Advertisement

Bulletin of Volcanology

, 79:83 | Cite as

Hydrothermal activity and subsoil complexity: implication for degassing processes at Solfatara crater, Campi Flegrei caldera

  • Cristian MontanaroEmail author
  • Klaus Mayer
  • Roberto Isaia
  • Marceau Gresse
  • Bettina Scheu
  • Tim I. Yilmaz
  • Jean Vandemeulebrouck
  • Tullio Ricci
  • Donald B. Dingwell
Research Article

Abstract

The Solfatara area and its fumaroles are the main surface expression of the vigorous hydrothermal activity within the active Campi Flegrei caldera system. At depth, a range of volcanic and structural processes dictate the actual state of the hydrothermal system below the crater. The presence of a large variety of volcanic products at shallow depth (including pyroclastic fallout ash beds, pyroclastic density current deposits, breccias, and lavas), and the existence of a maar-related fault system appears to exert major controls on the degassing and alteration behavior. Adding further to the complexity of this environment, variations in permeability and porosity, due to subsoil lithology and alteration effects, may further influence fluid flow towards the surface. Here, we report results from a field campaign conducted in July 2015 that was designed to characterize the in situ physical (temperature, humidity) and mechanical (permeability, strength, stiffness) properties of the Solfatara crater subsoil. The survey also included a mapping of the surficial hydrothermal features and their distributions. Finally, laboratory measurements (porosity, granulometry) of selected samples were performed. Our results enable the discrimination of four main subsoils around the crater: (1) the Fangaia domain located in a topographic low in the southwestern sector, (2) the silica flat domain on the western altered side, (3) the new crust domain in the central area, and (4) the crusted hummocks domain that dominates the north, east, and south parts. These domains are surrounded by encrusted areas, reworked material, and vegetated soil. The distribution of these heterogeneous subsoils suggests that their formation is mostly related to (i) the presence of the Fangaia domain within the crater and (ii) a system of ring faults bordering it. The subsoils show an alternation between very high and very low permeabilities, a fact which seems to affect both the temperature distribution and surficial degassing. A large range of surface temperatures (from 25 up to 95 °C) has been measured across these surfaces, with the hottest spot corresponding to the mud pools, the area of new crust formation, and the crusted hummocks. In the subsoil, the distribution of temperature is more complex and controlled by the presence of coarser, and more permeable, sandy/pebbly levels. These act as preferential pathways for hot hydrothermal fluid circulation. In contrast, low permeability, fine-grained levels act as thermal insulators that remain relatively cold and hinder fluid escape to the surface. Hot gases reach the surface predominantly along (vertical) fractures. When this occurs, mound-like structures can be formed by a cracking and healing process associated with significant degassing. It is anticipated that the results presented here may contribute to an improved understanding of the hazard potential associated with the ongoing hydrothermal activity within the Solfatara crater. At this site the permeability of the near-surface environment and its changes in space and time can affect the spatial and temporal distribution of gas and heat emission. Particularly, in areas where reduction in permeability occurs, it can produce pore pressure augmentation that may result in explosive events.

Keywords

Solfatara crater Subsoil Hydrothermal alteration Porosity Permeability Degassing Fangaia Crusted hummocks 

Notes

Acknowledgements

CM and BS acknowledge the support of the European Commission (FP7-MC-ITN, grant no. 289976: NEMOH). BS, KM, and DBD acknowledge the support from the EC FP7 under grant agreement no. 282759 (VUELCO). CM, BS and DBD acknowledge the support from EC FP7 grant agreement No 308665 (MED-SUV). DBD and KM acknowledge the support of ERC advanced grant no. 247076 (EVOKES). Great thanks go to Annarita Mangiacapra for the discussion and the help during field activity and to Albert B. Gilg for the help in carrying out and interpreting XRD analysis. ERT computations presented in this paper were performed using the Froggy platform of the CIMENT infrastructure (https://ciment.ujf-grenoble.fr), which is supported by the Rhône-Alpes region (GRANT CPER07_13 CIRA), the OSUG@2020 labex (reference ANR10 LABX56), and the Equip@Meso project (reference ANR-10-EQPX-29-01) of the programme Investissements d’Avenir supervised by the Agence Nationale pour la Recherche. We further acknowledge the reviewers Michael Heap and Micol Todesco, as well as the editors Lucia Capra and Andrew Harris, whose comments significantly improved the manuscript.

