Monte Somma & Vesuvius

Painters rendition of the 79 AD Pompeian eruption of Vesuvius.

The World’s most ill-begotten real estate, Part II

Monte Somma is an old volcano, activity started 400 000 years ago. Over the next 375 000 years a massive strato-volcano was built up at around the same location as todays Vesuvius. The main geological component is guarinite, an epitaxy of hiortdahlite, wöhlerite and låvenite. There is no known record of any caldera forming events during this long period. At the end of the period Monte Somma had an edifice containing four times the rock volume of today’s Vesuvius (calculated conservatively).

The volcanicity in the area is driven by the back-arc subduction zone caused as the African plate slams into the Eurasian plate, and then being pushed under. On the European side melt from the friction of the plates is being released through the Campanian volcanic arc. Other close by members of the volcanic arc is Campi Flegrei and Mount Epomeo (Island of Ischia).

25 000 years ago Monte Somma suffered the Codolan eruption, an ultra-plinian eruption that eradicated almost the entire volcano in a cataclysmic failure of the magmatic chamber. The Codolan ash lies on top of the Campanian Ignimbrite caused by Campi Flegrei 34 000 years ago, making the Codolan eruption the youngest of the cataclysmic events caused by the Campanian arc. The highest remaining point after the eruption is today known as Punta del Nasone (Tip of the Nose), an 1 132 meter high edifice on the caldera rim. The eruption probably had a significant effect on the population size in southern Europe.

Google Earth Image of Vesuvius. On the upper left you can clearly see the caldera wall of Monte Somma with the Tip of the Nose (1132m).

Vesuvius is born

From the ashes of Monte Somma a new volcano started to grow almost immediately. During the first 8 000 years the new volcano had a fairly unevolved magmatic chamber system. As such it could not cause large eruptions, instead it slowly, but steadily built up.

That changed about 17 000 years ago when a cycle started consisting of frequent small to medium eruptions interspersed by Plinian eruption ranging between VEI-5 and VEI-6. To date there has been 8 of these larger events in the current cycle. Calling them large might seem ridiculous compared to the Codolan ultra-plinian event, but one should compare within the cycle. These eruptions are believed to range between 5 and 15 cubic kilometers of ash counted in Dense Rock Equivalent (DRE). Compared to the 0.25 cubic kilometers (DRE) of Eyjafjallajökull these eruptions are rather large.

These larger eruptions take place roughly every 2 000 to 3 000 years. This time interval makes sense if one takes into account that the magmas needs time to fractionalize enough to evolve to the highly explosive magmas involved in these eruptions.

The latest plinian eruption was of course the 79 AD eruptions that eradicated the cities of Herculaneum and Pompeii. I will cover this eruption in a separate article in the series about Neapolitanean volcanicity. This eruption is the reason we call these eruptions plinian. The reason for that being the historian Pliny the Younger (Plinius), writing down the quintessential record of the eruption.

The plinian eruption before that was the Avellino eruption (Pomici d´Avellino) that took place 3 800 years ago. Archaeologists have noticed that this eruption had a large effect on the regional Bronze Age population.

After the 79 AD eruption Vesuvius has had numerous small to medium sized eruptions ranging from VEI-1 up to VEI-5. Some of these have been notoriously ashy. The 472 and 1631 eruptions yielded ash that travelled as far as Constantinople.

Vesuvius today is rapidly getting known as the Garbage Dump of Italy. This is due to a large amount of both legal and illegal dumping of garbage and industrial waste in old flanking vents and cones. This has raised the toxicity around the volcano to a level where one should not eat anything growing on or around the volcano. Even the fabled wines of Vesuvius are now deemed not fit for human consumption. It is sad that Man’s folly is destroying one of the world’s most beautiful vistas.

Technically Vesuvius is a somma-volcano, a type of volcanoes named after its parent volcano. The term refers to a fully developed strato-volcano that has formed inside a caldera of an older destroyed strato-volcano.

Photograph by the US Air Force. Eruption of Vesuvius 1944 taken from a bomber plane.

Risks of Vesuvius

Vesuvius can theoretically have 3 types of eruptions if we look historically. These are in order of threat-level the regular eruptions, the plinian eruptions, and a possible recurring ultra-plinian Somman event. Let us look at them one at a time.

Before we go on I would like to say that the projected death tolls for the respective eruption sizes are from figures that have been calculated by INGV, The Italian Government, The regional government of Naples, independent catastrophe mitigation experts, EU and the UN Decade Volcano Program.

