Saving Ash from a Volcanic Eruption: A Geologist's Perspective

[Ivan Seeking]

Best news I've heard today. Thanks Ivan. Where did you find that info?

CNN has been reporting it all morning.

 

[ViewsofMars]

CNN has been reporting it all morning.

Thanks. I normally don't listen to the news. I'll check it out online or look at the newspaper then confirm it with a website that I consider to be a source for the lastest scientific data.


One brief comment, I did read several days ago in my local paper that the damage to a airplane's engine flying through ash is possible and it could take up to three years before the engine dies. Personally, as a frequent flyer I want to feel secure by knowing I'm safe in the air and on the ground too.

 

[Frame Dragger]

A sulphur lining... http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/04/18/volcano.ash.test.flights/index.html?hpt=T1

 

[Count Iblis]

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/04/airlines-push-to-reopen-airspace-nasa-study-urges-caution/

In 2000, NASA conducted a study where it intentionally flew a DC-8 through volcanic ash that was not visible to the flight crew. Despite the relatively small amount of ash encountered, there was damage to the engines, though it was only seen in a detailed examination after the flight. A detailed report on the test includes pictures of damaged engine parts and explains pilots may not have any clues they are flying through ash.

 

[Frame Dragger]

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/04/airlines-push-to-reopen-airspace-nasa-study-urges-caution/

Funny how the people who are urging caution are:

1.) The people with the most experience and qualifications to make such a judgement.
2.) People without a personal financial and political stake in air-travel resuming.

Good to know that eruptions don't change human nature... death before loss of profit or inconvenience.

 

[Andre]

...So why aren't they considering at least some flights (high priority, perhaps) at lower, safe, altitudes? Is it just an admin (ATC) problem?

That may very well be the case, apart from the safety issue of range/endurance and reserve fuel for diversion to alternate airport (legal issue) which of course suffer proportionally but the airspace structure and the rules and regulations limits the capacity for safety. But given these restrictions I concur that some contingency plans could have existed to deal with that and allow for limited high priority air traffic.

 

[joelupchurch]

There are some things being said by authorities which are pretty silly:

A spokesperson from from Nats told BBC News that there was "no threshold" for concentrations at which volcanic ash was acceptable.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8629609.stm"

In another place I read:

The problem with such ash is that it is extremely fine – less than 2mm in diameter, and in the case of fine ash only 6 microns in diameter – which means that it is easily carried by the wind; and because it is ejected by enormously hot air from a volcano it will often be thrown high into the jetstream at exactly the height that aircraft like to fly. The ash particles' light weight means that they will then remain there, dispersing so slowly it can take two to three years for them to vanish.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/apr/15/volcanic-ash-bad-for-planes"

 

[Frame Dragger]

There are some things being said by authorities which are pretty silly:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8629609.stm"

In another place I read:


http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/apr/15/volcanic-ash-bad-for-planes"

Well, it does take 2-3 years for the gasses and ash from an eruption such as this (look at Pinatubo) to return to earth, but it doesn't mean they are a threat to air-safety for that long. There is ALWAYS particulate matter in the air, but it has to be enough to form glass on the turbines in the case of volcanic ash.

As for "no safe threshold", who knows at this point? I don't take that to mean that as long as a particle is aloft that planes won't be.

 

[mgb_phys]

A spokesperson from from Nats told BBC News that there was "no threshold" for concentrations at which volcanic ash was acceptable

That's what happens when you have a country where nobody with a science background is in charge of anything.

 

[Frame Dragger]

That's what happens when you have a country where nobody with a science background is in charge of anything.

I'm ready to embrace the notion of "Philosopher-Kings" at this point!

 

[tomkeus]

Funny how the people who are urging caution are:

1.) The people with the most experience and qualifications to make such a judgement.
2.) People without a personal financial and political stake in air-travel resuming.

Good to know that eruptions don't change human nature... death before loss of profit or inconvenience.

Exactly. They might as well say, "Hey let's shut down air traffic for the entire year". If you really want to play it safe and the only thing you care about is human life, you will certainly say that. But if safety is the only thing you are concerned, you might as well say, hey planes tend to drop from the sky here and there and cost hundreds of lives each year, so let's ban air traffic altogether.