Supplementary material

445_2017_1167_MOESM1_ESM.jpg (24.9 mb)
ESM 1 (JPG 3.46 MB).
445_2017_1167_MOESM2_ESM.jpg (24.9 mb)
ESM 2 (JPG 1.46 MB).
445_2017_1167_MOESM3_ESM.jpg (24.9 mb)
ESM 3 (JPG 1.45 MB).
445_2017_1167_MOESM4_ESM.jpg (24.9 mb)
ESM 4 (JPG 1.27 MB).
445_2017_1167_MOESM5_ESM.jpg (24.9 mb)
ESM 5 (JPG 1.37 MB).
445_2017_1167_MOESM6_ESM.jpg (24.9 mb)
ESM 6 (JPG 1.54 MB).
445_2017_1167_MOESM7_ESM.jpg (24.9 mb)
ESM 7 (JPG 1.42 MB).
445_2017_1167_MOESM8_ESM.jpg (24.9 mb)
ESM 8 (JPG 1.75 MB).
445_2017_1167_MOESM9_ESM.jpg (24.9 mb)
ESM 9 (JPG 1.50 MB).
445_2017_1167_MOESM10_ESM.jpg (24.9 mb)
ESM 10 (JPG 1.88 MB).
445_2017_1167_MOESM11_ESM.jpg (24.9 mb)
ESM 11 (JPG 2.27 MB).
445_2017_1167_MOESM12_ESM.jpg (24.9 mb)
ESM 12 (JPG 1.52 MB).
445_2017_1167_MOESM13_ESM.jpg (24.9 mb)
ESM 13 (JPG 1.47 MB).
445_2017_1167_MOESM14_ESM.jpg (24.9 mb)
ESM 14 (JPG 1.38 MB).
445_2017_1167_MOESM15_ESM.jpg (24.9 mb)
ESM 15 (JPG 34.6 MB).

