kilometers above regions that have later been hit by earthquakes.
Fluctuation in the density of electrons and other electrically-charged particles in the Earth’s ionosphere have been observed, and huge signals have been detected many times before large magnitude earthquakes struck.
These are climatic events which feature seismic activity connected to atmospheric disturbances caused by celestial bodies and the Sun’s quiescent phase, which is underway.
During times when the Earth’s axis rotation slows, in concert with the Sun’s minimum output and weakened heliosphere allows cosmic rays to enter our solar system and straight into the Earth’s atmosphere.
Planetary modulation relative to the Earth and the condition of the Interplanetary Magnetic Field (IMF) of outer space where our planet lives and transits – all play significant roles.
The fluxes of cosmic and solar radiation charges the Earth’s ionosphere.
The result means a rise in anomalies of the Earth’s geomagnetic field which produces Foucault currents – also called ‘Eddy Currents.’
Eddy currents are essentially loops of electrical currents that are induced within conductors by a changing magnetic field in the conductor. This is due to Faraday’s law of induction.
Anyway, eddy currents flow in closed loops within conductors, in planes that are perpendicular to the magnetic field.
The eddy current heats the rocks inside faults as the shear resistant intensity and static friction limit of the rocks decrease.
This is the physical mechanism that trigger earthquakes and volcanic eruption, but it is an ‘effect’ of what is happening where the Earth lives – and that is in outer space.
You see, during eras of solar minimums high energy cosmic radiation can and does penetrate deep below the Earth’s surface.
It is the reason why most earthquakes that occur during solar minimum are deep earthquakes.
The stress on the Earth’s Magnetosphere during solar minimum is higher because the Sun’s Heliosphere is weaker which allows the high-energy charged particles of cosmic rays to flood into our solar system.
For instance, on average, the flux of cosmic rays is 20 percent or more – higher during solar minimums.
Over the last 250 years consider the fact that these major volcanic eruptions took place during strong solar minimum and Grand Minimums:
*Grimvotn (Iceland) 1783/84 (14 km3)
*Tambora (Indonesia) 1810 (150 km3)
*Krakatoa 1883 (5.0 km3)
*Santa Maria (Guatemala) 1902 (4.8 km3)
*Novarupta (Alaska) 1912 (3.4 km3)
[?? .mod]
Excellent explanation.
“The connection between prolonged minimum and maximum solar phases to large magnitude earthquakes and increased volcanic eruptions is supported by overwhelming scientific evidence that is easily found online.”
__________________________________________________
OK. But the internal stress on earth crust must be already built, waiting for a trigger.
Theodore White wrote, “The ‘mechanism’ Dave Burton is electromagnetic. All seismic activity such as earthquakes and volcanic eruptions are triggered by external pressures being forced on the Earth’s magnetic field.”
You could call this theory of yours “geological reflexology.” 😏
Theodore White wrote, “The connection between prolonged minimum and maximum solar phases to large magnitude earthquakes and increased volcanic eruptions is supported by overwhelming scientific evidence that is easily found online.”
I don’t doubt you can easily find that online. You can also easily find online proof that the moon landings were faked, and 9-11 was an “inside job” which used “micro nukes” to bring down the WTC Towers, because fire can’t melt steel. Or something.
Theodore White wrote, “There is strong statistical data which shows powerful correlations between major volcanic activity and numerous earthquakes of 8.0 magnitude or more on Richter scale to the Sun’s Grand Minimum states.”
“Strong?” “Powerful?”
That is wildly overstated. Some people have claimed to have found a correlation, but it certainly isn’t strong.
Here’s a list of grand solar mimina:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_minimum#Grand_solar_minima_and_maxima
Here’s a graph:
MM 1645-1715 (Maunder Minimum – strong minimum)
DM 1790-1820 (Dalton Minimum – moderate minimum)
GM 1880-1914 (Glassberg Minimum – weak minimum)
CM 2007-???? (current apparent minimum)
Here’s a list of 8.5 & larger earthquakes, starting with the largest:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_earthquakes#Largest_earthquakes_by_magnitude
(The oldest listed is in 1575.)