Point is that things have to function and you have to take risks. All the time. Nothing is absolutely safe and certain. It really begins to tick me off how our Western societies can easily get paralyzed by fear and grind to a halt at the slightest sign of uncertainty.

Look at the safety precautions at the airports now. Getting more draconian all the time. We had planes bombed out of the skies in 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, but authorities didn't institute for passenger to get stripped down or cavity searches. The way things are going now I wouldn't be too surprised if within next 10 years the only way to travel by air is to strip naked, get tranquilized and then tied down to your seat.

This article sumps up nicely everything that bothers me about this culture of excessive caution that seems to be emerging more and more lately

http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/8607/

 

[Ivan Seeking]

The way things are going now I wouldn't be too surprised if within next 10 years the only way to travel by air is to strip naked, get tranquilized and then tied down to your seat.

Wow, that would be something. I haven't dated in years.

 

[Hurkyl]

But if safety is the only thing you are concerned, you might as well say, hey planes tend to drop from the sky here and there and cost hundreds of lives each year, so let's ban air traffic altogether.

Only if you're doing it wrong.

If safety was the only thing you are concerned about, then you would have to balance the dangers of air travel against the dangers of people traveling other ways.

 

[Frame Dragger]

Exactly. They might as well say, "Hey let's shut down air traffic for the entire year". If you really want to play it safe and the only thing you care about is human life, you will certainly say that. But if safety is the only thing you are concerned, you might as well say, hey planes tend to drop from the sky here and there and cost hundreds of lives each year, so let's ban air traffic altogether.

Point is that things have to function and you have to take risks. All the time. Nothing is absolutely safe and certain. It really begins to tick me off how our Western societies can easily get paralyzed by fear and ground to a halt at the slightest sign of uncertainty.

Look at the safety precautions at the airports now. Getting more draconian all the time. We had planes bombed out of the skies in 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, but authorities didn't institute for passenger to get stripped down or cavity searches. The way things are going now I wouldn't be too surprised if within next 10 years the only way to travel by air is to strip naked, get tranquilized and then tied down to your seat.

This article sumps up nicely everything that bothers me about this culture of excessive caution that seems to be emerging more and more lately

http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/8607/

I see a clear difference between security screening that routinely FAILS, and is therefore an illusion of comfort (re: your point about western views), and taking a risk when intelligent people are telling you to do different things.

There is this as well... the airlines and airport associations are complaining that they are losing $200 million USD per day. They are already asking governments for recompense. Passengers meanwhile (or strandees more properly) have no such recourse, unless their traveler's insurance covers Force Majeure up to volcanic eruptions.

So, there is a desire for money on one hand, which is nearly devoid of conscience because responsiblity is spread across an industry. On the other you have people who care ONLY about keeping planes from falling out of the sky. Clearly as with all things in life, it's a matter of risk/benefit, but how does a politician make that judgement based on conflicting advice?

Answer: They don't always make the right one. That doesn't mean that the western world is hysterical... it means that gambling with a plane full of people (who may be desperate to get somewhere,and thereofore not making their own clear judgements) is not acceptable. If a plane DID crash due to the ash, can you imagine the outrage?... it would be NOTHING compared to this.

Finally... there is "uncertain", and there is "needless risk". How is erring on the side of caution hysterical? I suspect that based on this, contingency plans for future eruptions will be put in place. THAT is what should have been done already, along with more research to understand just WHAT contitutes a safe concentration of ash. That said, you can't make up for prior negligence by gambling with lives and the confidence of people who fly.

You're also being a bit narrow here... people are TERRIFIED of spending the last minute or two of their lives helpless, in a metal tube, knowing they are about to die. That terror skews judgement, because although we all know we're going to eventually die, and maybe sooner rather than later, an air-crash is a nightmare for most. You mention security in, say, US airports, but you neglect to mention that we have almost NO security for rail travel, and other clear risks. People need to get through life without being paralyzed by terror, and for most, that means a certain level of denial.

Bottom line: People are terrified of falling to their deaths, being eaten alive, burning, and having their eyes, hands and genitals mutilated. Their fear is rooted in reason, but it's amplified by basic human nature, the same that makes Anatomy students faint when they actually SEE a cadaver... especially the face and hands. That isn't reasonable either, but it's enough to force some people out of medicine. We're human, we make human mistakes, and we know that death is final (afterlife or no, it's an end to THIS) so we try not to make mistakes which we SEE as risky.

