Satellite observations and numerical simulation results for the comprehensive analysis of ash cloud transport during the explosive eruptions of Kamchatka volcanoes

Сорокин, А. А.; Гирина, О.А.; Lupyan, E. A.; Мальковский, С.И.; Balashov, И.В.; Efremov, V. Yu.; Kramareva, L.S.; Korolev, S.P.; Romanova, I.M.; Simonenko, E. V.

doi:10.3103/s1068373917120032

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These studies focused on the application of various VATDMs and instruments to analyze volcanic ash and SO 2 dispersal and their impact, compare satellite, ground-based, and UAV/aircraft data with numerical simulations, validate models with field data, improve volcanic ash predictions, increase the understanding of eruption dynamics, and assess the transport of volcanic aerosols over long distances. A number of VATDMs such as Numerical Atmospheric-dispersion Modelling Environment (NAME) [117,126], Modèle Lagrangien de Dispersion de Particules d'ordre zéro (MLDP0) [18], FALL3D [113,114,119,132], CMAQ [115], Hybrid Single Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory (HYSPLIT) [124,125,128,135,136], PUFF [129], Massive-Parallel Trajectory Calculations (MAPTRAC) [131], VOLC-CALL PUFF [120], PlumeTraj [133], PlumeMoM [133], chemistry transport model (CHIMERE) [118,139], and Fplume [17] have been used in conjunction with MISR, MODIS, SEVIRI, IASI, OMI, VIIRS, OMPS, AIRS, ABI, and AHI satellite data, ground-based data [116,129,133,136,139], and UAV/aircraft-based remote sensing data [117].…”

Section: E-remote Sensing Data Assimilation Into Numerical Forecastin...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Monitoring Volcanic Plumes and Clouds Using Remote Sensing: A Systematic Review

Mota,

Pacheco,

Pimentel

et al. 2024

Remote Sensing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Volcanic clouds pose significant threats to air traffic, human health, and economic activity, making early detection and monitoring crucial. Accurate determination of eruptive source parameters is crucial for forecasting and implementing preventive measures. This review article aims to identify the most common remote sensing methods for monitoring volcanic clouds. To achieve this, we conducted a systematic literature review of scientific articles indexed in the Web of Science database published between 2010 and 2022, using multiple query strings across all fields. The articles were reviewed based on research topics, remote sensing methods, practical applications, case studies, and outcomes using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Our study found that satellite-based remote sensing approaches are the most cost-efficient and accessible, allowing for the monitoring of volcanic clouds at various spatial scales. Brightness temperature difference is the most commonly used method for detecting volcanic clouds at a specified temperature threshold. Approaches that apply machine learning techniques help overcome the limitations of traditional methods. Despite the constraints imposed by spatial and temporal resolution and optical limitations of sensors, multiplatform approaches can overcome these limitations and improve accuracy. This study explores various techniques for monitoring volcanic clouds, identifies research gaps, and lays the foundation for future research.

show abstract

Section: E-remote Sensing Data Assimilation Into Numerical Forecastin...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Monitoring Volcanic Plumes and Clouds Using Remote Sensing: A Systematic Review

Mota,

Pacheco,

Pimentel

et al. 2024

Remote Sensing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, we selected this model because the PUFF modeling results of the ash cloud movement of the modern volcanic eruptions in Kamchatka and the Kuril Islands are regularly compared with satellite data in the VolSatView Information System [38,39]. As a rule, there are good matches between "model ash clouds" and the real ones recorded on satellite images, e.g., [61][62][63]. The parameters used in modeling are shown in Table 4.…”

Section: Mathematical and Algorithmic Supportmentioning

confidence: 99%

Numerical Modeling of the Ash Cloud Movement from the Catastrophic Eruption of the Sheveluch Volcano in November 1964