Here’re the years of those earthquakes, in order (largest first); the ones which occurred in or near solar minima are bolded:
1960, 1964, 2004, 2011 CM, 1952, 1868, 1700 MM, 1762, 1833, 1906 GM, 2010 CM, 1950, 1707 MM, 1730, 1755, 1965, 1746, 1787 almost DM, 1957, 2005 almost CM, 2012 CM, 1575, 1604, 1647 MM, 1751, 1822 just past DM, 1835, 1861, 1877 almost GM, 1922, 1938, 1963, 2007 early CM, 1687 MM, 1737, 1896 GM
If there’s a correation, it isn’t a strong one.
Theodore White wrote, “A 1967 study published by the Earth & Planetary Science Letters discovered that solar activity plays a significant role in the triggering of earthquakes.”
Where’s the link?
Does it say anything about “external pressures being forced on the Earth’s magnetic field”?
(Didn’t think so.)
Then, In 1998 a scientist from the Beijing Astronomical Observatory, Chinese Academy of Science, also discovered a correlation between low solar activity and earthquakes.
I think you’re talking about this:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11589-998-0096-5
https://sci-hub.tw/10.1007/s11589-998-0096-5
Piers cited it, too, in his remarkable February 21, 2011 warning to “Expect more earthquakes world-wide for next two years,” 2½ weeks before the devastating March 11, 2011 Fukushima earthquake.
Zhang reported a correlation, but nothing about “external pressures being forced on the Earth’s magnetic field.”
It seems trite to caution you that correlation is not causation.
Theodore White wrote, “Additional research by The Space & Science Research Center found direct correlation between solar activity and the largest earthquakes and volcanic eruptions within the continental United States and other regions around the world.”
Come on, where’s the link? You expect people to track down something from that sort of nebulous reference??
Does it say anything about “external pressures being forced on the Earth’s magnetic field”?
(Didn’t think so.)
Theodore White wrote, “Moreover, the findings concluded that there was proof of a strong correlations between global volcanic activity among the largest of classes of eruptions and solar activity lows; with 80.6% occurrence of large scale global volcanic eruptions taking place during the Sun’s minimums and 87.5% occurring for the very largest volcanic eruptions during times of major solar minimums.”
How did you count that? Here’re the Minima again:
MM 1645-1715 (Maunder Minimum – strong minimum)
DM 1790-1820 (Dalton Minimum – moderate minimum)
GM 1880-1914 (Glassberg Minimum – weak minimum)
CM 2007-???? (current apparent minimum)
Tambora (1815) was during the Dalton Minimum, Novarupta (1912) was at the end of the Glassberg Minimum, Krakatoa (1883) was at the beginning of the Glassberg Minimum, and Tarawera (1886) was during the Glassberg Minimum.
But Pinatubo (1991), Hudson (1991), Puyehue-Cordon Caulle (2011), El Chichon (1982), Quizapu (1932), Grímsvötn (1783), Mt St. Helens (1980) and Agung (1963) were during solar maxima.
Theodore White wrote, “Then, two years later, in 2008, NASA announced that a close link between electrical disturbances on the edge of our atmosphere and impending earthquakes on the ground below has been found.”
You know, it’s a royal PITA trying to track down your fuzzy references. But I think I found this one. It’s an article about the work of Dr. Minoru Freund:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7435324.stm
Excerpt:
Not as unequivocal as you made it sound, is it?
Tragically, Dr. Fruend was diagnosed with brain cancer the following year, and died in 2012:
https://www.legacy.com/obituaries/mercurynews/obituary.aspx?n=minoru-m-freund-mino&pid=155715873
Theodore White wrote, “The finding fell into agreement with additional scientific studies performed by other space research institutes.”
Which you can’t trouble yourself to actually cite. Sheesh.
Theodore White wrote, “During times when the Earth’s axis rotation slows…”
What does that mean?
