7 ms·
no mention of the Hunga Tonga–Hunga Ha'apai eruption? It sounds like that eruption at least changed atmospheric composition by throwing tons of water into it.
by prpl 4y ago
no mention of the Hunga Tonga–Hunga Ha'apai eruption?
It sounds like that eruption at least changed atmospheric composition by throwing tons of water into it.
- bagels 4y agoDo you have any sources that discuss this?
- morsch 4y agoThe undersea eruption also ejected 146 million tons of South Pacific Ocean water into the stratosphere.[56] The amount of water vapor ejected was 10 percent of the atmosphere's typical stock.[57] It was enough to temporarily warm the surface of Earth. This water vapour was estimated to remain for 5–10 years.[55] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Hunga_Tonga%E2%80%93Hunga_Ha%27apai_eruption_and_tsunami#January_2022 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Hunga_Tonga%E2%80%93Hunga...
- sebazzz 4y agoInteresting as water vapour is in itself also a greenhouse gas.
- bagels 4y agoThanks for sharing this. That certainly is a lot of water.
- throwaway7980 4y ago
- selectodude 4y agoYou could always click on the source that Wikipedia has literally next to the sentence. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-01544-y/ https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-01544-y/
- rad_gruchalski 4y agoThe sources are in footnotes. The quote even contains footnote references.
- munk-a 4y agoWikipedia is generally a great summarization of a topic and links to numerous sources - that is usually a more valuable thing to link than an opaque research paper.
- pfdietz 4y ago10% of the stratosphere's typical stock.
- morsch 4y agoIf true, the article should be changed. Isn't the stratosphere extremely dry?
- pfdietz 4y agoYes, that's why a single eruption can have a noticeable effect. Stratospheric water may also set the upper limit on how many launches to orbit can be done per year, since all the propellant consumed in or above the stratosphere makes water that ends up in the stratosphere.
- ancientworldnow 4y agoHere's a practical examination of what effect the 10% increase in stratospheric water vapor caused by the eruption has on global weather: https://www.severe-weather.eu/global-weather/cold-anomaly-stratosphere-polar-vortex-volcanic-cooling-winter-influence-fa/ https://www.severe-weather.eu/global-weather/cold-anomaly-st...
- Comevius 4y agohttps://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00376-022-2034-1 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00376-022-2034-1 Unlikely. At least a single volcanic eruption is not enough to change the long-term climate trend, you need a clusters of eruptions to persist through centuries for that. HTHH will likely decrease the global mean surface temperatures by 0.004°C in the first year. Compared to that human activity is a thousand times more significant, everything else is statistical noise next to it, which at least means that it is easy to spot.
- rad_gruchalski 4y ago> At least a single volcanic eruption is not enough to change the long-term climate trend, you need a clusters of eruptions to persist through centuries for that. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1883_eruption_of_Krakatoa https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1883_eruption_of_Krakatoa “ The eruption caused a volcanic winter.[17] In the year following the eruption, average Northern Hemisphere summer temperatures fell by 0.4 °C (0.72 °F).[18] The record rainfall that hit Southern California during the water year from July 1883 to June 1884 – Los Angeles received 970 millimetres (38.18 in) and San Diego 660 millimetres (25.97 in)[19] – has been attributed to the Krakatoa eruption.[20] There was no El Niño during that period as is normal when heavy rain occurs in Southern California,[21] but many scientists doubt that there was a causal relationship.[22] The eruption injected an unusually large amount of sulfur dioxide (SO2) gas high into the stratosphere, which was subsequently transported by high-level winds all over the planet. This led to a global increase in sulfuric acid (H2SO4) concentration in high-level cirrus clouds. The resulting increase in cloud reflectivity (or albedo) reflected more incoming light from the sun than usual, and cooled the entire planet until the sulfur fell to the ground as acid precipitation.[23] “. Yes, I’m aware of “but many scientists doubt that there was a causal relationship” regarding the rain but the climate has been affected by a single eruption.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- booi 4y agoAlso https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer with Mount Tambora There's good evidence this has happened multiple times in history by a single eruption.
- ben_w 4y agoNot directly, though I can't guess at indirect effects. If 100% of the water from that landed in the flooded area of Pakistan, it would've only added 2.6 mm: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=146%20million%20cubic%20meters%20%2F%2055000km%5E2 http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=146%20million%20cubic%2...
- prpl 4y agoI had only been alluding to indirect effects - an increase in the greenhouse effect, which certainly would raise temperatures (and increase the amount water air can hold). I think we will find that, even during an increase in anomalous years from climate change, 2022-2023 will be anomalous.
- ben_w 4y agoIn that case I certainly wouldn't be surprised either way. IIRC the altitude of the water makes a difference.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]