Geology topics
Publications and source records attributed to Sara Barsotti.
Since the 1985 Nevado del Ruiz eruption that killed over 23,000 people in Armero, Colombia, risk communication has become central to volcanic crisis management. Despite the development of effective tools and programmes for volcanic risk communication, considerable challenges remain.
Explosive volcanic eruptions inject hot mixtures of solid particles (tephra) and gasses into the atmosphere. Entraining ambient air, these mixtures can form plumes rising tens of kilometers until they spread laterally, forming umbrella clouds. While the largest clasts tend to settle in proximity to the volcano, the smallest fragments, commonly referred to as ash (≤2 mm in diameter), can be transported over long distances, forming volcanic clouds. Tephra plumes and clouds pose significant hazards to human society, affecting infrastructure, and human health through deposition on the ground or airborne suspension at low altitudes. Additionally, volcanic clouds are a threat to aviation, during both high-risk actions such as take-off and landing and at standard cruising altitudes. The ability to monitor and forecast tephra plumes and clouds is fundamental to mitigate the hazard associated with explosive eruptions. To that end, various monitoring techniques, ranging from ground-based instruments to sensors on-board satellites, and forecasting strategies, based on running numerical models to track the position of volcanic clouds, are efficiently employed. However, some limitations still exist, mainly due to the high unpredictability and variability of explosive eruptions, as well as the multiphase and complex nature of volcanic plumes. In the next decades, advances in monitoring and computational capabilities are expected to address these limitations and significantly improve the mitigation of the risk associated with tephra plumes and clouds.
Eruption source parameters (ESPs) are crucial for characterising volcanic eruptions and are essential inputs to numerical models used for hazard assessment. Key ESPs of explosive volcanic eruptions include plume height, mass eruption rate, eruption duration, and grain-size distribution. Some of these ESPs can be directly observed during an eruption, but others are difficult to measure in real-time, or indeed, accurately and precisely quantify afterwards. Estimates of ESPs for eruptions that cannot be observed, for example, due to the remote location of a volcano or poor weather conditions, are often defined using expert judgement and data from past eruptions, both from the volcano of interest and analogue volcanoes farther afield. Analysis of such information is time intensive and difficult, particularly during eruption response. These difficulties have resulted in the production of datasets to aid quick identification of ESPs prior to or during an eruption for use in operational response settings such as those at volcano observatories and Volcanic Ash Advisory Centres. These resources include the Mastin et al. ( 2009a ) ESP dataset and the Catalogue of Icelandic Volcanoes and European Catalogue of Volcanoes aviation tables. Here, we review and compare these resources, which take different approaches to assigning ESPs. We identify future areas for development of these resources, highlighting the need for frequent updates as more knowledge of volcanic activity is gained and as modelling capabilities and requirements change.
In November 2019, the fourth meeting on Volcano Observatory Best Practices workshop was held in Mexico City as a series of talks, discussions, and panels. Volcanologists from around the world offered suggestions for ways to optimize volcano-observatory crisis operations. By crisis, we mean unrest that may or may not lead to eruption, the eruption itself, or its aftermath, all of which require analysis and communications by the observatory. During a crisis, the priority of the observatory should be to acquire, process, analyze, and interpret data in a timely manner. A primary goal is to communicate effectively with the authorities in charge of civil protection. Crisis operations should rely upon exhaustive planning in the years prior to any actual unrest or eruptions. Ideally, nearly everything that observatories do during a crisis should be envisioned, prepared, and practiced prior to the actual event. Pre-existing agreements and exercises with academic and government collaborators will minimize confusion about roles and responsibilities. In the situation where planning is unfinished, observatories should prioritize close ties and communications with the land and civil-defense authorities near the most threatening volcanoes. To a large extent, volcanic crises become social crises, and any volcano observatory should have a communication strategy, a lead communicator, regular status updates, and a network of colleagues outside the observatory who can provide similar messaging to a public that desires consistent and authoritative information. Checklists permit tired observatory staff to fulfill their duties without forgetting key communications, data streams, or protocols that need regular fulfilment (Bretton et al. 2018; Newhall et al. 2020). Observatory leaders need to manage staff workload to prevent exhaustion and ensure that expertise is available as needed. Event trees and regular group discussions encourage multi-disciplinary thinking, consideration of disparate viewpoints, and documentation of all group decisions and consensus. Though regulations, roles and responsibilities differ around the world, scientists can justify their actions in the wake of an eruption if they document their work, are thoughtful and conscientious in their deliberations, and carry out protocols and procedures developed prior to volcanic unrest. This paper also contains six case studies of volcanic eruptions or observatory actions that illustrate some of the topics discussed herein. Specifically, we discuss Ambae (Vanuatu) in 2017–2018, Kīlauea (USA) in 2018, Etna (Italy) in 2018, Bárðarbunga (Iceland) in 2014, Cotopaxi (Ecuador) in 2015, and global data sharing to prepare for eruptions at Nyiragongo (Democratic Republic of Congo).
This study compares and evaluates one-dimensional (1D) and three-dimensional (3D) numerical models of volcanic eruption columns in a set of different inter-comparison exercises. The exercises were designed as a blind test in which a set of common input parameters was given for two reference eruptions, representing a strong and a weak eruption column under different meteorological conditions. Comparing the results of the different models allows us to evaluate their capabilities and target areas for future improvement. Despite their different formulations, the 1D and 3D models provide reasonably consistent predictions of some of the key global descriptors of the volcanic plumes. Variability in plume height, estimated from the standard deviation of model predictions, is within ~ 20% for the weak plume and ~ 10% for the strong plume. Predictions of neutral buoyancy level are also in reasonably good agreement among the different models, with a standard deviation ranging from 9 to 19% (the latter for the weak plume in a windy atmosphere). Overall, these discrepancies are in the range of observational uncertainty of column height. However, there are important differences amongst models in terms of local properties along the plume axis, particularly for the strong plume. Our analysis suggests that the simplified treatment of entrainment in 1D models is adequate to resolve the general behaviour of the weak plume. However, it is inadequate to capture complex features of the strong plume, such as large vortices, partial column collapse, or gravitational fountaining that strongly enhance entrainment in the lower atmosphere. We conclude that there is a need to more accurately quantify entrainment rates, improve the representation of plume radius, and incorporate the effects of column instability in future versions of 1D volcanic plume models.