Governments almost always bow to fear, and realize that they would be out of a job and probably a conscience if something DID go wrong. So, you accept some risks, and when an obvious and unusual (to people) event occurs which contains a great deal of fear and uncertainty... this is what you get.

This, is putting aside the notion that in fact, traveling through an ash cloud IS dangerous, I'm speaking only to the human element here.

 

[sophiecentaur]

That may very well be the case, apart from the safety issue of range/endurance and reserve fuel for diversion to alternate airport (legal issue) which of course suffer proportionally but the airspace structure and the rules and regulations limits the capacity for safety. But given these restrictions I concur that some contingency plans could have existed to deal with that and allow for limited high priority air traffic.

I'm glad you see my point. It is obviously possible to arrange some sort of service which could be optimised for any particular flight ceiling. Even a 25% service at 200% of the running cost would be well worth while.
I should hope that someone in a backroom somewhere has already been told to prepare for a similar eventuality. The present situation has been handled particularly badly and you can see why. The slightest hint of an accident or even 'incident' would have someone's arse severely kicked; air travel is that sort of business and no one admits to placing a value on human life in that particular context. I have always been impressed by the way NICE manage to do that, so explicitly, with regard to medicine without being pilloried.
There should have been a proportionate response. Once 'the dust has settled' there are bound to be huge recriminations about the cost to everyone, including the lives lost when organ transplants and drugs haven't got through. Questions will be asked!

 

[dorlomin]

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/04/16/340727/pictures-finnish-f-18-engine-check-reveals-effects-of-volcanic.html"

They also have flown sampling missions in BAe Hawks.

Should lay aside one or two of the myths about this lock down.

 

[Frame Dragger]

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/04/16/340727/pictures-finnish-f-18-engine-check-reveals-effects-of-volcanic.html"

They also have flown sampling missions in BAe Hawks.

Should lay aside one or two of the myths about this lock down.

Now THAT, is good stuff.

 

[mgb_phys]

then you would have to balance the dangers of air travel against the dangers of people traveling other ways.

US highway deaths are something like 50,000/year = a full 737 crashing everyday!

 

[Frame Dragger]

US highway deaths are something like 50,000/year = a full 737 crashing everyday!

True, but is that per capita, or a result of how much time people spend in cars vs. airplanes?

This keeps making me think of 'Freakonomics'... granted hardly a scientific trove, but still...

http://books.google.com/books?id=Lk...resnum=4&ved=0CBQQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false"[

I really appreciate the equation: Risk = Hazard + Outrage.

 

[mgb_phys]

True, but is that per capita, or a result of how much time people spend in cars vs. airplanes?

Mostly a result of confusion about the correlation between wearing a seatbelt and not flying through the windscreen.

The US+Canada have about twice the highway fatality rate of most western european countries, in spite of being in theory safer as more miles are driven on freeways. And the US+Canada have much lower levels of wearing a seatbelt.

 

[Frame Dragger]

Mostly a result of confusion about the correlation between wearing a seatbelt and not flying through the windscreen.

Oh, that's part of it, but remember that most accidents DON'T end with ejection from the vehicle, but those who do tend to die.

http://askville.amazon.com/Statisti...s-intuition/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=4828631

In a way, everyone in an airplane (believes) they are essentially an unrestrained passenger, lacking ANY control, and in the event of a crash, they are unlikely to survive (they believe). This is clearly not rational when seatbelt usage figures would seem to indicate that many people are tired of living. I think we need to accept that without major education initiatives, these views will remain and people who would otherwise survive car wrecks will die.

Of course, this is still very much a "the elevator is the safest place for you to be"... until you start spending quality time in it. IF something goes wrong in a car, and you've taken precautions, you're likely to live. In a plane, you're more liley to die, and experience prolonged terror.

 

[lisab]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8631144.stm"

A new ash cloud spreading towards the UK is causing uncertainty over plans to reopen some airspace on Tuesday, air traffic control body Nats has said.

Earlier, it said the flight ban would be lifted over Scotland, Northern Ireland and the north of England.

But Nats said there was now a worsening situation in some areas. The outlook for Northern Ireland is most uncertain.

Dang, just as the airspace restrictions were beginning to ease.

Is there any way to see ash at night?

