Kilauea volcano and earthquakes in Hawaii

Alexa

traveller space dreamer
Joined
Oct 29, 2004
Messages
2,319
Location
Somewhere in the Quad
Anyone follows what's going on in Hawaii ? Several earthquakes and an angry volcano, Kilaunea, enough to scary everyone and evacuate the zone. I wached recently a series of documentary about continents' movements, so I'm a bit sensitive about this kind of phenomenons right now.

New York Times had an article in February about NASA preoccupation in volcanos and climate changes. Could Kilaunea cool the Earth or this volcano is not big enough ?


merlin_137665137_4ef2b62e-f8ab-4422-baae-2c5da2ed1f7c-master675.jpg


Kilauea Volcano Erupts, Spewing Lava and Gases Near Homes in Hawaii
The Next Big Volcano Could Briefly Cool Earth. NASA Wants to Be Ready.
 
I'm following. I was there in the early 70s during a series of eruptions. It ended in 74 with a 7.2 magnitude earthquake. It was like dancing without moving your feet.
 
One of the recent ones reached 6.9, so the situation is quite serious. Do you know if anybody predicted the eruption of Kilauea ? They do have a Center of Volcanology.
 
One of the recent ones reached 6.9, so the situation is quite serious. Do you know if anybody predicted the eruption of Kilauea ? They do have a Center of Volcanology.

It might be just simply a case of a spike in volcanic activity. and nothing more .
 
When I heard about this volcano and the earthquakes, I had a flashback of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. We are so young compared with the Earth and our lives depend so much on what's going on underneath.

atlantic_seafloor_crust_age_globe_big.jpg

This globe shows the ages of rocks that make up the seafloor of the Atlantic Ocean. The rocks that make up the crust on the ocean's floor are youngest near the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. They are colored red in this picture. The rocks are older (yellow, green) further from the spreading ridge. Molten lava pours out at the mid-ocean ridge. It hardens into basalt rock. Plate tectonics gradually moves the rocky seafloor away from the ridge. The oldest rocks in the Atlantic (blue) are about 180 million years old. (Image courtesy of NOAA. )
 
When I heard about this volcano and the earthquakes, I had a flashback of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. We are so young compared with the Earth and our lives depend so much on what's going on underneath.

atlantic_seafloor_crust_age_globe_big.jpg

This globe shows the ages of rocks that make up the seafloor of the Atlantic Ocean. The rocks that make up the crust on the ocean's floor are youngest near the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. They are colored red in this picture. The rocks are older (yellow, green) further from the spreading ridge. Molten lava pours out at the mid-ocean ridge. It hardens into basalt rock. Plate tectonics gradually moves the rocky seafloor away from the ridge. The oldest rocks in the Atlantic (blue) are about 180 million years old. (Image courtesy of NOAA. )

Have there been any indication increased activity in places like the Ring of fire ?
 
Scientists are anticipating huge once in a century. eruption in about a week .
 
There is some level concern that he volcanoes on the west cost of the US could become more active.
 
There were very few casualties which is probably a good indication of the island's readiness for this. Many houses lost, but the owners seemed to accept that as a consequence of where they lived. Many people live with this every day - Etna on Sicily in active - Iceland is active - so I found some of the incredulous people on the News reports strange. If they think we have tamed the Earth, then they are very wrong.

Could Kilaunea cool the Earth or this volcano is not big enough?
Can't say yet until it finishes, but statistically, it would be unlikely to be big enough - USGS: Volcano Hazards Program

The eruptions discussed there - Mount St. Helen's in 1980, Mount Pinatubo in 1991 - had little cooling effect. Krakatau in 1883 and Tambora in 1815 did have a large, if temporary, cooling effect, as did the the large 1783-1784 Laki fissure eruption in Iceland.

Interesting figures on that webpage too comparing CO2 with anthropogenic sources - we release the equivalent of Mount St Helen's every 2.5 hours. However, we don't release anything like the dust and SO2 that volcanic activity does, and it is those that cause cooling.
 