The lower end figure is the best possible figures. Basically it would require functioning scientific volcano predictions, and a high-powered highly ordered Government ruthlessly enforcing evacuations and other protective measures. Basically we are talking about northern European style Government with heavy military aid here. The high figure is based on INGV being disregarded for political reasons, week or no mitigative measures taken, lack of functioning roads being accounted for, and the general nonchalant attitude in the region. I would here say that INGV will do their work; they are highly capable and very diligent in performing their duties. I just hope that they will be allowed to do it by the highly corrupt Neapolitan local politicians.

The risk is of course heightened by the high population numbers, and that people live close to, or even on the flanks of Vesuvius.

Central crater of Vesuvius.

Normal Vesuvian eruption

Vesuvius is a highly prolific volcano, and it is known to have had several instances of magmatic intrusion since the 1944 eruption. The last major intrusive episode was taking place between 1996 and 1999. So far this is the largest of the intrusive events post 1944.

It is highly likely that Vesuvius will have an eruption during this century. When it happens it will almost certainly be in the range of VEI-2 to VEI-4. One should though note that there have been two out-layer small VEI-5 eruptions since the 79 AD eruption and also that there has been a few VEI-1 eruptions. Median eruption (most likely) would be a VEI-3 size. Ash, volcanic bombs and pyroclastic flows would be the largest risk for the population.

Death rate would be between 0 and 100 000 depending on size of the eruption, and the amount of protective measures taken.

Vesuvius in the background photographed from Herculaneum.

Plinian Vesuvian eruption

Vesuvius is from a short geological time-frame ranging in on a plinian eruption. Nothing points towards that the eruptive cycle that started 17 000 years ago has changed to the better. Judging by previous behavior the next plinian eruption will occur during the coming millennium.

The risk of a plinian eruption is driven by the rate of fractionalization of the magmas. Normally this type of explosive eruptive behavior requires the volcano to not erupt for a few centuries before the plinian eruption, thusly giving the magma time to evolve as intrusions bring in new material that mixes with older colder magmas to revigorate the explosivity until the volcano quite literally explodes. This seems to not be the case with Vesuvius. One suggestion might be that there are different magma chambers that are responsible for the larger eruptions and small shallow chamber responsible for the smaller eruptions. Be that as it may, do not expect a long period of repose between a normal eruption and a plinian. Risks for a plinian eruption would be large amounts of ash, large pyroclastic floods, and lava bombs ejected up towards 40 kilometers. There is also risk of tsunamis causing additional deaths in the low laying parts of the Bay of Naples. Larger pyroclastic flows can rush over the water’s surface and hit areas that are not close.

Death rate between 10 000 and 1 000 000 depending on prevailing wind and the amount of people evacuated.

Photograph from Whiteynet. Vesuvius encircled by Monte Somma caldera.

Ultra-plinian eruption

This option is highly unlikely in the foreseeable future. Why? Compared to the size of the Monte Somma edifice we know what the maximum size the volcano can grow to before it suffers a catastrophic fail. Even if we count in the secondary caldera formation normally are smaller than the first one due to damages to the crust we still known that it will take quite some time to build the volcano up sufficiently both above ground and below ground.

If we calculate the growth rate of Vesuvius and compare it with the size of Monte Somma before the caldera event we see that it will take a minimum of another 75 000 to 100 000 years to grow to comparable size. Statistically we know that secondary caldera formations are 50 to 75 percent of the original event size. So, we are most likely looking at something in between 25 000 to 75 000 years of continuous growth before we need to worry about it.

The major risk of an ultra-plinian eruption would be ash covering a very large area, the explosions involved would instantly crush anyone within 25 kilometer. Think a hydrogen nuclear bomb shock-wave here. Between 25 and 50 kilometers there would be an initial 50 percent mortality rate due to high aerial ash content, lava bombs, and enormous pyroclastic flows covering large parts of the Bay of Naples. After the event pretty much no buildings within the 50km radius would be left standing up. Nationally deaths would occur due to ash and gas contamination. The coming year southern Europe would suffer crop failures. There will be an increased likelihood of hemispheric rapid cooling causing additional deaths and famine.

Death rate, 100 000 to 4 000 000. Supervolcano as a term is nuisance, but if one would erupt in a population the size of Naples it would have major impact. Regardless of the term, the effect on the population of southern Europe would be truly “super”. Remember, it is highly unlikely to happen.

This was the second installment in a series that will be five posts long. Remaining are the two other supervolcanoes encircling Naples, and of course the mentioned Pompeian eruption.

CARL

What’s going on at Katla? Part III

Image from Wikimedia. Aerial picture of Katla.

