Topic: Iceland Volcano Creates 27-Story "Mountain"

[sam]

After more than three weeks of fiery, crowd-pleasing fountains, a volcano in southern Iceland has finally quieted down—leaving behind a new, 270-foot (82-meter) cone as a permanent souvenir, experts say.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/04/100413-iceland-volcano-eyjafjallajokull-eruptions/

[Rik]

I still reckon it's the Icelandic revenge over the banking crisis.

[Sandra]

How come MacBrown hasnt taxed it yet, its surely produced more global warming gasses than we do in 10 years or more 

[sam]

How come MacBrown hasnt taxed it yet, its surely produced more global warming gasses than we do in 10 years or more 

I don't think that's true.

Comparison of CO2 emissions from volcanoes vs. human activities.
Scientists have calculated that volcanoes emit between about 130-230 million tonnes (145-255 million tons) of CO2 into the atmosphere every year (Gerlach, 1991). This estimate includes both subaerial and submarine volcanoes, about in equal amounts. Emissions of CO2 by human activities, including fossil fuel burning, cement production, and gas flaring, amount to about 27 billion tonnes per year (30 billion tons) [ ( Marland, et al., 2006) - The reference gives the amount of released carbon (C), rather than CO2, through 2003.]. Human activities release more than 130 times the amount of CO2 emitted by volcanoes--the equivalent of more than 8,000 additional volcanoes like Kilauea (Kilauea emits about 3.3 million tonnes/year)! (Gerlach et. al., 2002)

- US GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/index.php

[Sandra]

Volcanoes emit much more than CO and Co2. I would think that sudden vast releases of gasses would be more damaging than larger amounts released over a longer period of time.

[Simon]

How come MacBrown hasnt taxed it yet, its surely produced more global warming gasses than we do in 10 years or more 

You obviously haven't been to Milton Keynes, Sandra. 

[sam]

Volcanoes emit much more than CO and Co2. I would think that sudden vast releases of gasses would be more damaging than larger amounts released over a longer period of time.

come on give me a reference or some kind of detail? Sorry you can't just argue like that. They do produce quite a bit of water vapour I'll give you that. 

By longer period of time - we are talking over a year - nothing in a geological sense. It takes times for these molecules to distribute themselves in the upper atmosphere.

[sam]

Well don't worry...

An erupting volcano will release gases, tephra, and heat into the atmosphere. The largest portion of gases released into the atmosphere is water vapor. Other gases include carbon dioxide (CO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), hydrochloric acid (HCl), hydrogen fluoride (HF), hydrogen sulfide (H2S), carbon monoxide (CO), hydrogen gas (H2), NH3, methane (CH4), and SiF4. Some of these gases are transported away from the eruption on ash particles while others form salts and aerosols. Volcanic gases are also produced when water is heated by magma. Gases also escape from pyroclastic flows, lahars, and lava flows, and may also be produced from burning vegetation.

C.M. Riley, U.S. Geological Survey at CVO  - http://www.geo.mtu.edu/volcanoes/hazards/primer/gas.html

oh and:

Even if the eruption has released this much daily for a month, this equates to only about 90,000 tonnes of sulphur dioxide.
Australian industry emitted 2.7 million tonnes of sulphur dioxide in 2008/2009, or more than 7,000 tonnes per day.

Pinatubo is estimated to have belched 42 million tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere in 1991. Globally, according to the US Energy Information Administration, human activity contributed 29,195 million tonnes of CO2 to the air in 2006 - nearly 700 times as much as Pinatubo's colossal cough.

http://www.abc.net.au/environment/articles/2010/04/16//2874939.htm  -- Icelandic volcano won't affect the world's climate

[Rik]

You obviously haven't been to Milton Keynes, Sandra. 

  

[Simon]

Well don't worry...

C.M. Riley, U.S. Geological Survey at CVO  - http://www.geo.mtu.edu/volcanoes/hazards/primer/gas.html

oh and:

http://www.abc.net.au/environment/articles/2010/04/16//2874939.htm  -- Icelandic volcano won't affect the world's climate

Interesting articles, Sam.

 

 

[Sandra]

Dont always believe what the scientists report Sam, especially if their reserach is funded by governments like those that work for the IPCC are.
Also dont forget that this is one of many hundreds that have errupted each and every year since shortly after the earth was formed.
There was an interesting series on TV a few months back called how the earth made us, explaining how wind, water, fire and volcanoes had shaped the world and showing how events helped us to evolve and develop.
The programme showed that it was volcanic activity that caused the earth to start warming up at the end of the last ice age and without it we would have probably still been in that ice age now.
So if volcanic activity could bring an ice age to an end earlier than would have happened without it, then it seems logical to me that it has to cause global warming to some extent and as they are natural continuously occurring events I would expect them to cause more warming than we do.

[sam]

Dont always believe what the scientists report Sam, especially if their reserach is funded by governments like those that work for the IPCC are.
Also dont forget that this is one of many hundreds that have errupted each and every year since shortly after the earth was formed.

Then who should I believe? I'm a scientist. I look at their results and I come to the same conclusion. I like that you disagree with them on what I'm saying here (dont trust them they are wrong) and then blindly accept what some TV show told you about the last ice age! That seems rather irrational to me.

Volcanic activity at the moment does not account for the changes. Where do you get the hundreds that erupt every year from? It would take around 1000 LARGE (not mediocre ones) bursts to produce the equivlanet of human activity.

So if volcanic activity could bring an ice age to an end earlier than would have happened without it, then it seems logical to me that it has to cause global warming to some extent and as they are natural continuously occurring events I would expect them to cause more warming than we do.

From what I've read it appears that volanic activity tends to produce a cooling not warming effect. So I disagree with you here completely.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mauna_Loa_atmospheric_transmission.png

http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Glossary/VolcWeather/description_volcanoes_and_weather.html

[Sandra]

The TV programme was the one presented by that youngish scottish professor, hes done a few documentaries and seems quite knowledgeable and doesnt appear to have any financial incentive to push the agenda one way or the other.
The reason I would trust that programme is that its there for anyone to see and could readily be ridiculed if it was factually incorrect.
The "research" carried out in secret, funded by governments, is never fully accessable to everyone and has only been found out to be false after emails have been hacked or leaked.

[sam]

b******t. Most research is available to all. Its just a shame we have such a scientific illiterate country. These days most of the results can easily be found on website, I agree that the raw data isn't always easy to get hold of, but look with about 5 minutes of googling I was able to find for you first hand, substantial research. If you really can't believe the result of scientists working for government then just go believe some conspiracy theory! Most research done is by scientists paid for by a government.

Give me the name of the show and I'll find out if it has been ridiculed, its quite possible.

[Sandra]

This page gives a summary of what he said in the first episode of the series Sam :

http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/pages/view.asp?page=19840

The series was called EARTH - THE POWER OF THE PLANET

There was another one that was similar that showed how civilisation coped with the changes called How Earth Made Us.