Janus said:
Good. Assuming this is caused by Kilauea, it's a bit ironic that I had to go away [\i] from the volcano to see volcanic related activity.
It's hard to tell what caused that particular plume. There are lots of them!
- Lava entering the ocean
- Rift vents
- Kilauea caldera
- Puʻu ʻŌʻō [? quite cloudy. can't tell]
Might be a merger of all of them. [refs:
USGS webcam still photos &
https://volcanoes.usgs.gov/volcanoes/kilauea/multimedia_chronology.html]
ps. If it's any consolation, the USGS is also complaining about the "WiFi service".
Kīlauea Eruption FAQs: General Questions
USGS Volcanoes·Monday, 21 May 2018
Why is there no streaming video of the eruption?
Hawai’i does not have the same internet capabilities as the mainland. Bandwidth is often limited, and HVO must give preference to monitoring instruments before cameras.
Their FAQ is a great source of information, IMHO.
They even give the URL for the civilian live feed: "
...local reporting for streaming videos (https://www.facebook.com/civilbeat)."
And unlike most Facebook comment sections, this one is NOT filled with IDIOT nose-picking booger-eaters.
Mike Kingston; "USGS Volcanoes, What about the presence of andesite in fissure 17 lava, as confirmed by Hamilton Analytical Lab and discussed in the West Hawaii Today article? This is highly unusual for Hawaii lava and, from everything I've read, is not consistent with the idea that this component of the lava is coming from the two vents mentioned or from the 1955 magma. Could you share with us 1) what percent of the fissure 17 sample was andesite and 2) has that percentage changed in this short period of time? (As alternative to that question, what was the silica content percentage, and did that change over time?) Also, what is the source of the andesite lava? Does this lava ultimately come from a different depth or layer of the earth? Aloha"
USGS Volcanoes; "Mike Kingston, Good catch on the andesite! This is unusual, and is clearly not summit/Pu`u `O`o magma nor 1955 magma. Instead, it is probably something much older -- perhaps magma that intruded in 1924 but never erupted, or magma left over from 1840, or even before? The older, more silica-rich magma might also explain why Fissure 17 has behaved a bit differently than the other fissures, with higher spattering and more discrete events. At this point, we only have some preliminary chemical analyses. But we know from past experience that the rift zone is full of unerupted pods of magma from past intrusions of a variety of different ages. Apparently, Fissure 17 is sampling one of these pods that is different from 1955. When this is all over, one of the things we hope to have learned is more about just how much magma, and how many different vintages, is stored within the rift zone."
Quite fascinating.
Again, just MHO.
