The 5 April 2003 vulcanian paroxysmal explosion at Stromboli volcano (Italy) from field observations and thermal data

Calvari, Sonia; Spampinato, Letizia; Lodato, L.

doi:10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2005.06.006

Cited by 101 publications

(119 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

115

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The last two episodes occurred in 2002([Bonaccorso et al, 2003, [Calvari et al, 2005a] and [Calvari et al, 2005b]) and 2007 (Calvari et al, 2010). Both were associated with paroxysms ( [Calvari et al, 2006], [Calvari et al, 2010] and ) that occurred once lava effusion was underway, thus conforming to case (ii) as described above. Depressurisation of deeper regions of the magma supply system, resulting in exsolution (primarily of CO 2 ) and rapid ascent of a buoyant batch of LP magma, is one of the mechanisms invoked to explain Stromboli's paroxysms (e.g., Aiuppa et al, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 61%

“…Once injected into the conduit system, this LP magma rises rapidly enough to inhibit crystallisation and gas separation, resulting in limited mixing with HP magma. Paroxysms produce dense plumes that rise 3-4 km above the crater, and almost all of them have had an impact on the settled area ( [Calvari et al, 2006], [Calvari et al, 2010] and [Rittmann, 1931]). On a small island ~ 4 km wide and 1 km high, and populated during summer by as many as 6000 people, such events represent a significant hazard; several people were killed as a result of paroxysms in 1919and 1930(Rittmann, 1931.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Lava effusion — A slow fuse for paroxysms at Stromboli volcano?

Calvari

Spampinato

Bonaccorso

et al. 2011

Earth and Planetary Science Letters

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 2007 effusive eruption of Stromboli followed a similar pattern to the previous 2002-2003 episode. In both cases, magma ascent led to breaching of the uppermost part of the conduit forming an eruptive fissure that discharged lava down the Sciara del Fuoco depression. Both eruptions also displayed a 'paroxysmal' explosive event during lava flow output. From daily effusion rate measurements retrieved from helicopter-and satellite-based infrared imaging, we deduce that the cumulative volume of lava erupted before each of the two paroxysms was similar. Based on this finding, we propose a conceptual model to explain why both paroxysms occurred after this 'threshold' cumulative volume of magma was erupted. The gradual decompression of the deep plumbing system induced by magma withdrawal and eruption, drew deeper volatile-rich magma into the conduit, leading to the paroxysms. The proposed model might provide a basis for forecasting paroxysmal explosions during future effusive eruptions of Stromboli.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 61%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lava effusion — A slow fuse for paroxysms at Stromboli volcano?

Calvari

Spampinato

Bonaccorso

et al. 2011

Earth and Planetary Science Letters

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further lithic fragments (type 4, vesicular slightly altered lavas and strongly altered blocks affected by hydrothermal and fumarolic activity) represent the material located at the surface or the inner parts of the summit cones, disrupted during the paroxysm. Lava flow emission was only temporarily interrupted by the paroxysm: active lava flows outpoured from vents at ~600 m asl, less than 2 h after the eruption [Calvari et al, 2006] suggesting that the shallow magmatic system was not significantly modified by the event.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The fresh subvolcanic ejecta represent the slowly cooled equivalents of the HP magmas feeding the normal Strombolian explosions or lava flows but arrested in situ and completely degassed within the uppermost subvolcanic system. The asymmetrical distribution and different nature of lithic blocks (hydrothermally altered fragments, material altered from fumarolic activity and vesicular altered lavas to the SW of crater 3, and fresh, holocrystalline subvolcanic blocks to the nnE of crater ) and visual observation of the eruption [Calvari et al, 2006] indicate eruption from at least two vents systems.…”

Section: Eruptive Dynamicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Paroxysmal Event and Its Deposits

Pistolesi

Rosi

Pioli

et al. 2013

The Stromboli Volcano: An Integrated Study of the 2002-2003 Eruption

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 5 April 2003 eruption of Stromboli volcano (Italy) was the most violent in the past 50 years. It was also the best documented due to the accurate geophysical monitoring of the ongoing effusive eruption. Detailed field studies carried out a few hours to a few months after the event provided further information that were coupled with visual documentation to reconstruct the explosive dynamics. The eruption consisted of an 8-min-long explosive event preceded by a short-lived precursory activity that evolved into the impulsive ejection of gas and pyroclasts. Meter-sized ballistic blocks were launched to altitudes of up to 400 m above the craters falling on the volcano flanks and on the village of Ginostra, about 2 km far from the vent. The vertical jet of gas and pyroclasts above the craters fed a convective plume that reached a height of 4 km. The calculated erupted mass yielded values of . -.4 × 0 8 kg. Later explosions generated a scoria flow deposit, with an estimated mass of .0-.3 × 0 7 kg. Final, waning ash explosions closed the event. The juvenile fraction consisted of an almost aphyric, highly vesicular pumice mingled with a shallow-derived, crystal-rich, moderately vesicular scoria. Resuming of the lava emission a few hours after the paroxysm indicate that the shallow magmatic system was not significantly modified during the explosions. Combination of volume data with duration of eruptive phases allowed us to estimate the eruptive intensity: during the climactic explosive event, the mass discharge rate was between 0 6 and 0 7 kg/s, whereas during the pyroclastic flow activity, it was 2.8-3.6 × 0 5 kg/s. Strong similarities with other historical paroxysms at Stromboli suggest similar explosion dynamics.

show abstract

“…1d) are also common occurrences from ballistics during explosive eruptions. The high kinetic and thermal energy of ballistics can puncture, dent, melt, burn and knock down structures and their associated systems, such as power supply and telecommunication masts; crater roads; and crush and potentially ignite crops (Booth 1979;Calvari et al 2006;Pistolesi et al 2008;Alatorre-Ibargüengoitia et al 2012;Wardman et al 2012;Maeno et al 2013;Fitzgerald et al 2014;Jenkins et al 2014). Blong (1981), Pomonis et al (1999) and Jenkins et al (2014) estimate a ballistic only needs 400-1000 J of kinetic energy to penetrate a metal sheet roof, far less than the estimated kinetic energy of ballistics (*10 6 J) from VEI 2-4 eruptions (Alatorre-Ibargüengoitia et al 2012).…”

Section: Ballistic Hazard and Risk Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Communication and Risk Management of Volcanic Ballistic Hazards

Fitzgerald

Kennedy

Wilson

et al. 2017

Advances in Volcanology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tourists, hikers, mountaineers, locals and volcanologists frequently visit and reside on and around active volcanoes, where ballistic projectiles are a lethal hazard. The projectiles of lava or solid rock, ranging from a few centimetres to several metres in diameter, are erupted with high kinetic, and sometimes thermal, energy. Impacts from projectiles are amongst the most frequent causes of fatal volcanic incidents and the cause of hundreds of thousands of dollars of damage to buildings, infrastructure and property worldwide. Despite this, the assessment of risk and communication of ballistic hazard has received surprisingly little study. Here, we review the research to date on ballistic distributions, impacts, hazard and risk assessments and maps, and methods of communicating and managing ballistic risk including how these change with a changing risk environment. The review suggests future improvements to the communication and management of ballistic hazard.

show abstract

The 5 April 2003 vulcanian paroxysmal explosion at Stromboli volcano (Italy) from field observations and thermal data

Cited by 101 publications

References 22 publications

Lava effusion — A slow fuse for paroxysms at Stromboli volcano?

Lava effusion — A slow fuse for paroxysms at Stromboli volcano?

The Paroxysmal Event and Its Deposits

The Communication and Risk Management of Volcanic Ballistic Hazards

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About