Trying to make sense of complex phenomenae

In the first two instalments, we had a look at Katla as she appears through media and what she has done historically. It is now time to have a look at what’s going on and try to paint a coherent picture of what she actually is, is up to and able to do, but first let us recapitulate what we found previously:

• There is a general interest in Katla because she is and has been regarded as a very dangerous volcano by generations of Icelanders.
• The presentation of Katla in media is skewered by vested interests ranging from scientists who hope to increase their professional and/or public standing, people trying to cash in on the interest generated such as journalists and bloggers, and finally, there are people trying to increase their standing within the subculture of doomsaying and alarmism.
• Katla is a massive but relatively young volcano, located on the MAR, and formed when Iceland was covered by glaciers.
• The records include two large fissure eruptions on the NE flank of Katla; the prehistoric 5 km3 Hólmsá Fires of 5550 BC and ~22 km3 Eldgjá eruption in 934 AD. In historic times, the 1100 years or so that Iceland has been settled, there have been 27 listed eruptions (28 if the inferred minor subglacial 2011 eruption is included), 23 of which have been explosive.
• Of the 23 explosive eruptions, three have been assigned VEI 3, thirteen VEI 4 and four VEI 5.
• The four VEI 5 eruptions are remarkably alike in size at 1.2 – 1.5 km3, which is at the upper end of what Katla probably is able to do but at the very lower end of VEI 5 eruptions.
• Tephrochronology (in some cases complemented by radiocarbon dating) has identified a further 103 eruptions going back ~8,500 years, and in the few cases where a VEI has been assigned, none have been greater than a VEI 4.
• Katla does not possess a caldera-sized magma chamber.
• In order to account for the great number of explosive eruptions which involve more evolved magmas, Katla could have more than a single magma chamber.
• The available evidence suggests that in order to break through the up to 700 meters thick Mýrdalsjökull glacier, an eruption must be at least a substantial VEI 3.
• Direct and (primarily) indirect evidence suggests that smaller eruptions, mainly basaltic VEI 0 – 2 eruptions are severely underrepresented in her eruptive record and ought to exceed the number of observed eruptions.

Fig 1. Mýrdalsjökull showing the main glacier outlets, directions of jökulhlaups and areas affected. E –
Entajökull, S – Sólheimajökull, K – Kötlujökull, M – Markarfljot, Ss – Sólheimasandur, MS – Mýrdalssandur.
Eyjafjallajökull is to the left and the smaller glacier above is Tindfjallajökull (adapted from Google Maps).

The greatest danger from Katla comes from the very quick and extensive melting of the glacier caused by large eruptions which results in destructive jökulhlaups. There are three major outlets from the glacier: Entujökull to the NW that empties into the Markarfljot river and valley north of Eyjafjallajökull, Sólheimajökull to the SSW that empties onto the Sólheimasandur and finally, Kötlujökull to the SE that empties in a great arc east through south onto the Mýrdalssandur. What ought to be prime farmland and in fact once was settled, is nowadays an unsettled wasteland because of the devastating jökulhlaups unleashed by Katla. This is the true reason why Katla is considered to be such a dangerous volcano.

The fact that one often comes across the reference that in the days before the Hringvegur (ring road), “people were afraid to traverse the Sólheima- and Mýrdalssandur because of the frequent jökulhlaups” is another indication that smaller and unrecorded eruptions that cause only minor hlaups are far more frequent than the 40 – 80 years often given as the interval between main, and thus visible, eruptions.

Fig. 2. The foundations of the old bridge across the Múlakvísl river destroyed by the July 9th 2011 jökulhlaup
are visible to the left. The new bridge was laid down a week later. (photo John A Stevenson, GVP website)

Apart from the postulated connection between the Eyjafjallajökull and Katla volcanoes, one question that always crops up is the Goðabunga cryptodome. Many volcanologists maintain that it is a part of the volcanic system of the Katla central volcano. Others, notably Sturkell and his co-workers, claim it is part of the Eyjafjallajökull volcanic system. In order to shed some light on this issue, I asked our own GeoLurking if he could make a plot of all the earthquakes from 1994 up to and including the 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption. The results are quite clear and do throw up a surprise:

Fig 3. E-W cross section, view from south, through Eyjafjallajökull, Goðabunga and Katla. Plot by and
courtesy of GeoLurking. The “lines” formed at approximately 5, 3 and 1.1 km at Goðabunga and Katla are most
likely artefacts caused by quakes being assigned a poorly defined depth. The latter, 1.1 km, is the default depth
assigned by the automatic system in case it cannot compute a depth within the predetermined level of certainty and unless they are manually checked, which is not the case of every quake, automatic depth remains uncorrected, hence these artefacts.

