Risk evaluation, detection and simulation during effusive eruption disasters

Abstract

Lava ingress into a vulnerable population will be difficult to control, so that evacuation will be necessary for communities in the path of the active lava, followed by post-event population, infrastructural, societal and community replacement and/or relocation. There is a pressing need to set up a response chain that bridges scientists and responders during an effusive crisis to allow nearreal-time delivery of globally standard 'products' for a timely and adequate humanitarian response. In this chain, the scientific research groups investigating lava remote-sensing and modelling need to provide products that are both useful to, and trusted by, the crisis response community. Requirements for these products include (a) formats that can be immediately integrated into a crisis management procedure, and (b) in an agreed and stable standard. A review of current capability reveals that we are at a point where the community can provide such a response, as is the aim of the RED SEED (Risk Evaluation, Detection and Simulation during Effusive Eruption Disasters) working group. This book is the first production of this group and is intended not only as a directory of current capabilities and operational service providers, but also as a statement of intent and need, while providing a simulation designed to demonstrate how a truly pan-disciplinary response to an effusive crisis could work.

The cascading origin of the 2018 Kīlauea eruption and implications for future forecasting

“…Explosive eruptions may exemplify the common picture of volcanic hazards, but effusive (lava-producing) events, typical at basaltic systems, can also be dangerous and destructive. In human terms, the stakes of forecasting can be particularly high when lava effusion occurs low on a volcano's flank, where population centers are common 16,17 . Eruptions at Nyiragongo (DR Congo) in 1977 and 2002, Etna (Italy) in 1669 and 2001-2002, Piton de la Fournaise (Réunion) in 1977, Mauna Loa in 1926, 1950, and 1984, and Kīlauea in 1960and 1983 are part of the long historical record of the risk to society posed by flank effusions 6,[18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25] and emphasize the critical importance of accurate forecasts during these events.…”

Role of mechanical erosion in controlling the effusion rate of basaltic eruptions

“…Thermorheological models for lava flows have been developed both with an analytical and a numerical approach [e.g., Danes , ; Hulme , ; Park and Iversen , ; Dragoni et al , ; Dragoni and Tallarico , ; Dragoni et al , ; Harris et al , ; Filippucci et al , ; Valerio et al , ]. Recently, Harris et al [] provided an overview of risk evaluation during effusive eruption disasters.…”

Monitoring the time-averaged discharge rates, volumes and emplacement style of large lava flows by using MIROVA system: the case of the 2014-2015 eruption at Holuhraun (Iceland)

“…The relationship between effusion rates and thermal emissions of lava flows has received increasingly at− tention during the past three decades (a full list of 46 papers published between 1990 and 2005 is reported in Harris [2013]). The methods, limits and applications of this approach are part of a book expressly focussed on detecting, modelling and responding to effusive erup− tions [Harris et al, 2016b], whereas exhaustive overview of the physic behind mass and energy flow through a lava flow system is provided by a series topical works [Pieri and Baloga 1986;Harris et al, 1997;Wright et al, 2001;Harris et al, 2007;Har− ris and Baloga, 2009;Dragoni and Tallarico, 2009;Cop− pola et al, 2013;Garel et al, 2012Garel et al, , 2014Garel et al, , 2015Tarquini 2017;among others]. Here, we outline the basic princi− ples of this technique and we summarize the open ques− tions that have been addressed in this work.…”