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reconstructs, for the first time, the motion dynamics of an eruptive cloud formed during the catastrophic eruption of the Sheveluch volcano in November 1964 (Volcanic Explosivity Index 4+). This became possible due to the public availability of atmospheric reanalysis data from the ERA-40 archive of the European Center for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) and the development of numerical modeling of volcanic ash cloud propagation. The simulation of the eruptive cloud motion process, which was carried out using the FALL3D and PUFF models, made it possible to clarify the sequence of events of this eruption (destruction of extrusive domes in the crater and the formation of an eruptive column and pyroclastic flows), which lasted only 1 h 12 min. During the eruption, the ash cloud consisted of two parts: the main eruptive cloud that rose up to 15,000 m above sea level (a.s.l.), and the co-ignimbrite cloud that formed above the moving pyroclastic flows. The ashfall in Ust-Kamchatsk (Kamchatka) first occurred out of the eruptive cloud moving at a higher speed, then out of the co-ignimbrite cloud. In Nikolskoye (Bering Island, Commander Islands), ash fell only out of the co-ignimbrite cloud. Under the turbulent diffusion, the forefront of the main eruptive cloud rose slowly in the atmosphere and reached 16,500 m a.s.l. by 04:07 UTC on November 12. Three days after the eruption began, the eruptive cloud stretched for 3000 km over the territories of the countries of Russia, Canada, the USA, Mexico, and over both the Bering Sea and the Pacific Ocean. It is assumed that the well-known long-term decrease in the solar radiation intensity in the northern latitudes from 1963–1966, which was established according to the world remote sensing data, was associated with the spread of aerosol clouds formed not only by the Agung volcano, but those formed during the 1964 Sheveluch volcano catastrophic eruption.

show abstract

“…The information from VONAs is available at the KVERT IS database (Volcanic Activity in Kamchatka and the Kurils) (Romanova et al, 2016) and at the Volcanoes of the Kurile-Kamchatka Islands Arc (VOKKIA) IS, at the IV&S FEB RAS geoportal (http://geoportal.kscnet.ru/volcanoes/van/) (Romanova et al, 2013;Gordeev et al, 2016). Based on parameters of an ash cloud or plume as reported in VONAs and the current meteorological situation in Kamchatka and the Kurils, the Signal IS at the FEB RAS Computing Center automatically computes the trajectory for the ash cloud or plume using the PUFF model (Sorokin et al, 2017), with the result of this modeling being stored at the KVERT site (http://www.kscnet.ru/ivs/kvert/).…”

Section: Satellite Monitoring Of Volcanoes Has Been Carriedmentioning

confidence: 99%

The 2016 Eruptions in Kamchatka and on the North Kuril Islands: The Hazard to Aviation

Гирина

Manevich

Melnikov

et al. 2019

J. Volcanolog. Seismol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large explosive eruptions of volcanoes pose the highest hazard to modern jet flights, because such eruptions can eject as much as several cubic kilometers of volcanic ash and aerosol into the atmosphere during a few hours or days. The year 2016 saw eruptions on 5 of the 30 active Kamchatka volcanoes (Sheveluch, Klyuchevskoy, Bezymianny, Karymsky, and Zhupanovsky) and on 3 of the 6 active volcanoes that exist on the North Kuril Islands (Alaid, Ebeko, and Chikurachki). Effusive activity was observed on Sheveluch, Klyuchevskoy, Bezymianny, and Alaid. All volcanoes showed explosive activity. The large explosive events mostly occurred from September through December (Sheveluch), a moderate ash emission accompanied the entire Klyuchevskoy eruption in March-November, and explosive activity of Karymsky, Zhupanovsky, Alaid, and Chikurachki was mostly observed in the earlier half of the year. The ash ejected in 2016 covered a total area of 600000 km 2 , with 460000 km 2 of this being due to Kamchatka volcanoes and 140000 km 2 to the eruptions of the North Kuril volcanoes. The activity of Sheveluch, Klyuchevskoy, and Zhupanovsky was dangerous to international and local flights, because the explosions sent ash to heights of 10-12 km above sea level, while the eruptions of Bezymianny, Karymsky, Alaid, Ebeko, and Chikurachki were dangerous for local flights, since the ash did not rise higher than 5 km above sea level.

show abstract

Satellite observations and numerical simulation results for the comprehensive analysis of ash cloud transport during the explosive eruptions of Kamchatka volcanoes

Cited by 6 publications

References 4 publications

Monitoring Volcanic Plumes and Clouds Using Remote Sensing: A Systematic Review

Monitoring Volcanic Plumes and Clouds Using Remote Sensing: A Systematic Review

Numerical Modeling of the Ash Cloud Movement from the Catastrophic Eruption of the Sheveluch Volcano in November 1964

The 2016 Eruptions in Kamchatka and on the North Kuril Islands: The Hazard to Aviation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About