Climate change could increase volcano eruptions

November 23, 2017, University of Leeds
Tephras - rock fragments and particles ejected by a volcanic eruption . Credit: University of Leeds

Shrinking glacier cover could lead to increased volcanic activity in Iceland, warn scientists.

A new study, led by the University of Leeds, has found that there was less in Iceland when glacier cover was more extensive and as the melted increased due to subsequent changes in pressure.

Dr Graeme Swindles, from the School of Geography at Leeds, said: "Climate change caused by humans is creating rapid ice melt in volcanically active regions. In Iceland, this has put us on a path to more frequent volcanic eruptions."

The study examined Icelandic volcanic ash preserved in peat deposits and lake sediments and identified a period of significantly reduced volcanic activity between 5,500 and 4,500 years ago. This period came after a major decrease in global temperature, which caused glacier growth in Iceland.

The findings, published today in the journal Geology, found there was a time lag of roughly 600 years between the climate event and a noticeable decrease in the number of volcanic eruptions. The study suggests that perhaps a similar time lag can be expected following the more recent shift to warmer temperatures.

Iceland's volcanic system is in process of recovering from the 'Little Ice Age'—a recorded period of colder climate roughly between the years 1500 to 1850. Since the end of the Little Ice Age, a combination of natural and human caused climate warming is causing Icelandic glaciers to melt again.

Dr Swindles said: "The human effect on global warming makes it difficult to predict how long the time lag will be but the trends of the past show us more eruptions in Iceland can be expected in the future.

"These long term consequences of human effect on the is why summits like COP are so important. It is vital to understand how actions today can impact future generations in ways that have not been fully realised, such as more ash clouds over Europe, more particles in the atmosphere and problems for aviation. "

Icelandic volcanism is controlled by complex interactions between rifts in continental plate boundaries, underground gas and magma build-up and pressure on the volcano's surface from glaciers and ice. Changes in surface pressure can alter the stress on shallow chambers where magma builds up.

Study co-author, Dr Ivan Savov, from the School of Earth & Environment at Leeds, explains: "When glaciers retreat there is less pressure on the Earth's surface. This can increase the amount of mantle melt as well as affect magma flow and how much magma the crust can hold.

"Even small changes in surface can alter the likelihood of eruptions at ice-covered volcanos."

Explore further: Research finds second source of potentially disruptive Icelandic volcanoes

More information: Graeme T. Swindles et al. Climatic control on Icelandic volcanic activity during the mid-Holocene, Geology (2017). DOI: 10.1130/G39633.1

Related Stories

Recommended for you

A damming trend

December 14, 2018

Hundreds of dams are being proposed for Mekong River basin in Southeast Asia. The negative social and environmental consequences—affecting everything from food security to the environment—greatly outweigh the positive ...

Data from Kilauea suggests the eruption was unprecedented

December 14, 2018

A very large team of researchers from multiple institutions in the U.S. has concluded that the Kilauea volcanic eruption that occurred over this past summer represented an unprecedented volcanic event. In their paper published ...

The long dry: global water supplies are shrinking

December 13, 2018

A global study has found a paradox: our water supplies are shrinking at the same time as climate change is generating more intense rain. And the culprit is the drying of soils, say researchers, pointing to a world where drought-like ...

Death near the shoreline, not life on land

December 13, 2018

Our understanding of when the very first animals started living on land is helped by identifying trace fossils—the tracks and trails left by ancient animals—in sedimentary rocks that were deposited on the continents.

New climate model to be built from the ground up

December 13, 2018

Facing the certainty of a changing climate coupled with the uncertainty that remains in predictions of how it will change, scientists and engineers from across the country are teaming up to build a new type of climate model ...