References

  1. Aiuppa A, Tamburello G, Di Napoli R et al (2013) First observations of the fumarolic gas output from a restless caldera: implications for the current period of unrest (2005-2013) at Campi Flegrei. Geochemistry, Geophys Geosystems 14:4153–4169.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ggge.20261 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allard P, Maiorani A, Tedesco D et al (1991) Isotopic study of the origin of sulfur and carbon in Solfatara fumaroles, Campi Flegrei caldera. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 48:139–159.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-0273(91)90039-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnórsson S (1995) Geothermal systems in Iceland: structure and conceptual models—I. High-temperature areas. Geothermics 24:561–602.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0375-6505(95)00025-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aubert M, Diliberto S, Finizola A et al (2009) Double origin of hydrothermal convective flux variations in the Fossa of Volcano (Italy). Bull Volcanol 70:743–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bagnato E, Barra M, Cardellini C et al (2014) First combined flux chamber survey of mercury and CO2 emissions from soil diffuse degassing at Solfatara of Pozzuoli crater, Campi Flegrei (Italy): mapping and quantification of gas release. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 289:26–40.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2014.10.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ball JL, Stauffer PH, Calder ES, Valentine GA (2015) The hydrothermal alteration of cooling lava domes. Bull Volcanol 77:16.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-015-0986-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barberi F, Bertagnini A, Landi P, Principe C (1992) A review on phreatic eruptions and their precursors. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 52:231–246.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-0273(92)90046-G CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bertagnini A, Landi P, Santacroce R, Sbrana A (1991) The 1906 eruption of Vesuvius: from magmatic to phreatomagmatic activity through the flashing of a shallow depth hydrothermal system. Bull Volcanol 53:517–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bloomberg S, Werner C, Rissmann C et al (2014) Soil CO2 emissions as a proxy for heat and mass flow assessment, Taupo Volcanic Zone, New Zealand. Am Geophys Union Geochemistry, Geophys Geosystems 15:4885–4904.  https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GC005327 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Borfecchia F, Micheli C, Carli F et al (2013) Mapping spatial patterns of Posidonia oceanica meadows by means of Daedalus ATM airborne sensor in the coastal area of Civitavecchia (Central Tyrrhenian Sea, Italy). Remote Sens 5Google Scholar
  11. Boyce AJ, Fulignati P, Sbrana A, Fallick AE (2007) Fluids in early stage hydrothermal alteration of high-sulfidation epithermal systems: a view from the Vulcano active hydrothermal system (Aeolian Island, Italy). J Volcanol Geotherm Res 166:76–90.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2007.07.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Browne PRL (1978) Hydrothermal alteration in active geothermal fields. Annu Rev Earth Planet Sci 6:229–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bruno PPG, Ricciardi GP, Petrillo Z et al (2007) Geophysical and hydrogeological experiments from a shallow hydrothermal system at Solfatara Volcano, Campi Flegrei, Italy: response to caldera unrest. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 112:1–17.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JB004383 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Byrdina S, Vandemeulebrouck J, Cardellini C et al (2014) Relations between electrical resistivity, carbon dioxide flux, and self-potential in the shallow hydrothermal system of Solfatara (Phlegrean Fields, Italy). J Volcanol Geotherm Res 283:172–182.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2014.07.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Caliro S, Chiodini G, Moretti R et al (2007) The origin of the fumaroles of La Solfatara (Campi Flegrei, South Italy). Geochim Cosmochim Acta 71:3040–3055.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gca.2007.04.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Caliro S, Chiodini G, Paonita a. (2014) Geochemical evidences of magma dynamics at Campi Flegrei (Italy). Geochim Cosmochim Acta 132:1–15.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gca.2014.01.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cardellini C, Chio G, Frondini F et al (2017) Monitoring diffuse volcanic degassing during volcanic unrests: the case of Campi Flegrei (Italy). Nat Sci Rep 7:1–15.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-06941-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Chiodini G, Avino R, Caliro S, Minopoli C (2011) Temperature and pressure gas geoindicators at the Solfatara fumaroles (Campi Flegrei). Ann Geophys 54:151–160.  https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-5002 Google Scholar
