As the other one seems to have disappeared I thought now would be as good a time as any to start a dedicated volcano thread.

I stumbled across this site a few months back and meant to post the link up here but didn't get round to it. It's a great source on some up to date information on recent eruptions (including satellite imgaery and photography):

http://volcanism.wordpress.com/

If you're interested in volcanic activity I'd thoroughly recommend a look.

Very interesting, thanks for that.

I was so pleased to read this from the police log in West Linn, Oregon on the 4th October.

10/4, 6:24 p.m.; Police took an anonymous call about juveniles stirring up trouble on Exeter Street. The youths were apparently hatching plans that involved a volcano. A responding officer found the suspects with baking soda and soda pop at the street’s edge. They were told to move off the roadway and clean up their suspicious science experiment when finished.

Hi,

Nice to see this new topic and has a Natural Hazards expert, Vulcanos are on the list.

Have few links to monitor the activity, hope you enjoy it

http://www.intlvrc.org/ 

Mt St. Helen

http://www.fs.fed.us/gpnf/volcanocams/msh/

Global view

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/NaturalHazards/natural_hazards_v2.php3?topic=volcano 

Good Idea Michael, undoubtedly the potential to be an explosive thread. Admired the view of Mt Tiede on my recent trip to Tenerife but was enjoying the sunshine and warmth at the pool so much that I soon closed my eyes again.

seringador:

Hi,

Nice to see this new topic and has a Natural Hazards expert, Vulcanos are on the list.

Have few links to monitor the activity, hope you enjoy it

...

Nice links.

I like the webcam of Mount St Helens - middle of the night when i tired it this morning and middle of the cloud at the moment! 

Marigold:

They were told to move off the roadway and clean up their suspicious science experiment when finished.

I bet I know who made the anonymous call

Michael:

As the other one seems to have disappeared I thought now would be as good a time as any to start a dedicated volcano thread.

I stumbled across this site a few months back and meant to post the link up here but didn't get round to it. It's a great source on some up to date information on recent eruptions (including satellite imgaery and photography):

http://volcanism.wordpress.com/

If you're interested in volcanic activity I'd thoroughly recommend a look.

Websense - 'Social Networking'
Bah humbug.

nsrobins:

Michael:

As the other one seems to have disappeared I thought now would be as good a time as any to start a dedicated volcano thread.

I stumbled across this site a few months back and meant to post the link up here but didn't get round to it. It's a great source on some up to date information on recent eruptions (including satellite imgaery and photography):

http://volcanism.wordpress.com/

If you're interested in volcanic activity I'd thoroughly recommend a look.

Websense - 'Social Networking'
Bah humbug.

More like Webnonsense. It's worth a look if you've got a connection at home and have a strange affinity for volcanoes

I see there's a lot of SO2 coming out of Hawaii's Kilauea, is it enough at the right time to give us a decent winter?

broken nail:

I see there's a lot of SO2 coming out of Hawaii's Kilauea, is it enough at the right time to give us a decent winter?

There was an awful lot of SO2 coming out when I was there in May. Enough to make you cough and splutter if you're not used to it, that's for sure!

However, because Kilauea is a non-explosive volcano, all the SO2 stays in the troposphere and almost all of it gets washed out by rain. It will have practically zero effect on the global climate - you need sulphur aerosols in the stratosphere for that, which only happens with big explosive eruptions like Pinatubo in 1991.
 

Snock:

broken nail:

I see there's a lot of SO2 coming out of Hawaii's Kilauea, is it enough at the right time to give us a decent winter?

 

There was an awful lot of SO2 coming out when I was there in May. Enough to make you cough and splutter if you're not used to it, that's for sure!

However, because Kilauea is a non-explosive volcano, all the SO2 stays in the troposphere and almost all of it gets washed out by rain. It will have practically zero effect on the global climate - you need sulphur aerosols in the stratosphere for that, which only happens with big explosive eruptions like Pinatubo in 1991.
 

As I recall Pinatubo spent a long time just spewing out to polute the air of the local people, before it went explosive.

It may well have done, and the S02 emissions may be a precursor to increased activity at Kilauea. However, increased activity in Hawaii basically means loads of lava and maybe a few modest explosions. There really is no chance of a large explosive eruption at Kilauea - I recall the highest recorded was 2 on the VEI (Volcanic Explosivity Index). To put that into context, Pinatubo was 6, and each successive number represents a tenfold increase in explosivity, meaning that Pinatubo was about ten thousand times more explosive than the worst Kilauea has ever thrown at us.

It's had several ?4s based on historical records and radiocarbon dating.  Maybe it's overdue a big one?

broken nail:

It's had several ?4s based on historical records and radiocarbon dating.  Maybe it's overdue a big one?

Well overdue or not, your original question was will it affect the UK this winter. The answer, unfortunately, is no. Even a hefty 4 on the scale isn't close to affecting the global climate (Mt. St. Helens was a 5 and didn't really register on temperature records).
 

