A checklist for crisis operations within volcano observatories

2021 ◽  
pp. 493-544
Author(s):  
Christopher G. Newhall ◽  
John S. Pallister ◽  
C. Dan Miller
Keyword(s):  
Volcano Observatories

scholarly journals EUNADICS-AV early warning system dedicated to supporting aviation in the case of a crisis from natural airborne hazards and radionuclide clouds

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (11) ◽  
pp. 3367-3405
Author(s):  
Hugues Brenot ◽  
Nicolas Theys ◽  
Lieven Clarisse ◽  
Jeroen van Gent ◽  
Daniel R. Hurtmans ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Early Warning ◽  
Traffic Management ◽  
Early Warning System ◽  
Dust Cloud ◽  
Warning System ◽  
Ground Level ◽  
Selective Detection ◽  
Data Products ◽  
Polar Orbiting Satellite ◽  
Volcano Observatories

Abstract. The purpose of the EUNADICS-AV (European Natural Airborne Disaster Information and Coordination System for Aviation) prototype early warning system (EWS) is to develop the combined use of harmonised data products from satellite, ground-based and in situ instruments to produce alerts of airborne hazards (volcanic, dust, smoke and radionuclide clouds), satisfying the requirement of aviation air traffic management (ATM) stakeholders (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/723986, last access: 5 November 2021). The alert products developed by the EUNADICS-AV EWS, i.e. near-real-time (NRT) observations, email notifications and netCDF (Network Common Data Form) alert data products (called NCAP files), have shown significant interest in using selective detection of natural airborne hazards from polar-orbiting satellites. The combination of several sensors inside a single global system demonstrates the advantage of using a triggered approach to obtain selective detection from observations, which cannot initially discriminate the different aerosol types. Satellite products from hyperspectral ultraviolet–visible (UV–vis) and infrared (IR) sensors (e.g. TROPOMI – TROPOspheric Monitoring Instrument – and IASI – Infrared Atmospheric Sounding Interferometer) and a broadband geostationary imager (Spinning Enhanced Visible and InfraRed Imager; SEVIRI) and retrievals from ground-based networks (e.g. EARLINET – European Aerosol Research Lidar Network, E-PROFILE and the regional network from volcano observatories) are combined by our system to create tailored alert products (e.g. selective ash detection, SO2 column and plume height, dust cloud, and smoke from wildfires). A total of 23 different alert products are implemented, using 1 geostationary and 13 polar-orbiting satellite platforms, 3 external existing service, and 2 EU and 2 regional ground-based networks. This allows for the identification and the tracking of extreme events. The EUNADICS-AV EWS has also shown the need to implement a future relay of radiological data (gamma dose rate and radionuclides concentrations in ground-level air) in the case of a nuclear accident. This highlights the interest of operating early warnings with the use of a homogenised dataset. For the four types of airborne hazard, the EUNADICS-AV EWS has demonstrated its capability to provide NRT alert data products to trigger data assimilation and dispersion modelling providing forecasts and inverse modelling for source term estimate. Not all of our alert data products (NCAP files) are publicly disseminated. Access to our alert products is currently restricted to key users (i.e. Volcanic Ash Advisory Centres, national meteorological services, the World Meteorological Organization, governments, volcano observatories and research collaborators), as these are considered pre-decisional products. On the other hand, thanks to the EUNADICS-AV–SACS (Support to Aviation Control Service) web interface (https://sacs.aeronomie.be, last access: 5 November 2021), the main part of the satellite observations used by the EUNADICS-AV EWS is shown in NRT, with public email notification of volcanic emission and delivery of tailored images and NCAP files. All of the ATM stakeholders (e.g. pilots, airlines and passengers) can access these alert products through this free channel.

World Organization of Volcano Observatories

1981 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 306-306
Author(s):  
Gudmundur Sigvaldason
Keyword(s):  
World Organization ◽  
Volcano Observatories

scholarly journals WebObs: The Volcano Observatories Missing Link Between Research and Real-Time Monitoring

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
François Beauducel ◽  
Didier Lafon ◽  
Xavier Béguin ◽  
Jean-Marie Saurel ◽  
Alexis Bosson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Real Time ◽  
Real Time Monitoring ◽  
Missing Link ◽  
Volcano Observatories

Physical and remote access to the European Volcano Research Infrastructures as a strategy to promote the community building: efforts, challenges, and results.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Letizia Spampinato ◽  
Giuseppe Puglisi
Keyword(s):  
Community Building ◽  
Volcanic Rocks ◽  
Remote Access ◽  
Research Topics ◽  
Scientific Communities ◽  
Research Infrastructures ◽  
Physical Access ◽  
Selection Of ◽  
Volcano Observatories ◽  
The Ideal

