Slashdot Mirror


We All Nearly Missed the Largest Underwater Volcano Eruption Ever Recorded (sciencealert.com)

schwit1 quotes ScienceAlert: She was flying home from a holiday in Samoa when she saw it through the airplane window: a "peculiar large mass" floating on the ocean, hundreds of kilometres off the north coast of New Zealand. The Kiwi passenger emailed photos of the strange ocean slick to scientists, who realised what it was -- a raft of floating rock spewed from an underwater volcano, produced in the largest eruption of its kind ever recorded.

"We knew it was a large-scale eruption, approximately equivalent to the biggest eruption we've seen on land in the 20th Century," says volcanologist Rebecca Carey from the University of Tasmania, who's co-led the first close-up investigation of the historic 2012 eruption. The incident, produced by a submarine volcano called the Havre Seamount, initially went unnoticed by scientists, but the floating rock platform it generated was harder to miss. Back in 2012, the raft -- composed of pumice rock -- covered some 400 square kilometres (154 square miles) of the south-west Pacific Ocean, but months later satellites recorded it dispersing over an area twice the size of New Zealand itself... for a sense of scale, think roughly 1.5 times larger than the 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens -- or 10 times the size of the 2010 Eyjafjallajokull eruption in Iceland.

When an underwater robot first sent back detailed maps, one volcanologist remembers that "I thought the vehicle's sonar was acting up... We saw all these bumps on the seafloor... It turned out that each bump was a giant block of pumice, some of them the size of a van."

41 comments

  1. Recorded by Brockmire · · Score: 0

    If it's recorded, we can just watch it whenever we want. Not sure how we nearly missed something recorded.

    1. Re:Recorded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My Tivo is full of recorded stuff nobody's ever watched.

  2. Pumice Rock by Brockmire · · Score: 1

    So is New Zealand going to be the pedicure capital of the world? Smooth as fuck feet when using their beaches?

    1. Re:Pumice Rock by Ross+Finlayson · · Score: 1

      No, but there *is* a large volcanic cauldera (Lake Taupo) in the centre (sic :-) of New Zealand's North Island whose beaches are covered with pumice rocks. If you pick up these rocks and throw them into the lake, they'll float!

  3. Effects on global warming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A volcano of this size on land would have a very noticeable effect on the climate, causing some cold winters due to dust in the upper atmosphere blocking sunlight. When the volcano occurs underwater this must be mitigated since I haven't noticed any particularly stunning sunsets lately and this has been the second warmest year ever recorded on Earth.

    1. Re:Effects on global warming by Rei · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A common way to scrub dust and water-soluble gases in industry is known as a wet scrubber, where you either have gas bubbles moving through liquid or liquid droplets moving through the gas, transferring dust and soluble gases into the liquid.

      With a subsea volcanic eruption, the ocean is basically a natural scrubber.

      BTW, the main impact on the short-term climate from volcanoes is sulfur dioxide, not dust (I say "short term" because the longer-term impact is warming due to CO2 - but in the short term the SO2 greatly overpowers this effect).

      --
      Santa Ana Winds: Like the Dustbowl, but with awards shows.
  4. Nothing on the seismometers? by Nutria · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You'd think an explosion that size would be noticed all over the Pacific Rim.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    1. Re:Nothing on the seismometers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, they were distracted by the Kaiju.

    2. Re:Nothing on the seismometers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Think about the 'explosion' on the bottom of the ocean. Think how the sound is dampened by the thousands of feet of water. The scale of the variables surrounding this event is amazing.

    3. Re:Nothing on the seismometers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are not taking into account just how fricking huge the Pacific is.

    4. Re:Nothing on the seismometers? by segwonk · · Score: 1

      My first thought was - why wasn't there a tsunami from this?

      --
      - ------ Go 'til ya know.
    5. Re:Nothing on the seismometers? by Nutria · · Score: 0

      Not the explosion, you ninny, but the tremors caused by the eruption. They travel a *long* distance.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    6. Re:Nothing on the seismometers? by hawkfish · · Score: 1

      Nope, they were distracted by the Kaiju.

      Well played ;-)

      --
      You will not drink with us, but you would taste our steel? - Walter Matthau, The Pirates
  5. I bet they would have noticed by bobstreo · · Score: 1

    If it was the Yellowstone Caldera.

  6. Say 150 square miles, not 154 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    400 square kilometers is 20x20 square kilometers. That's obviously not an exact number, and "some 400 square kilometer" makes it extra clear. So give a rough number for square miles too. 154 square miles gives an impression of precision that is not justified. Better yet, stop using that archaic unit of distance, but if you're going to keep using it, do it right.

    1. Re:Say 150 square miles, not 154 by KiloByte · · Score: 1

      Especially that in this context it's unobvious whether they mean nautical miles or land miles, which, unlike the third ("survey") mile differ by a lot. Having three different units by the same name is pure brain damage.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    2. Re:Say 150 square miles, not 154 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just start using kilometres like the grown-ups. Big boy units.