Sorry I took that on board and went on a tangent. 

Snock:

broken nail:

I see there's a lot of SO2 coming out of Hawaii's Kilauea, is it enough at the right time to give us a decent winter?

 

There was an awful lot of SO2 coming out when I was there in May. Enough to make you cough and splutter if you're not used to it, that's for sure!

However, because Kilauea is a non-explosive volcano, all the SO2 stays in the troposphere and almost all of it gets washed out by rain. It will have practically zero effect on the global climate - you need sulphur aerosols in the stratosphere for that, which only happens with big explosive eruptions like Pinatubo in 1991.
 

Novarupta 1912 VEI 6, no cooling?

Santa Maria 1902  VEI 6, no cooling?

Krakatau 1883  VEI 6, no cooling?

Ref;

http://www.volcano.si.edu/world/largeeruptions.cfm

breezy:

Snock:

broken nail:

I see there's a lot of SO2 coming out of Hawaii's Kilauea, is it enough at the right time to give us a decent winter?

 

There was an awful lot of SO2 coming out when I was there in May. Enough to make you cough and splutter if you're not used to it, that's for sure!

However, because Kilauea is a non-explosive volcano, all the SO2 stays in the troposphere and almost all of it gets washed out by rain. It will have practically zero effect on the global climate - you need sulphur aerosols in the stratosphere for that, which only happens with big explosive eruptions like Pinatubo in 1991.
 

 

Azul, Cerro 1932  VEI 5+, no cooling?

Novarupta 1912 VEI 6, no cooling?

Santa Maria 1902  VEI 6, no cooling?

Krakatau 1883  VEI 6, no cooling?

Ref;

http://www.volcano.si.edu/world/largeeruptions.cfm

You like being contrary don't you. Well, so do I!

Firstly, the page you gave as a reference doesn't mention whether the eruptions had an effect on the global climate. I'm not sure why you picked these eruptions in particular.

So, in chronological order:

Krakatoa did have a global cooling effect: http://www.geology.sdsu.edu/how_volcanoes_work/climate_effects.html

Santa Maria, despite being a 6 on the VEI, produced an order of magnitude less H2SO4 aerosol than the 1883 Krakatoa eruption, which in turn had an order of magnitude less than the 1783 Laki eruption in Iceland (despite Laki being only 4 on the scale). http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/webprojects1997/AnnaL/Welcome.htm#what%20happens. The table I'm referring to really illustrates that explosivity doesn't dictate atmospheric aerosol loading and nor does it indicate where those aerosols wound up. Krakatoa's were mostly injected into the stratosphere, which affected the climate. Santa Maria's aerosols probably entered the stratosphere, but I can't find anything clearly stating whether or not that eruption affected the climate. Laki's aerosols mostly stayed in the troposphere, but because large quantities of sulphur compounds were released over many months, the 'volcanic fog' hung in the air over much of the northern hemisphere for much longer than is expected for a short 'explosive' eruption and blocked sunlight, increasing albedo and cooling the northern hemisphere by a different mechanism than more explosive eruptions. Laki seems to be nearly unique in that it affected the climate over a large area and for many months because it was a very long and highly emissive eruption, not because it was particularly explosive.

Novarupta was a high latitude eruption, and since the stratospheric meridional flow is slightly poleward, it could never affect global climate. However, this is not to say it had no effects. It seems it had teleconnections with the Indian monsoon (and also produced high-latitude NH cooling): http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/03oct_novarupta.xml

Azul, Cerro (in Chile) also qualifies as a high latitude eruption. Less literature exists on this volcano, but since the greater portion of the SH south of 35 degrees (which is the latitude of Azul) is ocean, few measurements exist. Hard to tell what effect it had on the SH climate in the 1930s.

The height of the eruption column also plays a major part. Mount St. Helens had really quite a small eruption plume, reaching about 12 miles (just into the stratosphere). Hence not much aerosol got into the stratosphere and no cooling occured, even though it was a 5 on the VEI. Clearly it's a complex system and whether or not a volcano has the effect of cooling the globe depends on its location, explosivity/eruption plume height, sulphur emissions and even the state of the stratospheric winds at the time of eruption.

Oh, I should also mention that I'm studying the effect of volcanic eruptions on global climate for my master's thesis. Just starting out, but ask me again in a few months and I should be able to answer any question on the subject you throw my way. I also expect I'll be thoroughly sick of it!
 

Thanks for that Stu, I'll be looking forward to further postings from you, what a fascinating subject to be studying for your thesis.

breezy:

Azul, Cerro 1932  VEI 5+, no cooling?

Novarupta 1912 VEI 6, no cooling?

Santa Maria 1902  VEI 6, no cooling?

Krakatau 1883  VEI 6, no cooling?

So are you claiming that neither CO2 or volcanic eruptions affect climate? Its all down to barycycles?