There were very few casualties which is probably a good indication of the island's readiness for this. Many houses lost, but the owners seemed to accept that as a consequence of where they lived. Many people live with this every day - Etna on Sicily in active - Iceland is active - so I found some of the incredulous people on the News reports strange. If they think we have tamed the Earth, then they are very wrong.


Can't say yet until it finishes, but statistically, it would be unlikely to be big enough - USGS: Volcano Hazards Program

The eruptions discussed there - Mount St. Helen's in 1980, Mount Pinatubo in 1991 - had little cooling effect. Krakatau in 1883 and Tambora in 1815 did have a large, if temporary, cooling effect, as did the the large 1783-1784 Laki fissure eruption in Iceland.

Interesting figures on that webpage too comparing CO2 with anthropogenic sources - we release the equivalent of Mount St Helen's every 2.5 hours. However, we don't release anything like the dust and SO2 that volcanic activity does, and it is those that cause cooling.

Tamobora's eruption cause the year of no Spring in 1816 .

Image what the climate effect would be if the Volcanoes on the west coast all started erupting.
 
Imagine what the climate effect would be if the Volcanoes on the west coast all started erupting.
It would be the stuff of disaster movies. You cannot think like that though. If you did you would be a constant nervousness wreck. There could equally be a major earthquake in California, or large asteroid could hit the Earth. Or I could get struck be lightning! Or shot by terrorists? Or, much more likely, knocked down by a drunk driver? Or brain haemorrhage? Heart attack? Would the economic effects be worse than trade tariffs imposed on Californian wine? Isn't it better to take one day at a time?
 
It would be the stuff of disaster movies. You cannot think like that though. If you did you would be a constant nervousness wreck. There could equally be a major earthquake in California, or large asteroid could hit the Earth. Or I could get struck be lightning! Or shot by terrorists? Or, much more likely, knocked down by a drunk driver? Or brain haemorrhage? Heart attack? Would the economic effects be worse than trade tariffs imposed on Californian wine? Isn't it better to take one day at a time?

Im not worried about it. Besides, if it happened , it's beyond my control anyway. The west coast volcanoes would have a dire effect globally but it wouldn't mean the end of civilization . Worse would be the Yellowstone caldera. If that one went up, that could topple our civilization, at the very .least.
 
They're up 17 fissures now. Not a good development .
 
Last edited:
There is some level concern that he volcanoes on the west cost of the US could become more active.

There's a strange and entirely unexplained correlation between low solar activity and high volcanic activity. It may just be a coincidence, but since we're now in one of the least active periods on the sun for many decades, I wouldn't be surprised to see more volcanoes.
 
The eruptions that cause major climatic effects are the explosive ones, and they have to be really big too. Kilauea is highly destructive, it seems, but it isn't chucking massive amounts of dust and SO2 into the stratosphere - and that's what matters globally.
 
There were very few casualties which is probably a good indication of the island's readiness for this. Many houses lost, but the owners seemed to accept that as a consequence of where they lived. Many people live with this every day - Etna on Sicily in active - Iceland is active - so I found some of the incredulous people on the News reports strange. If they think we have tamed the Earth, then they are very wrong.


Can't say yet until it finishes, but statistically, it would be unlikely to be big enough - USGS: Volcano Hazards Program

The eruptions discussed there - Mount St. Helen's in 1980, Mount Pinatubo in 1991 - had little cooling effect. Krakatau in 1883 and Tambora in 1815 did have a large, if temporary, cooling effect, as did the the large 1783-1784 Laki fissure eruption in Iceland.

Interesting figures on that webpage too comparing CO2 with anthropogenic sources - we release the equivalent of Mount St Helen's every 2.5 hours. However, we don't release anything like the dust and SO2 that volcanic activity does, and it is those that cause cooling.

They really do not have any choice. The evacuation was mandatory. I'm glad I don't live in a zone where I'll be forced to evacuate in a matter of minutes.

Strange thing. I don't remember those from 1980 and 1991, but the name of Krakatau is stuck into my memory since my childhood. It's quite amazing to be able to watch live what a volcano can do. No chance we can tame the Earth. We are just its passengers for a few thousands of years.
 

Similar threads


Back
Top