From this cross section, it is quite clear that there is no connection between the Eyjafjallajökull volcanic system and Katla. Eyjafjallajökull has its own, well-defined feeder system from the Moho (first molten layer beneath the Earth’s solid crust) as does Katla, thus they are wholly independent of one another. As can also be seen, albeit not as clearly, Goðabunga too seems to be independent of either Eyjafjallajökull and Katla, the ramifications of which will be the subject of a later post by Carl. Sufficient to say that when we contemplate what Katla herself may be up to, we must differentiate between activity at Goðabunga and activity at Katla. Once we do, we see that while Goðabunga is more or less continuously active, Katla operates in bursts and seems to be most active during summer and autumn when the ice cap is at its, relatively speaking of an up to 700 m thick glacier, thinnest.

Fig 4. Activity post-Eyjafjallajökull. Activity at Eyjafjallajökull is minor and has to do with the system settling down after the end of the eruptive phase. Note that at a depth of 0 to 5 km or so, there seem to be three separate areas of activity at Katla. (Plot by and courtesy of GeoLurking.)

After the Eyjafjallajökull eruption, Katla seems to have entered an active phase with a suspected subglacial eruption on July 9th 2011 and several pits or craters forming on top of the glacier. This activity seems to be localised to three main areas within the caldera:

Fig. 5. Earthquake activity at Katla July 9th 2011, the day of the jökulhlaup and suspected subglacial eruption. Both the 1823 and 1918 eruptions occurred close to but just east of this area. The 1823 eruption occurred close to the easternmost red spot while the 1918 eruption was roughly at the rightmost dark blue spot below it. (IMO)

Fig 6. Earthquake activity at Katla July 17th 2011. (IMO)

Fig. 7. Earthquake activity at Katla July 21st 2011. The 1755 eruption was situated in the same area as the three overlapping orange spots. (IMO)

As can be seen, there are at least three distinct areas of activity inside the caldera with the one associated with the inferred July 9th eruption well to the south. The pits formed in the glacier also align with these three areas, albeit the pits to the northeast seem more drawn out along the caldera wall and not over the center of activity. These three areas seem to tie in with the three areas of activity noted in fig 4 as do the locations of three of Katla’s major eruptions. Thus there is not a single vent, but at least three at surface distances of approximately 5 to 8 km from each other. It is equally likely to judge from Fig 3. and Fig 4. in conjunction, that at great depth, they do have a common source.

I will now present you with my personal view of Katla, but do not be afraid to disagree or draw your own conclusions (within reason please, no Katlatubos here):

Katla is a young volcano and far more active than has previously been thought. Unlike the similarly aged but much less active Eyjafjallajökull, Katla has had more time to develop her system of sills to the point where they are fewer in number than they originally were but have a substantially larger magma-carrying capacity and approach or may have reached the point where they can be considered magma chambers proper. Since cooking evolved magmas takes a long time, usually millennia in the case of cubic kilometre-sized silica-rich magmas and at the very least many centuries for intermediate magmas, it is highly likely that Katla possesses several pockets of magma capable of eruptions ranging from high VEI 3s to small VEI 5s. Not only do the times between such eruptions argue this, their wide spread of location within the caldera does so too.

The most common type of eruption at Katla is the small, subglacial eruption of a few tens of millions of cubic meters of basaltic magmas. These eruptions are not energetic enough to break through the very thick Mýrdalsjökull glacier and the only proofs of their existence are intense earthquake swarms followed by minor jökulhlaups and later observations of deep pits or craters, sometimes water-filled, in the glacier ice. My guesstimate is that there may be many such small eruptions over any given ten-year period, and possibly in the case of a period of high activity, there may even be more than one in a single year. By back-tracking and investigating old accounts over the past few centuries of jökulhlaups in the area not associated with visible eruptions, it ought to be possible to identify many of these minor eruptions.

While a larger “proper” eruption of Katla in the VEI 3 – 5 range cannot be ruled out, I find one unlikely at present as the current activity mostly is in areas already depleted of evolved magmas by geologically speaking very recent major eruptions. Also there is little sign of the uplift required on GPS. If one were to occur, the odds for one towards the upper end of what Katla is able of ought to be better in the Eastern to Northern parts of the caldera.

Finally, what we do see when we look at SIL-stations such as Austmannsbunga, located on the NE caldera rim (not a coincidence, see above), is hydrothermal activity following a period of possibly still ongoing magmatic intrusion and not signs of an imminent, large eruption.

Fig 8. Hydrothermal activity at Katla as shown on the Austmannsbunga SIL (IMO)

I’m sorry to be such a boring old fart, but if this is unsatisfactory, start looking for intense earthquake activity at some 25 – 10 km depth, showing on the IMO map for Mýrdalsjökull as being in the Eastern to Northern part of the caldera, activity that shows a clear upwards trend and spreads when it reaches depths approaching 5 km!

HENRIK