Theodore White wrote, “Planetary modulation relative to the Earth and the condition of the Interplanetary Magnetic Field (IMF) of outer space… fluxes of cosmic and solar radiation charges the Earth’s ionosphere… The eddy current heats the rocks inside faults as the shear resistant intensity and static friction limit of the rocks decrease. This is the physical mechanism that trigger earthquakes and volcanic eruption, but it is an ‘effect’ of what is happening where the Earth lives – and that is in outer space. You see, during eras of solar minimums high energy cosmic radiation can and does penetrate deep below the Earth’s surface. It is the reason why most earthquakes that occur during solar minimum are deep earthquakes.”
Good grief. Don’t you think that if cosmic radiation and interplanetary magnetic fields were heating the earth enough to soften the rock someone might have noticed?
Sorry, this is garbage.
Theodore White wrote, “Over the last 250 years consider the fact that these major volcanic eruptions took place during strong solar minimum and Grand Minimums:
*Grimvotn (Iceland) 1783/84 (14 km3)
*Tambora (Indonesia) 1810 (150 km3)
*Krakatoa 1883 (5.0 km3)
*Santa Maria (Guatemala) 1902 (4.8 km3)
*Novarupta (Alaska) 1912 (3.4 km3)”
Tambora was. But not Grímsvötn: 1783 was not during a grand solar minimum. Novarupta & Krakatoa were at the margins of the weak Glassberg Minimum. Pinatubo (1991), Hudson (1991), Puyehue-Cordon Caulle (2011), El Chichon (1982), Quizapu (1932), Mt St. Helens (1980), and Agung (1963) were all during the modern solar maximum.
https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2011/03/12/john-l-casey-the-solar-seismic-connection/
Dave not so fast. Lok at this data.
Correction (to my comment which is in moderation):
Puyehue-Cordon Caulle (2011) was not during the solar maximum.
It has to do with an increase in galactic cosmic rays which create muons (a by product of these galactic cosmic rays) which are then able to penetrate the earth surface and excite calderas of silicon rich volcanos through the interaction of these muons with these silicon rich volcanic calderas.
Hence explosive volcanic activity increases not all volcanic activity.
Salvatore Del Prete wrote, “galactic cosmic rays… create muons… which are then able to penetrate the earth surface and excite calderas of silicon rich volcanos…”
You know, gibberish made up of sciency-sounding words is still gibberish. Do you have a cat?
Salvatore, I have once read that there is a connection between the solar cycle and earthquackes and volcanic eruptions, but have never seen any confirmation in real figures. Do you have a link for that?
https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2011/03/12/john-l-casey-the-solar-seismic-connection/
Since he doesn’t appear to be peer reviewed or published I would take his “personal theories” with a grain of salt ….
The report is dated 2011 yet it is marked “preliminary.” What’s up with that?
The author is John L Casey, and his affiliation is “Space and Science Research Center, a division of Verity Mgmt. Svcs. Inc., Orlando, Florida.”
Googling Verity Mgmt. Svcs. Inc. — it seems to be just John L Casey, and its address is his house.
Well, that doesn’t make him wrong. But…
His report lists 31 volcanic eruptions, and claims that 80.6% of them were were during solar minima. But:
1. He started with 1650, the start of the Maunder Minimum — looks like a cherry-pick.
2. By my count, fifteen (15) of his 31 volcano dates were not actually during solar minima.
That does make him wrong.
Does this mean the swamp will stop their geoengineering efforts for a while?
The reported height of the plume is 9,000 ft. which must be AGL since the summit of Fuego is at about 12,450 ft above sea level. So total height of the plume above sea level must be about 21,450 ft. above sea level. So can someone explain to me how the plume reached the tropopause at a place less than 1,100 miles from the equator where it should be over twice the height of the plume this time of year?
Ok now I see in the special bulletin that the plume reached 30,000 ft. That is still about 20,000 ft short of the height of the tropopause.
Is there no mention of the global warming CO2 villain? If so, does that mean there is none?
Surely Trump will be blamed, when they get around to that.
“This statistic displays the volume of sulfur dioxides emissions in the United States from 1970 to 2016. In 2016, there was 2.71 million tons of sulfur dioxide emissions. Sulfur dioxides is a highly reactive gases, which largely comes from fossil fuel combustion and other industrial facilities.”
https://www.statista.com/statistics/501303/volume-of-sulfur-dioxide-emissions-us/
How much sulphur was released by using black powder in WW2 ?