 

[BobG]

Nobody wants to have to tell anyone's relatives that their loved one died because of from Eyjafjallajökull.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jq-sMZtSww


It's even worse than notifying the deaf about a death.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zheeF5yPak

 

[Frame Dragger]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8631144.stm"



Dang, just as the airspace restrictions were beginning to ease.

Is there any way to see ash at night?

There should always be ways to at least bounce a laser and see how the light scatters... but really, it's tough to see period. On radar, it's just invisble at this point... glass and dust don't make an impression, and modern radars screen "noise".

 

[tomkeus]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8631144.stm"

Yes but the ash plume is much lower than last time. It is reaching only 4km or so opposed to 10km last week so it shouldn't present as big problem in affected areas.

 

[joelupchurch]

The US+Canada have about twice the highway fatality rate of most western european countries, in spite of being in theory safer as more miles are driven on freeways. And the US+Canada have much lower levels of wearing a seatbelt.

That is incorrect. The current seat belt usage in the United States is 84% (2009). The latest number I could find for Europe is 76% for front seat occupants and 46% for rear seat occupants. The only countries that do consistently better the United States are Scandinavia, Germany and the UK.

The 2009 fatality rate for the United States is 7.2 per billion vehicle kilometers which is a respectable number compared to Europe.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-04-12-traffic-deaths_N.htm"

Of course Americans have an advantage over other countries since we tend to stay inside our cars.

Risk comparisons for the EU show that the fatality risk for motorised two-wheelers is the highest of all modes, being on average 20 times higher than for car occupants. Also cycling and walking have on average a 7 to 9 times higher fatality risk per distance traveled than car travel.

http://www.etsc.eu/oldsite/rep_all6.htm"

 

[Count Iblis]

Yes but the ash plume is much lower than last time. It is reaching only 4km or so opposed to 10km last week so it shouldn't present as big problem in affected areas.

It has just been announced that the airports in Southern Britain will remain closed.

 

[ViewsofMars]

Sorry for the delay Ivan in fully responding yesterday regarding correspondence (your *replies* my responses) please, reference msgs. 118, 120, 121, 122. (My delay was due to the unexpected happening and I had to deal with it! Car problems yesterday. I have no desire in fixing my turbo.)

As a female aka WOMAN science researcher, I naturally did some research today that might be helpful.

NASA:

4.19.10
NASA Observes Ash Plume of Icelandic Volcano
by Rob Gutro, NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center

The continuing eruption of Iceland'sEyjafjallajökull volcano was observed Mon., April 19, 2010, by the Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) instrument onboard NASA's Terra spacecraft . The new image shows a white eruption column being carried toward the south by prevailing winds. The image is dominated by the gray, ash-laden eruption cloud dispersed south and east by the winds, blowing from the southern Iceland coast toward Europe. The bright red areas mark the hot lava at the current vent (upper left), and the still-hot lava flows from the earlier phases of the eruption (upper center). The high-temperature material is revealed by ASTER's thermal infrared bands.

This image covers an area of 58.6 by 46.8 kilometers (36.3 by 29 miles). The resolution is 15 meters (49 feet) per pixel.

4.19.10
Two NASA Satellites Capture Last Three Days of Eyjafjallajökull's Ash Plume
by Rob Gutro, NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center

NASA's Aqua and Terra satellites fly around the world every day capturing images of weather, ice and land changes. Over the last three days these satellites have provided visible and infrared imagery of the ash plume from the Eyjafjallajökull volcano in Iceland.

Eyjafjallajökull is pronounced similar to "EYE-a-fyat-la-yu-goot," and it is still spewing ash into the atmosphere. Volcanic eruptions are important sources of gases, such as sulphur dioxide (SO2) and volcanic ash (aerosols) in the atmosphere.

The Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer, also known as MODIS, is an instrument that flies aboard both NASA's Aqua and Terra satellites. MODIS captures daily visible and infrared Earth imagery and has provided daily images of the volcanic plume. NASA’s MODIS instrument and the Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS) instrument, both of which fly on Aqua, contain sulfur dioxide (SO2) absorption channels to enhance volcanic ash detection. These applications have significantly improved upon existing satellite-based multi-spectral techniques in identifying and tracking ash clouds and estimating their height.