17 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Steve_S2
3 / 5 (6) Nov 23, 2017
This is quite reasonable, if 1 billion tonnes of land ice melts and shifts into the oceans, that reduced pressure / tension on the land surface will permit Uplift and changes below the strata. While at the same time that shift of "weight" into the oceans is dispersed yet it affects tides and waves travelling across the surface (subsea of course) and as a moving weight, shifting will add further stress to the tectonic plates. Look at the increases in earthquakes, volcanic activity globally but especially at the tell tale Iceland volcanoes and those of the pacific rim Ring of Fire and now in Antarctica. Effect, Counter Effect and sadly this is only coming to "some" consciousness now ? Sad considering I have been talking about it for over a decade and have been slammed by so many.
BackBurner
2.5 / 5 (4) Nov 23, 2017
'Dr Graeme Swindles, from the School of Geography at Leeds, said: "Climate change caused by humans..."

Sort of a leap there isn't it Dr. Swindles? A scientists should know better.

Great name though. Fits you perfectly.
leetennant
5 / 5 (7) Nov 23, 2017
This is quite reasonable, if 1 billion tonnes of land ice melts and shifts into the oceans, that reduced pressure / tension on the land surface will permit Uplift and changes below the strata. While at the same time that shift of "weight" into the oceans is dispersed yet it affects tides and waves travelling across the surface (subsea of course) and as a moving weight, shifting will add further stress to the tectonic plates. Look at the increases in earthquakes, volcanic activity globally but especially at the tell tale Iceland volcanoes and those of the pacific rim Ring of Fire and now in Antarctica. Effect, Counter Effect and sadly this is only coming to "some" consciousness now ? Sad considering I have been talking about it for over a decade and have been slammed by so many.


This is not a new prediction. I think it's just considered a minor outcome so there's more emphasis on things like sea level rise.
PTTG
4.5 / 5 (8) Nov 23, 2017
Hey Mackita, if CO2 isn't causing warming, what happens to the energy that the Co2 absorbs?
leetennant
4.6 / 5 (10) Nov 23, 2017
But why the hell the ice should melt rapidly just in volcanically active regions


It's not. And that's not what that sentence says. And it's not.

And volcanoes emit around 1% of human emissions so why would volcanoes be a cause of warming and not humans?

And if you think volcanoes could be the culprit because of their emissions and they only emit 1% of human emissions then haven't you accidentally conceded anthropogenic warming?

Whoops!
jeffreyjoemiller
4.2 / 5 (5) Nov 23, 2017
"A new study, led by the University of Leeds, has found that there was less volcanic activity in Iceland when glacier cover was more extensive and as the glaciers melted volcanic eruptions increased due to subsequent changes in surface pressure."

This has been well established for decades. There is also an increase in volcanic activity during periods of global drought increase.
PTTG
4 / 5 (4) Nov 24, 2017
The thermosphere is almost entirely above the Karman line; it's more like space than like air, and the reason it's so hot (high temperature) is because it's incredibly low-density. Do you know the difference between temperature and energy?

Also, you realize you're calling all of modern climate scientists idiots, right?
Captain Stumpy
3 / 5 (2) Nov 24, 2017
Also, you realize you're calling all of modern climate scientists idiots, right?
@PTTG
it's zephir

of course, he realises it, and he has built a reputation throwing pseudoscience around like a cudgel in a 1930's gang fight (or a really bad NY gang musical - whichever you feel is more relevant! LOL)

you think his anti-climate science arguments are bad, you should read his aether reddit page railing against modern astrophysicists and particle physics!
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (4) Nov 24, 2017
@idiot zephr
He sent infrared radiation through a tube filled with carbon dioxide... the concentration in air is only a few hundred parts per million
1- the atmosphere has more in it than CO2

2- if you had taken the time to read Lacis et al and the studies that have validated it, you would realise that CO2 has a relationship with WV

3- making arguments straight out of a denier political rhetoric site doesn't help spread actual science - had you taken just a few moments to use google SCHOLAR instead of sticking to the koch site data center you would realise that this issue is discussed quite a lot in the literature, and has a sh*tload of studies too
How could adding CO2 affect radiation in bands of the spectrum that H2O
start with LACIS

move on to google scholar

SKIP the denier rhetoric sites alltogether

then you will learn2science
Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (3) Nov 24, 2017
PS @idiot zeph
Even more blah blah bullsh*t blah
it's not like I, personally, haven't offered you multiple studies on this topic alone, but I can also attest that you have been offered studies on this topic by many other people

refusing to accept proven science tends to be something of a trend with you, eh?