How much oil was released into the oceans by sunken ships ,sub’s and planes in WW2 ?
How much carbon was released from fires that burnt for months in WW2 ?
“India is on course to surpass China as the world’s largest emitter of anthropogenic sulphur dioxide (SO2) according to a study in Scientific Reports this week. The study reports that since 2007, emissions in China have declined by 75% while those in India have increased by 50%.”
https://www.natureasia.com/en/research/highlight/12261
“The main chemicals in air pollution that create acid rain are sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen (NOx). Acid rain usually forms high in the clouds where sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides react with water, oxygen, and oxidants. this mixture forms a mild solution of sulfuric acid and nitric acid.”
http://www2.gsu.edu/~mstnrhx/EnviroBio%20Projects/AcidRain/causes.html
During WW II Aruba was a major transfer point for oil coming into the US from South America. It had two of the largest oil refineries in the world at that time. Thus it was central location for U-boats preying on tankers. The island was even shelled by a U-boat in Feb 1942. First hand accounts from US sailors of the time make it clear it was what would be considered now a terrible ecological disaster area. The entire island was surrounded by a film of oil when the sea was calm even after the U-boat attacks in the area ceased. When the wind was right the sailors could smell the place long before they could see it when approaching the island at night.
For decades now it has been a favorite for divers because of it’s clear waters and abundance of marine fauna.
The situation was at least as bad off the coast of New Jersey (and elsewhere) after “Unternehmen Paukenschlag” and “Unternehmnen Neuland” in the spring of 1942.
We have indeed made great strides in reducing pollutants like SO2 and NOx as well as particulates. My career has been reducing those pollutants from fossil fired power plants.
Gary, roughcut, where do we actually stand on that? These HELE plants seem to be all the rage in Asia.
This new blogging software highlights the new posts in a different color whenever you revisit the page. I love it! This is just what the doctor ordered. It makes finding these new comments so much easier. Thanks, Anthony and coders.
The SO2 component of volcanic emission varies a lot, for unknown reasons. Same for CO2.
Isn’t –2 orders of magnitude … about ¹/₁₀₀th the amount?
I’d say that even the very statement, “Fuego injected (some number) orders of magnitude the amount of SO₂ into the atmosphere which previously caused significant stratospheric climate-impact event blah, blah, blah” is entirely mendacious when the number is NEGATIVE.
Just saying
GoatGuy
Specifically, the mendaciousness blatantly out in the open, tho’ shrouded by mathematically accurate but entirely misleading as stated jargon.
“Orders of magnitude” almost never refers to a diminution of scale.
Almost never.
99% of the time, people say things like “this is orders of magnitude more important than that”, whatever this and that are referring to.
So to use the “orders of magnitude” connotation in a small-and-difficult-for-ordinary-non-mathematical-reporters to grok … really darkly mendacious.
It is a conscious effort to mislead.
Got that?
An intentional, conscious effort to mislead. That is perhaps the definition of mendacious.
Just saying (more)…
GoatGuy
wasn’t that a tilde ~ not a minus sign – ? I was reading it as “approximately 2 orders of magnitude”….
Prediction – Global cooling will be seen for the next 2 years, and this volcano will be seized upon as the one and ONLY reason such a thing could possibly have happened.
La Reunion Golf Course on the side of the volcano. Let’s see if I’ve done this right –
That didn’t seem to work. Let’s try this:
http://www.rockyhigh66.org/stuff/Guatemala_fuego_blink.gif
The USGS didn’t post any foreshocks or eruption on their website for this one. I found that odd. Seismometers anywhere in the region should have picked this up and the only thing posted is a 4.0 EQ two days before the eruption. Talk about not having any warning.
“According to Simon Carn, satellite data analysis showed that the event produced the highest SO2 loading measured from a Fuego eruption in the satellite era (since 1978), and therefore most likely the highest since the major 1974 eruption. He went on to note that the SO2 mass was about ~2 orders of magnitude than the 1974 eruption, which had a significant stratospheric impact.”