    3. Re: Say 150 square miles, not 154 by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      I think you are mistaken, and old people need to die for metric to come in. I was on vacation and talked with a retired Canadian teacher who complained of having to convert to Celsius system back in the 80's. A motherfucking high school teacher complaining about simple math as too complicated. Made my head nearly explode. Doing simple conversions in my head was like showing magic to someone 2000 years ago. Have you ever met guys in their 50's who never graduated high school but has had labour job for 30 years talk about all their experience like they're irreplaceable?

    4. Re: Say 150 square miles, not 154 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If it was 30 years of plumbing experience I'd hire them before I hired your educated but entireless useless dumb ass if I had a plumbing problem.

  7. Carbon by Salo2112 · · Score: 1

    How much carbon gets into the atmosphere from the eruption of an underwater volcano? Do events like this help or hurt the climate?

    1. Re:Carbon by rrohbeck · · Score: 1, Informative

      Probably nothing because it was all dissolved in water. Oh and humans emit CO2 at a rate of about 100x of all volcanoes combined.

    2. Re:Carbon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When Republicans faggots pull dogshit out of their asses by the handful that's just good conservatism. They're full of the stuff.

    3. Re:Carbon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      translation: "Ooooh! Here's something that if I don't think about it too much will reinforce my beliefs! I can wave it around just as if I'm proving something!"

    4. Re:Carbon by Tenebrousedge · · Score: 3, Informative

      Quite correct. It's also notable that one of the reasons why AGW was initially considered discredited was that the oceans have an effectively infinite ability to absorb carbon dioxide, many times what humans could possibly liberate. Therefore, it was reasoned, 'carbonic acid' could not build up in the atmosphere. Unfortunately for everyone of Earth, the oceans overturn at a rate far too low to keep up with the amount of excess carbon we're emitting, and consequently we notice this whole 'ppm' thing going up, and as a nice bonus the oceans are acidifying too.

      So as you say, the oceans can deal with the undersea volcanoes just fine. It's the gigatonnes of anthropogenic carbon being dumped directly into the atmosphere that we should probably think about dialing back a few notches.

      (If anyone was looking for a citation for your figure of 100x, they would find it in
      Gerlach, T. (2011). Volcanic versus anthropogenic carbon dioxide. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union, 92(24), 201-202. )

      --
      Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
    5. Re:Carbon by Hussman32 · · Score: 1

      The CO2 added by volcanoes is negligible, but it's the energy that the volcano adds to the ocean that affects the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. One kilogram of magma will heat up about 500 kg of water 1 degree Celsius. That adds up to a lot of energy very quickly when talking about a pumice flotilla of 400 km^2.

      --
      "Who are you?" "No one of consequence." "I must know." "Get used to disappointment."
    6. Re:Carbon by Tenebrousedge · · Score: 1

      energy that the volcano adds to the ocean that affects the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.

      CO2 concentrations are not strongly temperature-dependent, no.

      One kilogram of magma will heat up about 500 kg of water 1 degree Celsius. That adds up to a lot of energy very quickly when talking about a pumice flotilla of 400 km^2.

      It is not a lot of energy when compared to the Earth's energy budget, and you're ignoring the heat of vaporization. Why don't you try again, preferably with a reputable citation.

      --
      Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
  8. So, this was not picked up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By the geological people, the ones who are supposed to notice this sort of thing?

  9. Here's a link to one of the photos by SandorZoo · · Score: 5, Informative

    The article couldn't be bothered to actually include any of the photos taken from the plane, but I think you can find one of them here.

    1. Re:Here's a link to one of the photos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It also cant be bothered to be correct much either..

      "the north coast".. What? There no place known as "the north coast", the northern end of New Zealand is pretty much a point that has a light house on it - Cape Reinga, and not much else around, take a look at a map and you'll see. Perhaps more correctly "off the east coast of Northland" or more specifically something like "in the Pacific xyz Miles/km north east of Auckland".

  10. Not Detected By Passive Sonar? by careysub · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Since the Havre Seamount is at a depth of 900 to 1200 m, while the critical pressure for water is 218 bar (the pressure at 2200 m depth), steam can form in such an eruption so I would have expected a lot of noise from this event. Did no one with hydrophones notice anything?

    --
    Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
  11. Is this story over 5 years old? by mick129 · · Score: 1

    Seems like all the events are July through October 2012. Did any part of this happen recently?

    --
    Move along, no sig to see here.
    1. Re:Is this story over 5 years old? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haha no this is designed to get millennials angry and confused. Their world is crumbling. Or something.

    2. Re: Is this story over 5 years old? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yeah don't worry, we know everything about the planet already, we wouldn't miss an entire fucking volcano going off or anything. The science is settled, we got this!

  12. 2020 Kermandec Island eruption by riverat1 · · Score: 2

    This Wikipedia article on it contains some more information and a couple of satellite photos.

    2012 Kermandec Islands eruption

  13. acidification of oceans by aod7br7932 · · Score: 1

    Could this be the major cause of oceans increased acidification(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_acidification)?

    1. Re:acidification of oceans by Hussman32 · · Score: 1

      Maybe because all the heat of the magma raised the temperature of the ocean water and therefore lowered the pH. The ocean is alkaline because there are stronger bases (sodium, magnesium, calcium) than acids in the water, and that balance controls the carbonate content in the ocean and what is in the atmosphere.

      --
      "Who are you?" "No one of consequence." "I must know." "Get used to disappointment."