this doesn't make you a sceptic, nor does it make you intelligent. in fact, it makes you the opposite: a dogmatic fanatical religious true believer in any topic that is against the mainstream science

in most folk, this is considered irrational
in those attempting to present themselves as rational and objective, this is simply a sign of idiocy and religious fervour

think on that a spell before continuing eh?
Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (3) Nov 24, 2017
@pseudoscience zeph
Thickness blah blah blah off topic rambling narcissistic dunning-kruger delusional rant blah
so... tell me honestly: what in the h*ll does that have to do with the fact that you:
1- screwed the pooch WRT CO2 in the atmosphere?

2- refused to actually read the relationship between CO2 and WV?

3- historically have completely disregarded the studies repeatedly linked that debunk your above claims?

4- you have just been caught in yet another lie and intentional misrepresentation of science with opinion articles and links to pseudoscience?

i mean, you used a Wattsup link that pushes a known pseudoscience political rhetoric that is completely debunked on at least 10 different sites!!!!

so now you want to link other information to justify your above screw up?

that is called distraction from reality, red herring and a few other things, eh?
Maggnus
3.9 / 5 (7) Nov 24, 2017
you realize you're calling all of modern climate scientists idiots
You told that, not me.
In 1900 - shortly after Arrhenius published his argument that our use of fossil fuels will eventually warm the planet - J. Koch did a simple experiment. He sent infrared radiation through a tube filled with carbon dioxide, containing somewhat less gas in total then would be found in a column of air reaching to the top of the atmosphere. That's not much, since the concentration in air is only a few hundred parts per million. Koch did his experiments in a 30cm long tube and he reported that when he cut the amount of gas in the tube by one-third, the amount of radiation that got through scarcely changed.

An excellent example oi cherry picking. Pick a single study (from 1900 no less (117 years ago!)) and then ignore everything that has been studied on the subject since then. Tsk!
leetennant
4.2 / 5 (5) Nov 24, 2017
You're of course right: hundreds of additional studies of greenhouse effect saturation emerged after then. Thank you for pointing it out. I just wanted to show, that the healthy scientific AGW skepticism is nearly as old, as the Svante Arrhenius theory - and based on experiments instead of just plain speculations. The experiments beat the smartest theory, as Feynman has said many times.


OMFG, this is not an example of "skepticism" it's an example of "science".
Captain Stumpy
4.2 / 5 (5) Nov 24, 2017
@pseudoscience zeph
I just wanted to show, that the healthy scientific AGW skepticism is nearly as old, as the Svante Arrhenius theory - and based on experiments instead of just plain speculations
I'm calling bullsh*t on that one, otherwise you wouldn't have posted the following:
Research Shows A High Temperature World Had Nothing To Do With CO2, because in Miocene temperatures fell dramatically, whereas CO2 stayed the same
nor would you have said
How could adding CO2 affect radiation in bands of the spectrum that H2O
especially in light of the fact that you've been here and have read the relevant studies

if you defend the pseudoscience it makes you the idiot, not a sceptic, nor an advocate for both sides of a story

so again: the reason why people argue against your idiotic brand of pseudoscience or blatant misrepresentation of fact is simple
https://www.youtu...EwjBXlZE
Maggnus
3.7 / 5 (6) Nov 24, 2017
@pseudoscience zeph
Thickness blah blah blah off topic rambling narcissistic dunning-kruger delusional rant blah


Ha!
cgsperling
not rated yet Nov 25, 2017
This could be our only hope. Increased eruptions pump particulates into the air which reflect sunlight away and cool the planet. Earth to Humans: "Choke on THIS !"
tblakely1357
1 / 5 (1) Nov 25, 2017
It's amazing how many different ways GW is going to kill us. Waiting for the article warning that GW could cause our sun to nova.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.