Yellowstone Earthquakes & Updates on Supervolcano

  • Thread starter Thread starter Andre
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the recent earthquake activity in Yellowstone National Park and its implications for the supervolcano located there. Participants explore the historical context of eruptions, the likelihood of future volcanic activity, and the significance of current seismic events.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that recent earthquakes in Yellowstone, including magnitudes of 3.5, 3.0, and 3.2, are part of ongoing seismic activity, which is not unusual for the area.
  • Others reference Jake Lowenstern's analysis suggesting that a supervolcano event is not imminent due to insufficient magma, but acknowledge the possibility of smaller volcanic eruptions.
  • One participant emphasizes that the historical record shows a highly episodic nature of past eruptions, with significant intervals of inactivity, raising questions about the current state of magma beneath the caldera.
  • Concerns are raised about media hype surrounding the earthquakes, with some participants expressing skepticism about the portrayal of risks associated with the seismic activity.
  • Several participants discuss the relative frequency of earthquakes in Yellowstone compared to other regions like California and Alaska, suggesting that Yellowstone's activity should not induce panic.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of small earthquakes versus long periods of inactivity, with some suggesting that regular small quakes may be preferable for stress management in geological terms.
  • One participant mentions observations of thermal features in Yellowstone becoming less active, attributing this to potential shifts in magma and environmental factors like reduced groundwater.
  • Another participant draws a comparison to volcanic activity in Hawaii, noting that earthquakes precede eruptions there, but acknowledges the unique geological context of that region.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the implications of the recent earthquakes, with some emphasizing the need for caution and others downplaying the significance of the activity. There is no consensus on the likelihood of future eruptions or the interpretation of the current seismic data.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight various uncertainties, including the lack of definitive predictions regarding future volcanic activity and the dependence on historical eruption patterns. The discussion reflects differing interpretations of seismic data and its implications for volcanic hazards.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying geology, volcanology, or seismology, as well as individuals concerned about natural hazards in volcanic regions.

Andre
Messages
4,296
Reaction score
73
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital...lowstone-earthquakes-supervolcano-update.html

...
1) The rumbling continues, including 3.5, 3.0 and 3.2 quakes just today

2) Here is some more Jake Lowenstern (the Yellowstone volcano scientist) analysis (via TIME):

Jake Lowenstern, Ph.D.,YVO's chief scientist, who also is part of the USGS Volcano Hazards Team, told TIME that it doesn't appear a supervolcano event is imminent. "We don't think the amount of magma exists that would create one of these large eruptions of the past," he said. "It is still possible to have a volcanic eruption comparable to other volcanoes.
...

Not a lot certainty about what's going to happen. Although one thing seems certain, the scary scenarios will accumulate, don't you think?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
The three largest Yellowstone eruptions produced a rain of ash that spread over much of western and central North America and beyond; these ash deposits are greater than 2 m thick near their eruptive sources and as much as a meter thick in surrounding areas.

Each of these three eruptions produced a caldera, or deep crater-like depression, tens of kilometers wide, formed by collapse of the ground surface into a partly emptied subterranean magma chamber. The latest of these three great eruptions formed the Yellowstone caldera. Renewed magma influx beneath the Yellowstone caldera in central Yellowstone National Park uplifted parts of the caldera floor and produced voluminous intracaldera lavas, the youngest of which extruded in a series of eruptive episodes about 164,000, 152,000, 114,000, 102,000, and 72,000 years ago.

Available data suggest a highly episodic behavior of past eruptions of this sort, periods of a few thousand years characterized by numerous eruptions being separated by longer intervals of about 12,000 to 38,000 years without eruption. One statistical measure of eruption probabilities based on this episodic behavior suggests an average recurrence of 20,000 years. The fact that no such eruption has occurred for more than 70,000 years may mean that insufficient eruptible magma remains beneath the Yellowstone caldera to produce another large volume lava flow.

Of the hazards, the most likely to occur are hydrothermal explosions, with an average annual probability from as high as 0.5 (equivalent to an average recurrence of 2 years) for small explosions to perhaps 5x103 (an average recurrence of 200 years) for explosions large enough to form a 100-m-diameter crater. Hydrothermal explosions that might result in potential risks to people have a probability no greater than 0.1 per year (an average recurrence of 10 years) for small explosions. Potential for a volcanic eruption is much lower than that for hydrothermal explosions.

Source: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2007/1071/of2007-1071.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Andre said:
Not a lot certainty about what's going to happen. Although one thing seems certain, the scary scenarios will accumulate, don't you think?
I imagine there will be a lot of hype motivated by the desire to sell more advertising. Call me cynical, but I don't see much in the way of critical analysis in the media.

Anything Earth movement around mag 2-3 is not big deal - California and Alaksa have that daily. The more appropriate measure would be temperature rises, which would indicate magma moving toward the surface.

I was in Yellowstone several years ago and I observed that many of the thermal vents and features were no longer as hot or active. Part of that is a shift in the magma, and part may be drier weather so that ground water is reduced in some areas.
 
I read this article earlier.

Earthquakes are hardly unusual in Yellowstone. Hundreds occur in the park every year. Earthquake "swarms" like the recent activity also aren't uncommon, although the 900 or so quakes that began Dec. 26 and significantly tapered off about a week later appear to have been the most energetic swarm in more than 20 years.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090110/ap_on_sc/yellowstone_volcano_hysteria
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For perspective, see this map.
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsww/Maps/region/N_America.php

Note the greater frequency of earthquakes of Mag 2.5 or greater in Alaska, California and Puerto Rico, compared with Yellowstone. In Yellowstone, there is one earthquake of Mag 3.3, which is unusual.

Also see recent earthquakes in the US - http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsus/
Alaska, California and Puerto Rico have daily activity well above Yellowstone

Zoom into - http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsus/Maps/US10/37.47.-115.-105.php - and note the number of earthquakes in Utah vs Wyoming (Yellowstone).


Certainly, one should keep an eye on Yellowstone, but don't panic.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Is it better to have many small rumblings, I thought I remembered something along those lines anyways...?
 
hypatia said:
Is it better to have many small rumblings, I thought I remembered something along those lines anyways...?
It's better to have regular small quakes on a major fault than to have a long period of quiet, when stresses can build. I would not want to be near the New Madrid fault when that rascal decides to cut loose again.
 
I was watching a show about volcanic action in Hawaii last night, and earthquakes always precede eruptions there, but that is a unique area with a fixed hot spot that the plates move over. Or so they said.
 
  • #10
This has interesting graphics and details.

http://www.solcomhouse.com/yellowstone.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Toba"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #12
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Garita_Caldera" :approve:
 
Last edited by a moderator: