Thread: Yellowstone caldera erruption.

Hello,

I've been thinking about Yellowstone Caldera, i do believe that an eruption is comming in the near future (i'm no believer of 2012 so it has nothing to do with that)
it usually errupts every 600 000 years, the last one was 640 000 years ago.
Since the caldera is only a few miles beneath the surface, i've been thinking that perhaps a very large explosion could cause seismic activity and cause an erruption.
Is there anyone else who thinks it's possible ? or am i to dramatic ?


kind regards from Belgium,

please remember that "short" in geologic terms could be anything from tomorrow to several thousands of years in the future

the map below shows the spread of ashfall in previous eruptions
not many places to hide if you're in the western part of the US - you should be ok in belgium though

Originally Posted by AXEL

Since the caldera is only a few miles beneath the surface, i've been thinking that perhaps a very large explosion could cause seismic activity and cause an erruption.
Is there anyone else who thinks it's possible ? or am i to dramatic ?

Hi Axel,
I'm not sure what you mean. Are you suggesting that a large, artificial explosion near the caldera could start am earthquake that would weaken the crust singificantly so that Yellowstone could erupt?

If so, this would only likely have any effect if the eruption were already very close. In that case it might advance it by a year or two. In other cases the energy release from any practical explosive device would not likely be enough to produce any permanent effect.

Is a series of 3 events separated by 700,000 and 670,000 years enough to show periodicity? Is a period difference of 30,000 years "near clockwork timing"? What does the reference to zircon and quartz data mean? Just asking.

Originally Posted by Bunbury

Is a series of 3 events separated by 700,000 and 670,000 years enough to show periodicity?

Because of the working hypothesis behind the Yellowstone hotspot, in a loose sense, yes; this hotspot track has a history of 10-15 million years, IIRC.

Is a period difference of 30,000 years "near clockwork timing"?

Geologically-speaking, yes.

What does the reference to zircon and quartz data mean? Just asking.

I'm not sure; the two minerals are generally used to answer different kinds of questions, so one would have to browse the literature to find out (one of the big problems of not including references).

Isotope ratios and minor element geochemistry can reveal details of parent magma composition and history. Couple this with growing understanding of the evolution of magmatic provinces. My understanding is that this is a fast growing field, with several techniques evolving and being proven over the last decade. (My knowledge of the concepts if wholly superficial and doubtless less than I have implied by the above statements.)

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

Originally Posted by AXEL

Since the caldera is only a few miles beneath the surface, i've been thinking that perhaps a very large explosion could cause seismic activity and cause an erruption.
Is there anyone else who thinks it's possible ? or am i to dramatic ?

Hi Axel,
I'm not sure what you mean. Are you suggesting that a large, artificial explosion near the caldera could start am earthquake that would weaken the crust singificantly so that Yellowstone could erupt?

If so, this would only likely have any effect if the eruption were already very close. In that case it might advance it by a year or two. In other cases the energy release from any practical explosive device would not likely be enough to produce any permanent effect.

thanks for the answer Ophiolite that was indeed what i ment, that the erruption could be advanced by a very large explosion

Related:

WASHINGTON—Geophysicists have made the first large-scale picture of the electrical conductivity of the gigantic underground plume of hot and partly molten rock that feeds the Yellowstone supervolcano. The image suggests that the plume beneath the volcanically active area—renowned today for geysers and hot springs—is even bigger than it appears in earlier images made with earthquake waves.

“It’s like comparing ultrasound and MRI in the human body; they are different imaging technologies,” says geophysics Professor Michael Zhdanov of the University of Utah in Salt Lake City. Zhdanov is principal author of the new study and an expert on measuring magnetic and electrical fields on Earth’s surface to find oil, gas, minerals and geologic structures underground.

“It’s a totally new and different way of imaging and looking at the volcanic roots of Yellowstone,” says study co-author Robert B. Smith, professor emeritus and research professor of geophysics, also at University of Utah, and a coordinating scientist of the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory.

In the past 2 million years, three eruptions at Yellowstone have been huge, belching enough volcanic ash to cover half of North America. The new study says nothing about the chances of another cataclysmic caldera (giant crater) eruption at Yellowstone, but it provides scientists with a valuable, new perspective on the vast and deep reservoir of fiery material that feeds such eruptions.

The new study has been accepted for publication in Geophysical Research Letters, a journal of the American Geophysical Union, which plans to publish it within the next few weeks.

-----

Much More at the link:

http://www.agu.org/news/press/pr_arc.../2011-16.shtml

[/img]

I just watched a documentary that showed where lava had erupted in Yellowstone as recently as 100,000 years ago (but not in a super-eruption). Does anybody know if the hot springs and geysers have been active continuously since then, sporadically, or only recently?

General evidence is for pretty much continual activity since that time

My house got done by 7.0 M quake on September 4th, then a 6.4 on Feburary 22nd.

Were 100km's from a significant plate boundary. 26,000 years ago the Taupo eruption occured with the release of 1000 km (cubed)of material. That's VEI eight. It was the biggest eruption within the last 0.5ma?

Rocks behave as fluids over time.

We don't know!

2500km cubed! FarrrrrKKK!

There's an interesting chapter in Bryson's A Short History of Nearly Everything on this. And a movie too.

nothing to worry guys.....just pray and all will gonna be alright....in this nothing is permanent so don't think too much,I dont say don't mine those thing I just say
happen if what suppose to be happen and nothing gonna change that

this blog is run by a professor of geology, a volcano expert Yellowstone: The public and media obsession with the caldera | Eruptions | Big Think and this link takes you to a recent article on yellowstone. there are many more on his blog on the subject. it's a great blog to follow, a little while ago when the icelandic volcano with the unpronounceable name was in full roar, this blog was where you could find the very latest information, as things happened.

Originally Posted by cookie

just pray and all will gonna be alright....

If yellowstone erupts, you sit and pray while I try to reach safety. We'll see which plan works best.

In order to get any kind of eruption, you either need to increase the pressure in the magma chamber, or you need to reduce the resistence holding the magma in.

Now if you could get one of the old cold war fusion bombs in the 200 megaton range, and detonated it on the surface, it might remove enough material, and produce a compression shockwave and rebound that would generate a new eruption. You're unlikely to get a new mega-eruption out of it since the pump isn't primed for one; more like an oozing magma lake similar to Hawaii. And the destruction from the warhead is likely to be greater and farther reaching than the resultant eruption.

I have been exploring the possibility that a supervolcano does not errupt like a stratovolcano or shield type volcano. We knbow so little about them that anyone's "best guess" is not completely out of the picture. My thoughts are that the process may be very slow and progressive, very much like taking a pot of water that has the top few centimeters frozen and putting it on the hot burner. The water on the bottom boils first. If we are lucky, and probably will be, the top ice fractures and let's off a lot of steam first and probably a good bit from around the edges.

This is a speculation, so just another perspective on a question on many minds today scientific and popular. I think, with all the increasing frequencies of solar flares, quakes and now volcanic activity we've seen over the last 40 years especially, there could be a connection to the solar activity of 2002 and 2003 with the Yellowstone Caldera's increased activity in 2002 and 2003, both seismic and from geysers/steam vents. The flares and quakes aren't exactly subsiding. Quite the opposite.

I speculate more of these vents will be seen perhaps even this year. This may become a runaway phase in less than 10 or 20 years, judging by those recent changes, and we could see the smoke and ash spewing in as little as 25 years. With a lot of continued research, it may be possible to predict accurately what to expect. Regardless, it wouldn't hurt for people to change architecture to protect against such a disaster.

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

I speculate more of these vents will be seen perhaps even this year. This may become a runaway phase in less than 10 or 20 years, judging by those recent changes, and we could see the smoke and ash spewing in as little as 25 years. With a lot of continued research, it may be possible to predict accurately what to expect. Regardless, it wouldn't hurt for people to change architecture to protect against such a disaster.

Well, be sure to document when that happens. Meanwhile, I ain't holding my breath, since there is little support for your assertions.

The lead USGS geologist (Dr. Jake Lowenstern YVO Scientist-in-Charge Jake Lowenstern) at Yellowstone doesn't believe it is going to erupt any time soon due to the level in the magma chamber. If we're talking about recent activity, why does the USGS have Yellowstone under normal activity levels? The park saw increased earthquake activity in 2009 as well as increased uplift since the early 2000s, but nothing has happened. Geological time is also a rough estimate. We're talking +/- 50,000 years at least. That's not a lot in the whole scheme of geological time, but it is in human time. I seriously doubt Yellowstone is going to erupt anywhere near our lifetime.

Originally Posted by dutchie

this blog is run by a professor of geology, a volcano expert Yellowstone: The public and media obsession with the caldera | Eruptions | Big Think and this link takes you to a recent article on yellowstone. there are many more on his blog on the subject. it's a great blog to follow, a little while ago when the icelandic volcano with the unpronounceable name was in full roar, this blog was where you could find the very latest information, as things happened.

That's a good link. The first impact is the satellite view thumbnail.