<p>Indeed, nowadays data sharing via internet is one of the most used approaches to networking scientific communities. However, the opportunity to physically access Research Infrastructures (RIs) and their installations and facilities is potentially the most powerful mean to build up a community. Physically access, in fact, makes the ideal conditions for the RI’s providers and users to work side by side on specific research topics. This is recently the case of the European trans-national access activities promoted in order to allow and push the volcanology community to use either the volcano observatories, to carry out experiments or fieldworks, or laboratories, for exploiting analytical and computational facilities, belonging to the main European volcano research institutions.</p><p>The EUROVOLC project has granted the access to 11 RIs for an overall of 45 installations, including single facilities of pools of mobile instrumentation and of laboratories, and remote access to collections of volcanic rocks, of 5 European countries (France, Iceland, Italy, Portugal, and Spain). In the frame of the project, the trans-national access offer has come from 7 partners (IMO, UI, INGV&CNR, CIVISA, IPGP, and CSIC) acting in 7 WPs (13, 14, 16, 16, 17, 18, and 19).</p><p>The EUROVOLC work-plan has foreseen two calls, one in 2018 and the other in 2019, allowing users to apply for access the RIs, and the effective physical access in 2019 and 2020, respectively. Each call has been managed according to a stepwise process based on an excellence-driven criterion, in which the roles of the various actors and the schedule have been previously defined.</p><p>This contribution aims at presenting the management and coordination efforts related to the trans-national access activities in the frame of EUROVOLC including the preparation and the launch of the 1<sup>st</sup> call, the process of the selection of the proposals, the feedback from the management of the 1<sup>st</sup> call, the preparation of the 2<sup>nd</sup> call, and a critical analysis for improving the management of the 2<sup>nd</sup> call.</p>

DefVolc: Interface and web service for fast computation of volcano displacement

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerie Cayol ◽  
Farshid Dabaghi ◽  
Yo Fukushima ◽  
Marine Tridon ◽  
Delphine Smittarello ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Web Service ◽  
Linear Model ◽  
Web Server ◽  
Model Parameters ◽  
Magma Reservoirs ◽  
Surface Displacements ◽  
Stress Changes ◽  
Speed Up ◽  
Source Geometry ◽  
Volcano Observatories

<div> <div> <div> <p>DefVolc is a suite of programs and a web service intended to help the rapid interpretation of InSAR data, acquired on volcanoes at an increased frequency thanks to the various dedicated satellites. Our objective is to help to rapidely inverse volcano displacements, whether these displacements result from fractures (sheet intrusions or faults) or massive magma reservoirs. These sources may have complex geometries, and they may deform simultaneously. Moreover, volcanoes are associated with prominent topographies. This makes the analysis of surface displacements complex. To appropriately analyse the InSAR displacements, we conduct inverse modelling, using 3D elastostatic boundary element models and a neighbourhood optimization algorithm . We simultaneously invert non-linear model parameters (source geometry and location) and linear model parameters (source stress changes), and further assess mean model parameters and confidence intervals. In order to speed up the setting up of inversions, we developed a users friendly graphical interface. In order to accelerate the inversions, they run on clusters. A web server is proposed to registered users in order to run the inversions on University Clermont Auvergne clusters. Because the web server was developped in the framework of the Eurovolc project framework, European volcano observatories are priority users.</p> </div> </div> </div>

scholarly journals Volcano observatories and monitoring activities in Guatemala

Volcanica ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (S1) ◽  
pp. 203-222
Author(s):  
Amilcar Roca ◽  
Edgar Roberto Mérida Boogher ◽  
Carla Maria Fernanda Chun Quinillo ◽  
Dulce María Esther González Domínguez ◽  
Gustavo Adolfo Chigna Marroquin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Signal Analysis ◽  
Volcanic Hazards ◽  
Monitoring Equipment ◽  
Volcanic Arc ◽  
Tectonic Plates ◽  
Daily Monitoring ◽  
Research Activities ◽  
Acoustic Signal Analysis ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Volcano Observatories

The tectonic and volcanic environment in Guatemala is large and complex. Three major tectonic plates constantly interacting with each other, and a volcanic arc that extends from east to west in the southern part of the country, demand special attention in terms of monitoring and scientific studies. The Instituto Nacional de Sismología, Vulcanología, Meteorología e Hidrología (INSIVUMEH) is the institute in charge of executing these actions at the national and civil level.In recent years, INSIVUMEH has formed a volcanology team consisting of multi-disciplinary personnel that conducts the main volcanological monitoring and research activities. These activities include: seismic and acoustic signal analysis, evaluation and analysis of the volcanic hazards, installation and maintenance of monitoring equipment, and the socialization and dissemination of volcanic knowledge. Of all the volcanic structures in Guatemala, three volcanoes (Fuego, Pacaya, and Santiaguito) are in constant eruption and require all of the available resources (economic and human). These volcanoes present a wide range of volcanic hazards (regarding type and magnitude) that make daily monitoring a great challenge. One of the greatest goals achieved by the volcanology team has been the recent development of a Relative Threat Ranking of Guatemala Volcanoes, taking into account different parameters that allow improved planning in the future, both in monitoring and research. El ambiente tectónico y volcánico de Guatemala es extenso y complejo. Tres grandes placas tectónicas, que interactúan constantemente entre sí, y un arco volcánico, que se extiende de este a oeste en la parte sur del país, exigen especial atención en términos de monitoreo y estudios científicos. El Instituto Nacional de Sismología, Vulcanología, Meteorología e Hidrología (INSIVUMEH) es el instituto encargado de ejecutar estas acciones a nivel nacional y civil. En los últimos años, INSIVUMEH ha formado un equipo de vulcanología conformado por personal multidisciplinario que realiza las principales actividades de seguimiento e investigación vulcanológica. Estas actividades incluyen: análisis de señales sísmicas y acústicas, evaluación y análisis de peligros volcánicos, instalación y mantenimiento de equipos de monitoreo, y socialización y difusión del conocimiento volcánico. De todas las estructuras volcánicas de Guatemala, tres volcanes (Fuego, Pacaya y Santiaguito) están en constante erupción y requieren todos los recursos disponibles (económicos y humanos). Estos volcanes presentan una amplia gama de peligros volcánicos (en cuanto a tipo y magnitud), haciendo que el monitoreo diario sea un gran desafío. Uno de los mayores logros del equipo de vulcanología ha sido el desarrollo reciente de un Ranking de Peligrosidad Relativa de los Volcanes de Guatemala, tomando en cuenta diferentes parámetros que permitan una mejor planificación en el futuro, tanto en el monitoreo como en la investigación.