So what was the SO2 loading in the 1974 eruption? I cannot find this anywhere. Specifically, the Smithsonian Volcanism Program website has a database listing emissions for eruptions of Fuego, and there is nothing there prior to 2005. Where does he get these numbers?
By way of comparison, the current Fuego eruption is listed as VEI 2 and the 1974 eruption is listed as VEI 4. See the Wikipedia page on VEI for stratospheric injection versus VEI — at VEI 2, three is no stratospheric injection. At VEI 3 it is “possible”. At VEI 4 (the 1974 eruption) injection is “definite”.
Fine, but now let’s compare this with something bigger: Pinatubo in 1991. That was VEI 6 (stratospheric injection “substantial”) with estimates of around 20-million metric tons of SO2 emitted. Is this guy claiming Fuego is that large? Smithsonian doesn’t think so with a listed VEI of 2 right now. How much impact on climate was there from Pinatubo’s SO2?
Finally, see this NASA animation of SO2 dispersal from Pinatubo along with the following comment:
“Stratospheric SO2 dissipates rather quickly compared to volcanic ash and stratoshperic H2SO4.”
All this seems at odds with the claims being made by Mr. (Dr?) Carn.
Forgot the link for NASA animation: https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/2181
The problem with that is that VEI is a crappy metric of what an eruption does. A mediocre continual eruption can easily reach VEI-4 or 5 and never get anywhere close to punching through the tropopause. Flood basalts are the same way. (Hello Lower Puna)
Nah…
bringing in SO2 (cooling) is the same as the CO2 nonsense (warming)
Sulfur Dioxide Surface Mass
amount of sulfur dioxide in the air near the earth’s surface
https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/chem/surface/level/overlay=so2smass/equirectangular
No the SO2 climate cooling observation is correct unlike CO2 global warming which is not correct.
The Siberian Traps, fingered as the cause of the Permian-Triassic mass extinction event, aka “The Great Dying”, c. 252 Ma, released an estimated 4000 billion tons of sulfur dioxide during their 900,000 year-long flood basalt eruption, among other pollutants.
There are newer examples where injecting a large amount of SO2 into the troposphere triggered a global winter. Examples are the Icelandic Laki eruptions 1783 to 1784, which probably did not reach the stratosphere, but probably the middle and upper troposphere. It was cloudy for months and the sun was darkened. In Britain, the average temperature during these years was so low that the crop failed. However, the low temperature was not due solely to the volcanoes, it was only about to recover from the outgoing Maunder minimum. This recovery time was quite short, soon followed by the Dalton minimum.
IMO, Europe had recovered from the Maunder in the first half of the 18th century, which enjoyed warming more rapid and longer lasting than during the late 20th century warming cycle. But that stage of the LIA was still colder than today, eg Washington crossing the icy Delaware River, and then came the Dalton Minimum.
Felix, there is an option to delete all your comments from a page right below the “Leave a Reply” message after the article. I haven’t tried it yet.
“It is well known that sulfur dioxide ejected into the stratosphere has a global cooling effect.”
The mechanism of cooling effect after volcano eruption is obvious: reflection of sunlight by sold particles and aerosols. However, the effect of SO2 on ozone destruction is possibly underestimated:
http://volcano.oregonstate.edu/ozone-destruction
More details about sulfur dioxide and ozone are in this link:
http://www.meteor.iastate.edu/gcp/studentpapers/1996/atmoschem/huff.html
The direct reaction 2SO2 + O3 -> 2 SO3 was not discussed though it is possible thermodynamically.
OK, so Fuego 2018 was two orders of magnitude – or 1/100 – as large as Fuego 1974. Looking back,
Fuego 1974’s global stratospheric aerosol optical depth was 0.04,
http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~deshler/articles/Hofmann_2004_Chapman_Monog.pdf
which reduced the solar heating into the troposphere by less than 1 watt/m2, causing a theoretical cooling of at most 0.15C for the year 1975. Since so-called “global” temperatures (before MSU satellite temperatures) were nowhere near accurate to a tenth of a degree, and el Nino can cause bigger fly-flops of temperature, that event is not detectable in the climate record.
