| Popis: |
The plume height represents a crucial piece of evidence about an eruption, feeding later assessment of its size, character, and potential impact, and feeding real-time warnings for aviation and ground-based populations. There have been many observed discrepancies between different observations of maximum plume height for the same eruption. A comparison of maximum daily height estimates of volcanic clouds over Indonesia and Papua New Guinea during 1982–2005 shows marked differences between ground and satellite estimates, and a general tendency towards lower height estimates from the ground. Without improvements in the quality of these estimates, reconciled among all available methods, warning systems will be less effective than they should be and the world's record of global volcanism will remain hard to quantify. Examination of particular cases suggests many possible reasons for the discrepancies. Consideration of the satellite and radar cloud observations for the 1991 Pinatubo eruptions shows that marked differences can exist even with apparently good observations. The problem can be understood largely as a sampling issue, as the most widely reported parameter, the maximum cloud height, is highly sensitive to the frequency of observation. Satellite and radar cloud heights also show a pronounced clumping near the height of the tropopause and relative lack of eruptions reaching only the mid-troposphere, reinforcing the importance of the tropopause in determining the eruption height in convectively unstable environments. To reduce the discrepancies between ground and satellite estimates, a number of formal collaboration measures between vulcanological, meteorological and aviation agencies are suggested. |
Full Text from ScienceDirect