On Saturday, April 17 at 13:20 UTC (9:20 a.m. EDT), Aqua captured a visible image of the ash plume so clearly that in the satellite image a viewer could see the billowing cloud spewing from the volcano and blowing almost due south before turning east over the Atlantic Ocean.

On Sunday, April 18 at 12:05 UTC (8:05 a.m. EDT), NASA's Terra satellite flew over the volcano and captured an image of the brown ash cloud mostly obscured by higher clouds. The brown plume was partly visible underneath the high clouds.

By Monday morning, April 19 at 12:50 UTC (8:50 a.m. EDT) the high clouds had cleared, and the brown line of spewed volcanic ash was visible once again blowing south, then turning east toward the United Kingdom.

The ash cloud basically consists of fine particles of pulverized rock. Volcanic ash is a rare but potentially catastrophic hazard to aviation. Encounters with volcanic ash while in flight can result in engine failure from particulate ingestion and viewing obstruction of the cockpit widescreen from etching by the acidic aerosols. Volcanic Ash Advisory Centers were established to monitor the air space in areas prone to eruptions and to issue volcanic ash warnings.

NASA works with other agencies on using satellite observations to aid in the detection and monitoring of aviation hazards caused by volcanic ash. For more on this NASA program, visit: http://science.larc.nasa.gov/asap/research-ash.html.

Eyjafjallajökull is one of Iceland's smaller glaciers, located north of Skógar. Skógar is a small Icelandic village with a population of roughly 25 located at the south of the glacier. Eyjafjallajökull lies west of another glacier called Mýrdalsjökull.

The MODIS Rapid Response System was developed to provide daily satellite images of the Earth's landmasses in near real time. True-color, photo-like imagery and false-color imagery are available within a few hours of being collected, making the system a valuable resource. The MODIS Rapid Response Team that generates the images is located at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md.
[Please view images and further text from the link below. Thank you.]
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/iceland-volcano-plume.html

Science Magazine :

Iceland’s Volcano Proving Tough to Predict
by Richard A. Kerr on April 19, 2010

Volcano prediction can be tough going, but volcanologists really have their hands full with the ongoing eruption at Iceland’s Eyjafjallajökull. When will it end? Will there be even more ash? And will Eyjafjallajökull's bigger and badder neighbor Katla join in? It seems that the very character of Icelandic volcanoes is working against reliable forecasting. If anything, the long-term outlook is bad.

Eyjafjallajökull’s orneriness became obvious 17 April, when scientists at the University of Iceland and the Icelandic Meteorological Office announced that the volcano’s chemistry had changed. At the extremes, volcanoes behave one of two ways: quietly like Hawaii’s Mauna Loa, which almost always just oozes lava for years on end; or boisterously like Mount St. Helens, which quickly rose to an explosive climax and then retired.

The latest chemical analyses of ash explain how Eyjafjallajökull switched without warning from quiet lava to plane-grounding ash plume. The key was a boost in the silica content of the magma arriving at the surface. Silica-rich magma makes for more viscous—and thus more explosive—lavas and can be produced as some minerals crystallize out of subterranean magma. The mountain, which was regularly monitored, gave no chemical warning that the switch was on the way.

Eyjafjallajökull is not divulging its longer-term intentions either. According to geophysicist Páll Einarsson of the University of Iceland, the magma feeding the current eruption seems to be coming from down deep rather than a shallow chamber. So it is impossible to gauge just how much magma could emerge during this episode of activity.[Please read on . . .]
http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2010/04/icelands-volcano-proving-tough-t.html#disqus_thread

I think my previous message #69 might be helpful.

 

[pivot]

does anyone know what causes volcanic lightning? seems like it could be various things (change in pressure, particles in the air, moisture, magnetic materials, etc)

 

[Count Iblis]

Actually this is nothing new. Eyjafjallajökull shuts down air traffic in the 21st century, and in the 18th century http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laki" shut down shipping traffic:

The summer of 1783 was the hottest on record[citation needed] and a rare high pressure zone over Iceland caused the winds to blow to the south-east. The poisonous cloud drifted to Bergen in Norway, then spread to Prague in the Province of Bohemia by 17 June, Berlin by 18 June, Paris by 20 June, Le Havre by 22 June, and to Great Britain by 23 June. The fog was so thick that boats stayed in port, unable to navigate, and the sun was described as "blood coloured".[6]