Now, divide it by 100 – let’s see – that’s 0.0015 degrees, or about 1/60th of a degree. On a planet populated with thermometers that are calibrated to no better than 0.5C (or 1F if you prefer), and where even Roy Spencer’s global scanning MSU radiometers are probably no better than 0.1C (Roy – feel free to correct me on this) – there’s NO WAY Fuego 2018 will produce any remotely measurable effect on climate.
Much like the somewhat larger eruption of Chile’s Calbuco in 2015
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/10/recent-lunar-eclipse-reveals-a-sign-of-global-cooling-in-the-atmosphere/
Fuego 2018’s climate cooling will be completely swamped by the vagaries of thunderstorms and trade winds in the tropical Pacific.
Unless, of course, Fuego 2018 is not over.
The issue with sulfate formation is that if the SO2 in the column never reaches the stratosphere, it has little to no effect there. Once the load of SO2 gets to the stratosphere, it takes about 2 months to fully convert to sulfate. The sulfate that is formed will last around 48 to 50 months before it sediments out and the Junge layer returns to whatever ambient level existed before the injection. Bluth et al has a good paper on the e-fold rates that apply. I don’t have the link handy, but this is a plot using the e-fold rates from that paper on a hypothetical one tonne injection so that the levels can be easily scaled to an arbitrary injection size. Remember, this only applies to STRATOSPHERIC SO2 and troposphere SO2 is not considered. Fuego likely never reached the tropopause.
Right, if the SO2 remained in the troposphere, it will be scavenged out before the climate gets its shoes on. And even if that little amount did squeak into the troposphere, the climate impact is nil.
I don’t know if Bluth’s calculations factor in horizontal/latitude flow of the sulfates, but the time scales seem right. My composite growth/decay curve for globally averaged volcanic aerosol optical depths (AOD) is:
6 months of growth, from date of eruption, as sulfates form and spread globally.
6 month plateau at maximum.
Then decay at e-folding rate of 1.5 years, starting at 12 months from the eruption.
That brings the AOD back down to noise level about 4 years after the eruption.
This composite is from (lunar eclipse) observations of Krakatau, Agung, el Chichon, and Pinatubo.
Of course, smaller eruptions return to effective zero in less time.
That “horizontal/latitude flow” issue is something I puzzled over for weeks since I couldn’t find it addressed in the paper. Eventually I just gave up since I could not locate any authoritative work on it. Another item I haven’t puzzled out is the diffusion rate for carbonyl sulfide across the tropopause. It’s fairly non reactive in the troposphere but is readily dissociated in the stratosphere with hard UV. Once that happens, it can contribute to background sulfate formation in the Junge layer.
Richard, fitting a single exponential decay is what most people do but it does not give quite the right shape and as a result produces a different time constant.
Near the peak both the aerosol creation and elimination processes are both relevant and need to be linked. Doing the maths for an impulse injection and two concurrent processes instead of just a simply decay provides a very good analytical model.
The decay time constant is then found to be 9 months.
Would it be possible to try fitting that model to your eclipse data?
Greg, the composite curve that I described above is a purely empirical fit to eclipse data for 4 eruptions. Around the decay portion of the curve the data points are scattered enough that it would be impossible to eke out two decay time scales. There’s also the problem of other small events occurring during the decay phase, and the possibility of additional eruptions around the time of the primary event – like Pinatubo and Hudson.
So I’m happy to get something that looks like a reasonable growth & decay curve so I can extrapolate back from eclipse observations that may be 18 months after the eruption (as Pinatubo).
What was the basis of the Bluth et al work? Physical modelling , observations … ?
I developed a model based on the processes being two rate reactions , one feeding the other. The maths leads to a double exponential one for the conversion of SO2 to acidic aerosol ; the other it’s elimination.
λ1λ2 / ( λ1 – λ2 ) . ( exp-λ1t – exp-λ2t )
the lambda terms are the reciprocal of the e-folding time constants.
The result fits Mt P AOD data remarkably well.
https://climategrog.wordpress.com/2017/08/16/an-analytic-function-for-aod/
El Chichon rise is a little different and gives different constants, probably since it was further from equator and did not spread as symmetrically as Mt.P.
