Potential impacts from tephra fall to electric power systems: a review and mitigation strategies

Wardman, John; Wilson, Thomas; Bodger, P.S.; Cole, Jim; Stewart, Carol

doi:10.1007/s00445-012-0664-3

Cited by 54 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Volcanic ash represents a significant hazard to the airline industry and operation of global commerce (Casadevall 1994;Casadevall et al 1996;Prata 2009;Durant et al 2010), water quality (Stewart et al 2006;Stewart et al 2009;Wilson et al 2010), agriculture (Cronin et al 1997;Wilson et al 2010), stability of local infrastructure (Wardman et al 2012a;2012b;Wilson et al 2012), and human health (Baxter et al 1999;Horwell et al 2003aHorwell et al , 2003bHansell et al 2006;Hincks et al 2006;Horwell and Baxter 2006). Because ash can be transported for great distances regardless of the total volume of material actually erupted, it represents one of the farthest reaching volcanic hazards.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The size range of bubbles that produce ash during explosive volcanic eruptions

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Volcanic eruptions can produce ash particles with a range of sizes and morphologies. Here we morphologically distinguish two textural types: Simple (generally smaller) ash particles, where the observable surface displays a single measureable bubble because there is at most one vesicle imprint preserved on each facet of the particle; and complex ash particles, which display multiple vesicle imprints on their surfaces for measurement and may contain complete, unfragmented vesicles in their interiors. Digital elevation models from stereo-scanning electron microscopic images of complex ash particles from the 14 October 1974 sub-Plinian eruption of Volcán Fuego, Guatemala and the 18 May 1980 Plinian eruption of Mount St. Helens, Washington, U.S.A. reveal size distributions of bubbles that burst during magma fragmentation. Results were compared between these two well-characterized eruptions of different explosivities and magma compositions and indicate that bubble size distributions (BSDs) are bimodal, suggesting a minimum of two nucleation events during both eruptions. The larger size mode has a much lower bubble number density (BND) than the smaller size mode, yet these few larger bubbles represent the bulk of the total bubble volume. We infer that the larger bubbles reflect an earlier nucleation event (at depth within the conduit) with subsequent diffusive and decompressive bubble growth and possible coalescence during magma ascent, while the smaller bubbles reflect a relatively later nucleation event occurring closer in time to the point of fragmentation. Bubbles in the Mount St. Helens complex ash particles are generally smaller, but have a total number density roughly one order of magnitude higher, compared to the Fuego samples. Results demonstrate that because ash from explosive eruptions preserves the size of bubbles that nucleated in the magma, grew, and then burst during fragmentation, the analysis of the ash-sized component of tephra can provide insights into the spatial distribution of bubbles in the magma prior to fragmentation, enabling better parameterization of numerical eruption models and improved understanding of ash transport phenomena that result in pyroclastic volcanic hazards. Additionally, the fact that the ash-sized component of tephra preserves BSDs and BNDs consistent with those preserved in larger pyroclasts indicates that these values can be obtained in cases where only distal ash samples from particular eruptions are obtainable.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The size range of bubbles that produce ash during explosive volcanic eruptions

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fragility functions developed for tephra fall impacts on buildings and electrical transmission systems Zuccaro et al 2008;Wardman et al 2012b). …”

Section: Fragility and Vulnerability Functionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…6a). There is one instance of IS 3 from Pacaya where above-ground pipes suffered damage from large tephra particles (Wardman et al 2012b). Because there is only one instance of pipe damage, the set of fragility functions we derive here are for individual WTPs and not pipe networks.…”

Section: Fragility Functionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We are unaware of any instances of physical damage to runways or taxiways from direct tephra falls. However, at La Aurora International Airport, Guatemala, the runway was severely abraded after the 2010 eruption of Pacaya volcano as a result of tephra clean-up (Wardman et al 2012b). Therefore, we only consider the probability that an airport will be closed (effectively IS 1 ) during tephra fall.…”

Section: Fragility Functionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Framework for developing volcanic fragility and vulnerability functions for critical infrastructure

Wilson

Deligne

et al. 2017

J Appl. Volcanol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Volcanic risk assessment using probabilistic models is increasingly desired for risk management, particularly for loss forecasting, critical infrastructure management, land-use planning and evacuation planning. Over the past decades this has motivated the development of comprehensive probabilistic hazard models. However, volcanic vulnerability models of equivalent sophistication have lagged behind hazard modelling because of the lack of evidence, data and, until recently, minimal demand. There is an increasingly urgent need for development of quantitative volcanic vulnerability models, including vulnerability and fragility functions, which provide robust quantitative relationships between volcanic impact (damage and disruption) and hazard intensity. The functions available to date predominantly quantify tephra fall impacts to buildings, driven by life safety concerns. We present a framework for establishing quantitative relationships between volcanic impact and hazard intensity, specifically through the derivation of vulnerability and fragility functions. We use tephra thickness and impacts to key infrastructure sectors as examples to demonstrate our framework. Our framework incorporates impact data sources, different impact intensity scales, preparation and fitting of data, uncertainty analysis and documentation. The primary data sources are post-eruption impact assessments, supplemented by laboratory experiments and expert judgment, with the latter drawing upon a wealth of semi-quantitative and qualitative studies. Different data processing and function fitting techniques can be used to derive functions; however, due to the small datasets currently available, simplified approaches are discussed. We stress that documentation of data processing, assumptions and limitations is the most important aspect of function derivation; documentation provides transparency and allows others to update functions more easily. Following our standardised approach, a volcanic risk scientist can derive a fragility or vulnerability function, which then can be easily compared to existing functions and updated as new data become available. To demonstrate how to apply our framework, we derive fragility and vulnerability functions for discrete tephra fall impacts to electricity supply, water supply, wastewater and transport networks. These functions present the probability of an infrastructure site or network component equalling or exceeding one of four impact states as a function of tephra thickness.

show abstract

“…However, surface chemistry also matters -ash particles acquire a soluble salt coating following interaction with volcanic gases in the volcanic plume (Stewart et al, 2009). This property is important for impacts to electrical transmission lines -the reactive surface is conductive when moist, causing flashovers (short-circuits; Wardman et al, 2012). Water supplies are also vulnerable as the salt coating is soluble and so can contaminate water (Stewart et al, 2009).…”

Section: Volcanic Tephra Depositionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the impacts of volcanic eruptions using RiskScape

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

RiskScape is a free multi-hazard risk assessment software programme jointly developed by GNS Science and the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) in New Zealand. RiskScape has a modular structure, with hazard layers, assets, and loss functions prepared separately. While RiskScape was originally developed for New Zealand, given suitable hazard and exposed asset information, RiskScape can be run anywhere in the world. Volcanic hazards are among the many hazards considered by RiskScape. We first present RiskScape's framework for all hazards, and then describe in more detail the five volcanic hazards -tephra deposition, pyroclastic density currents, lava flows, lahars, and edifice construction/excavation. We describe how loss functions were selected and developed. We use a scenario example to illustrate not only how RiskScape's volcanic module works but also how RiskScape can be used to compare across natural hazards.

show abstract

Potential impacts from tephra fall to electric power systems: a review and mitigation strategies

Cited by 54 publications

References 37 publications

The size range of bubbles that produce ash during explosive volcanic eruptions

The size range of bubbles that produce ash during explosive volcanic eruptions

Framework for developing volcanic fragility and vulnerability functions for critical infrastructure

Evaluating the impacts of volcanic eruptions using RiskScape

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About