What we don't have to compare against is a satellite shot of it in 1600, 1650, 1700 et al. The native "Turtle Islander" or American saw this as a land of evil spirits. I found records of the park back to Jim Bridger in 1823. After that the first written descriptions are around 1870.

__________________________________________________ __________________

as for documenting and holding one's breath, I hope to document a change in architecture to fluid dynamic shape, and modern protections taken into the design envisionment if for no other reason than to protect this new age of technology from extinction by stupidity, long before any human living on this planet would ever need to document the catastrophic erruption of what may or may not be a global killer.

I don't think it is healthy to dismiss any possibility developed around Newtonian mechanics. We've had a lot of people die here in the Mid-West lately from tornadoes and freaky weather. The Sugarland concert here is an example of an unusual act of nature greeted by stupidity. I take my hat off to the people who pitched in right away to help the victims, but there were many who ran. Why would anyone with an ounce of intelligence not see it coming on radar and evacuated long before a storm hits? This just might be what happens at Yellowstone.
Some will see it and try to warn others. Some will do what they can to pick up the pieces. Some will run in fear.

I'm certain all will be documented by someone.

Originally Posted by NorthernIowaPanther

The lead USGS geologist (Dr. Jake Lowenstern YVO Scientist-in-Charge Jake Lowenstern) at Yellowstone doesn't believe it is going to erupt any time soon due to the level in the magma chamber. If we're talking about recent activity, why does the USGS have Yellowstone under normal activity levels? The park saw increased earthquake activity in 2009 as well as increased uplift since the early 2000s, but nothing has happened. Geological time is also a rough estimate. We're talking +/- 50,000 years at least. That's not a lot in the whole scheme of geological time, but it is in human time. I seriously doubt Yellowstone is going to erupt anywhere near our lifetime.

Are they using Doppler imaging to determine the magma chamber's volumetrics? I'd be more concerned about water sources in that area. I am not convinced we know enough to say it won't errupt in the classic sense on December 21st this year. My best guess is that won't happen, but in view of the increased seismic and volcanic activity around the planet escalating over the last decade along with two 10 fold (nominally) increased acceleration in both the magnetic and geomagnetic poles from .005 deg Northward per year in 1900 to .35 degrees per year in 2002 to 2003. It's increasing. In MY lifetime? Well... I'm not planning on dying this year... I hope I'm around to document 25 years of failed predictions. I started documenting pre-mature events Tuesday... that's a different category altogether.

The history of eruptions is very well documented and the processes that are involved in such a process are also well understood. Geology and Volcanology are both well developed sciences that have a lot going for them. Fluid mechanics is incorporated in much of the modern Geology and Volcanology, but it is not going to be a defining feature in the amount you are suggesting I dont think.

Originally Posted by Paleoichneum

The history of eruptions is very well documented and the processes that are involved in such a process are also well understood. Geology and Volcanology are both well developed sciences that have a lot going for them. Fluid mechanics is incorporated in much of the modern Geology and Volcanology, but it is not going to be a defining feature in the amount you are suggesting I dont think.

Are you familiar with fracking?

yes. are you familiar with the eruptive history of the yellowstone hot spot track?

Originally Posted by Paleoichneum

yes. are you familiar with the eruptive history of the yellowstone hot spot track?

Somewhat. I don't have it memorized. Do you know anything about the basic rock type in that area?

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

Originally Posted by Paleoichneum

yes. are you familiar with the eruptive history of the yellowstone hot spot track?

Somewhat. I don't have it memorized. Do you know anything about the basic rock type in that area?

I'm not sure what the original bedrock is, but I know a lot of what is there now is rhyolite. The evidence is that the trees that occupy a lot of the area are the only ones that can grow in it and it's rather impermeable so puddles of water stick around longer and so they see a lot of mosquito activity.

Rhyolite - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Just so we have a comparison...


So... lots of quartz ingrained and granite-like. I suppose I'd be wanting to know what is closer to the basement... and the magma channels/chambers.

One noticeable trait is that the flow of the erruption seems to head SouthEast, thus, from 10,000 ft down to the gulf.

My assumption it would be the same due to the crustal composition. It tends to be rhyolite. Just look at Mt. St. Helens.

Originally Posted by NorthernIowaPanther

My assumption it would be the same due to the crustal composition. It tends to be rhyolite. Just look at Mt. St. Helens.

Mt St Helens is an entirely different type of eruption. It's where a plate is going underneath the continent. The Yellowstone hotspot is from a very deep reservoir of magma, and has completely different composition.

The yellowstone basements rocks are mainly Precambrian gneiss' and shists