Now that we have very precise climate models it will be very easy to predict the cooling effect of the volcano and it will be interesting to see the predictions and actual temperature change. Of course, the data will need to be adjusted to fit the model as data has a habit of being wrong.
“It is well known that sulfur dioxide ejected into the stratosphere has a global cooling effect.”
And if Fuego had injected to the stratosphere, it might be something to note. But it didn’t. Being a tropical volcano, whatever SO2 load it has would have been diminished by ambient humidity. Tropical volcanoes have to push harder and in greater volume to have an effect on stratospheric sulfate formation.
So they are clinging to the “aerosols cause cooling” when we learned from Willis’s work that the atmosphere reduces its cloud cover letting more sun in as a response and local thermometers note no decrease in temperature. Will it take another 10 yrs to become mainstream like it did when sceptics showed that natural variation was an important climate metric.?
So they are clinging to the “aerosols cause cooling”…
Might want to Google this kind of stuff next time before blurting it out in public.
“sceptics showed that natural variation was an important climate metric”
Really? Which so-called sceptic bestowed that gem upon us? A name?
Two orders of magnitude LOWER than the 1974 eruption. Look at his twitter account.
Question for you all experts: do volcanoes emit any CO2? If so does anyone measure how much?
“SO2 mass ejected was about ~2 orders of magnitude [adjective missing] than the 1974 eruption”
As predicted, CAGW advocates continue to blame volcanism for the 22+ year global warming hiatus.
Fuego’s eruption Is just a VEI3, which occur every 18 months on average.
VEI3 eruptions have minimal global cooling effects, and, like most eruption, the cooling only lasts a couple years because volcanic paticulates quickly precipitate out or are removed by gravity.
We’re overdue due for a large eruption (VEI 5+), as the last VEI 6 was Pinatubo in 1991, and global seismic activity has been increasing significantly over the last 10 years.
The short-term global cooling from the next VEI 5+ eruption will be blamed for decades of cooling by CAGW advocates to avoid admitting the coming global cooling will be from PDO/AMO 30-yr cool cycles and weak solar cycles.
“As predicted, CAGW advocates continue to blame volcanism for the 22+ year global warming hiatus.”
Predicted by who? Which advocates? What 22 year hiatus/cooling.
Lol, arm-wave much?
Zazove-san:
It was an easy prediction for anyone who understands CAGW is a political phenomenon and not a physical one.
There was a 19-yr hiatus from 1996~2015, only interrupted by the 2015~16 Super El Niño. The global temp anomaly is now just 0.18C, which is the average over the past 22 years.
Interesting how you don’t see enviromentalists protesting against volcanoes and demanding that governments do something about them. Pollution is bad, unless Mother Nature does it.
“SO2 mass was about ~2 orders of magnitude than the 1974 eruption”
What was that SUPPOSED to be ? 2 order bigger or two orders smaller. It’s a huge difference, would be good to know in which direction.
Since this event hit the news I have been trying to find some statement of magnitude in terms VEI scale but nothing but vague unscientific waffle. The best guide we have it height. I would guess from that it’s probably a VEI 4 or5 , anyone have an authoritative source?
Greg,
It’s lower. Carn’s tweet is here. It says:
“This is the highest SO2 loading measured in a #Fuego eruption in the satellite era (since 1978) & so most likely the highest since the major 1974 eruption. But the SO2 mass is a lot lower (~2 orders of mag) than the 1974 eruption, which had a significant stratospheric impact.”
Thanks Nick , on the ball as ever. Looks like some lamer at Smithsonian tried to paraphrase what was said but made it into nonsense. Apparently cut and paste from a tweet was too simple, they had produce some “added value” to their content because, hey, they’re Smithsonian, right?
That makes sense, I’m not sure why that graph is labeled as “SO2” but measured in Dobson Units. That is a measure of optical attenuation not gas concentration. What they are almost certainly measuring is NOT sulfur dioxide but the presence of sulfuric acid aerosols.
Three tropical storms close to the coast of Mexico.
?14.4256.8
After the eruption of the volcano, Guatemala is now threatened by a tropical storm from the Caribbean Sea.
Tropical Storm BUD
?21.9250.3