Quantifying gas, ash and aerosols in volcanic plumes using emission OP-FTIR measurements

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-François Smekens ◽  
Tamsin Mather ◽  
Mike Burton
Keyword(s):  
Sulphur Dioxide ◽  
Uv Light ◽  
Volcanic Eruptions ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Radiative Transfer Model ◽  
Volcanic Plume ◽  
Transfer Model ◽  
Ir Radiation ◽  
Time Operation ◽  
Volcano Observatories

<p>Monitoring of volcanic emissions (gas, ash and aerosols) is crucial to our understanding of eruption mechanisms, as well as to developing mitigation strategies during volcanic eruptions. Ultraviolet (UV) spectrometers and cameras are now ubiquitous monitoring tools at most volcano observatories for quantifying sulphur dioxide (SO2) emissions. However, because they rely on scattered UV light as a source of radiation, their use is limited to daytime only, and measurement windows are often further restricted by unfavourable weather conditions. On the other end of the spectrum, Open Path Fourier Transform Infrared (OP-FTIR) instruments can be used to measure the concentrations of a series of volcanic gases, and they allow for night-time operation. However, the retrieval methods rely on the presence of a strong source of IR radiation in the background - either natural (lava flow, crater rim, the sun) or artificial – restricting their use to very specific observation geometries and a narrow range of eruptive conditions. Here we present a new approach to derive quantities of SO2, ash and aerosols from measurements of a drifting volcanic plume. Using the atmosphere as a background, we measured self-emitted IR radiation from plumes at Stromboli volcano (Italy) capturing both passive degassing and ash-rich explosive plumes. We use an iterative approach with a forward radiative transfer model (the Reference Forward Model – RFM) to quantify concentrations of sulphur dioxide (SO2), aerosols and ash in the line of sight of the spectrometer. This new method could significantly enhance the scientific return from OP-FTIR instruments at volcano observatories, ultimately expanding their deployment as part of permanent scanning networks (an alternative to DOAS instruments) to provide continuous data on the emissions of gas, ash and aerosols. </p>

Ranking Icelandic volcanoes by threat and prioritizing their monitoring requirements 

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Barsotti ◽  
Michelle Parks ◽  
Pfeffer Melissa ◽  
Kristín Jónsdóttir ◽  
Kristín Vogfjorð ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gas Sensors ◽  
Monitoring Network ◽  
Volcanic Eruptions ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Timely Manner ◽  
Eruption Frequency ◽  
Funding Opportunities ◽  
Timely Warning ◽  
Volcano Observatories ◽  
Active Volcanoes

<p>How well are our volcanoes monitored? When and why should we review and enhance the monitoring setup for volcano surveillance? These questions are often raised at Volcano Observatories or at those Institutions in charge of monitoring volcanoes and their associated hazards. The Icelandic Meteorological Office (IMO) is responsible for monitoring natural hazards in Iceland, including volcanoes and volcanic eruptions. IMO operates an extended multidisciplinary monitoring network which comprises seismometers, cGPS, gas sensors, MultiGAS and DOASes, hydrological stations, strainmeters and tiltmeters, infrasound networks and webcams, with the aim of detecting in a timely manner potential unrest at any of the 32 active volcanoes in the country. Limited resources and funding opportunities often pose limitations on how extensive (in terms of number of sensors and their variety) a volcano monitoring network can be. Therefore, the Volcano Observatories are often required to decide how to prioritize the monitoring needs and find a balance in sensitivity, reliability, and efficacy of the network.  </p><p>In this contribution, we will present the results of the analysis performed at the IMO to rank the Icelandic active volcanoes by their threat and, consequently, to prioritize their monitoring needs. Some criteria (based on eruption frequency, potential hazards, infrastructure exposure and current status) are defined as guidelines and they are used to drive decisions regarding when and how to alter the monitoring setup. The specific case of Hekla volcano is used here to evaluate the validity of such criteria and to perform an analysis of the current capability of issuing a timely warning for one of the most dangerous volcanoes in Iceland. </p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document