USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 70212491

Short-term forecasting and detection of explosions during the 2016–2017 eruption of Bogoslof volcano, Alaska

Abstract

We describe a multidisciplinary approach to forecast, rapidly detect, and characterize explosive events during the 2016–2017 eruption of Bogoslof volcano, a back-arc shallow submarine volcano in Alaska’s Aleutian arc. The eruptive sequence began in December 2016 and included about 70 discrete explosive events. Because the volcano has no local monitoring stations, we used distant stations on the nearest volcanoes, Okmok (54 km) and Makushin (72 km), combined with regional infrasound sensors and lightning detection from the Worldwide Lightning Location Network (WWLLN). Pre-eruptive seismicity was detected for 12 events during the first half of the eruption; for all other events co-eruptive signals allowed for detection only. Monitoring of activity used a combination of scheduled checks combined with automated alarms. Alarms triggered on real-time data included real-time seismic amplitude measurement (RSAM); infrasound from several arrays, the closest being on Okmok; and lightning strokes detected from WWLLN within a 20-km radius of the volcano. During periods of unrest, a multidisciplinary response team of four people fulfilled specific roles to evaluate geophysical and remote-sensing data, run event-specific ash-cloud dispersion models, ensure interagency coordination, and develop and distribute of formalized warning products. Using this approach, for events that produced ash clouds ≥7.5 km above sea level, Alaska Volcano Observatory (AVO) called emergency response partners 15 min, and issued written notices 30 min, after event onset (mean times). Factors that affect timeliness of written warnings include event size and number of data streams available; bigger events and more data both decrease uncertainty and allow for faster warnings. In remote areas where airborne ash is the primary hazard, the approach used at Bogoslof is an effective strategy for hazard mitigation.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 52.859180945520826° to 54.559322587438636° latitude; -169.573974609375° to -165.9869384765625° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Michelle L. Coombs, Aaron Wech, Matthew M. Haney, John J. Lyons, David J. Schneider, Hans Schwaiger, Kristi L. Wallace, David Fee, Jeffrey T. Freymueller, Janet Schaefer, Gabrielle Tepp. 2018-09-03. Short-term forecasting and detection of explosions during the 2016–2017 eruption of Bogoslof volcano, Alaska. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2018.00122

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Inflation at Ol Doinyo Lengai driven by shallow magma intrusion during the 2022–2023 uplift episode in an early-phase continental rift

The active stratovolcano Ol Doinyo Lengai is located in the magma-rich, early-phase continental Natron Rift, which is part of the larger East African Rift System. Since 2016, a geodetic network comprising 7 Global Navigation Satellite Navigation (GNSS) and 2 seismic stations has been deployed to monitor inflation and deflation around this volcano. Between March 2022 and August 2023, millimeter-precision GNSS data detected a non-eruptive uplift episode at Ol Doinyo Lengai. In this work, we explore potential drivers of the uplift event by inverting GNSS data using the open-source software package dMODELS developed by the US Geological Survey. We assess four mathematical models (spherical, sill-like, spheroid, dislocation/dike) and find the best-fit solution is consistent with an intrusion of magma from a shallow, sill-like source at approximately 3.1 ± 2.2 km depth below the summit with a volume change of 0.99 ± 0.22 × 10 6 m 3 . Although continuous GNSS observations of surface motions at Ol Doinyo Lengai are relatively short, having only begun in 2016, this work contributes to our understanding of the ongoing magmatic processes and its long-term deformation cycle, allowing for improved volcanic hazards assessment and comparisons with global volcanic systems.

Ol Doinyo Lengai↗

Pliocene (Piacenzian) planktic foraminiferal biogeography: Insights into how planktic biogeography is linked to climate and socioeconomic impacts on marine ecosystems

The Piacenzian Age (3.60–2.58 Ma) of the Pliocene Epoch was characterized by globally warmer climates, higher sea levels, and atmospheric CO 2 similar to present. Utilizing a robust dataset of 2,101 samples and over 637,000 foraminifer specimens from 77 deep-sea core sites worldwide, we document planktic foraminifer biogeography and biodiversity during the mid-Piacenzian Warm Period (mPWP). Cluster analysis and multidimensional scaling reveal five major bioregions: tropical, warm subtropical, transitional, polar, and a distinct North Atlantic polar bioregion. Each bioregion was dominated by characteristic species with well-established temperature preferences. Analyses demonstrate higher species richness and evenness in low and mid-latitudes, with increased diversity associated with periods of climatic warming and poleward expansion of warm water assemblages. The long-term stability of biogeographic patterns underscores ecological conservatism but also highlights potential vulnerability to rapid anthropogenic climate change. Our findings emphasize the critical role of planktic foraminifers in reconstructing past ocean conditions and offer valuable insights into links between planktic biogeography, climate, and socioeconomic impacts on marine ecosystems. This work advances our understanding of marine ecosystem responses to climate extremes and provides a foundation for future regional and temporal analyses of planktic foraminifer biogeography under global change scenarios.

Frontiers in Earth Science↗

Estimation of dynamic geologic CO2 storage resources in the Illinois Basin, including effects of brine extraction, anisotropy, and hydrogeologic heterogeneity

Since the vast majority of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) storage resources in the United States are in deep saline aquifers, optimizing the use of these saline storage resources could be crucial for efficient development of geologic CO 2 storage (GCS) resources and basin- or larger-scale deployment of GCS in the country. Maximum CO 2 injection rates can be enhanced by extracting brine from the CO 2 storage unit. However, disposal of the extracted brine is both a technological and economic challenge. The lowest-cost option would likely be reinjection of the extracted brine into another formation above or below the CO 2 storage unit. Therefore, it is important to estimate brine injectivity as it will constrain the potential to increase CO 2 injectivity at an injection site that has access to multiple geologic storage units where either CO 2 or brine can be injected. Using a simulation-optimization framework, coupled with a non-isothermal, multiphase CO 2 -water-salt equation-of-state module, we developed a computationally efficient method for evaluating optimization of simultaneous CO 2 injection, brine extraction, and brine (re)injection at hypothetical injection sites deployed across a geologic basin. The Illinois basin is ideal for testing our methodology because it contains multiple geologic storage units with seals in between them to isolate injection of CO 2 in one unit from interfering with the injection of either brine or CO 2 in another unit above or below it. In addition, we investigated the relative effects of variation in key geologic parameters as well as two reservoir structures (hydrogeologic heterogeneity/anisotropy and homogeneity/isotropy) on CO 2 injectivities and enhancement of CO 2 injectivity through extracting brine. Results suggest that permeability, depth, and especially thickness of the storage unit could be the most influential parameters determining CO 2 injectivity. They also suggest that only injecting CO 2 into the storage unit with the greatest injectivity, enhancing that unit’s injectivity by extracting brine, and disposing of the produced brine in other suitable units could maximize total CO 2 injectivity in limited regions of the basin. At the majority of simulated injection sites, however, we found that injecting CO 2 into all of the accessible and suitable storage units was more likely to maximize the CO 2 storage resource.

Illinois, Kentucky, Indiana↗