  19. Chiodini G, Caliro S, Cardellini C et al (2010) Long-term variations of the Campi Flegrei, Italy, volcanic system as revealed by the monitoring of hydrothermal activity. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 115:1982–1984.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JB006258 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chiodini G, Cioni R, Marini L, Panichi C (1995) Origin of the fumarolic fluids of Vulcano Island, Italy and implications for volcanic surveillance. Bull Volcanol 1977:99–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Chiodini G, Frondini F, Cardellini C et al (2001) CO2 degassing and energy release at Solfatara volcano, Campi Flegrei, Italy. J Geophys Res 106:213–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Chiodini G, Granieri D, Avino R et al (2005) Carbon dioxide diffuse degassing and estimation of heat release from volcanic and hydrothermal systems. J Geophys Res B Solid Earth 110:1–17.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JB003542 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Chiodini G, Paonita A, Aiuppa A et al (2016) Magmas near the critical degassing pressure drive volcanic unrest towards a critical state. Nat Commun 7:1–9.  https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms13712 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Chiodini G, Vandemeulebrouck J, Caliro S et al (2015) Evidence of thermal-driven processes triggering the 2005–2014 unrest at Campi Flegrei caldera. Earth Planet Sci Lett 414:58–67.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2015.01.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Christenson B, Werner CA, Reyes AG et al (2007) Hazards from hydrothermally sealed volcanic conduits. EOS Trans Am Geophys Union.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2007EO050002
  26. Christenson BW, Reyes A. G, Young R, et al (2010) Cyclic processes and factors leading to phreatic eruption events: insights from the 25 September 2007 eruption through Ruapehu Crater Lake, New Zealand. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 191:15–32.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2010.01.008
  27. Cody AD (2003) Geology, history and stratigraphy of hydrothermal eruptions in the Rotorua geothermal field. University of Waikato, HamiltonGoogle Scholar
  28. de’ Gennaro M, Franco E, Stanzione D (1980) Le alterazioni ad opera di fluidi termali alla Solfatara di Pozzuoli (Napoli): mineralogia e geochimica. Period di Mineral 49:5–22Google Scholar
  29. De Landro G, Serlenga V, Russo G et al (2017) 3D ultra-high resolution seismic imaging of shallow Solfatara crater in Campi Flegrei (Italy): new insights on deep hydrothermal fluid circulation processes. Nat Sci Rep.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-03604-0
  30. De Vita S, Orsi G, Civetta L et al (1999) The Agnano-Monte Spina eruption (4100 years BP) in the restless Campi Flegrei caldera (Italy). J Volcanol Geotherm Res 91:269–301.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-0273(99)00039-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Di Giuseppe MG, Troiano A, Fedele A et al (2015) Electrical resistivity tomography imaging of the near-surface structure of the Solfatara crater, Campi Flegrei (Naples, Italy). Bull Volcanol 77:27.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-015-0910-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Edmonds M, Oppenheimer C, Pyle DM et al (2003) SO2 emissions from Soufrie ’re Hills Volcano and their relationship to conduit permeability, hydrothermal interaction and degassing regime. J Volcanol Geotherm Energy 124:23–43.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-0273(03)00041-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ellis AJ, Mahon WAJ (1964) Natural hydrothermal systems and experimental hot-water / rock interactions. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 28:1323–1357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Farquharson J, Heap MJ, Varley NR, Baud P (2015) Permeability and porosity relationships of edifice-forming andesites: a combined field and laboratory study. Geol Soc Am Bull 297:52–68.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2015.03.016 Google Scholar
  35. Fulignati P, Gioncada A, Sbrana A (1996) Hydrothermal alteration in the subsoil of Porto Levante, Vulcano (Aeolian Islands, Italy). Acta Vulcanol 8:129–138Google Scholar
  36. Gambino S, and Guglielmino F (2008) Ground deformation induced by geothermal processes: A model for La Fossa Crater (Vulcano Island, Italy). J Geophys Res 113:B07402. doi: 10.1029/2007JB005016.
  37. Glamoclija M, Garrel L, Berthon J (2004) Biosignatures and bacterial diversity in hydrothermal deposits of Solfatara Crater, Italy. Geomicrobiol J 21:529–541.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01490450490888235 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Gresse M, Vandemeulebrouck J, Byrdina S et al (2016) Changes in CO2 diffuse degassing induced by the passing of seismic waves. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 320:12–18.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2016.04.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Google Earth 7.0 (2016) Solfatara di Pozzuoli, Pozzuoli, Metropolitan City of Naples, Italy 40° 49' 39.25" N, 14° 8' 22.61" E, elevation 98-106 M. 2D map, viewed 21 June 2016. <http://www.google.com/earth/index.html>.
  40. Harris AJL, Maciejewski AJH (2000) Thermal surveys of the Vulcano Fossa fumarole field 1994–1999: evidence for fumarole migration and sealing. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 102:119–147.Google Scholar
  41. Heap MJ, Baud P, Meredith PG et al (2014a) The permeability and elastic moduli of tuff from Campi Flegrei, Italy: implications for ground deformation modelling. Solid Earth 5:25–44.  https://doi.org/10.5194/se-5-25-2014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Heap MJ, Lavallée Y, Petrakova L et al (2014b) Microstructural controls on the physical and mechanical properties of edifice-forming andesites at Volcán de Colima, Mexico. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 119:2925–2963.  https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JB010521 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Heap MJ, Kennedy BM (2016) Exploring the scale-dependent permeability of fractured andesite. Earth Planet Sci Lett 447:139–150.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2016.05.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Heap MJ, Kennedy BM, Farquharson JI et al (2017) A multidisciplinary approach to quantify the permeability of the Whakaari / White Island volcanic hydrothermal (Taupo Volcanic Zone, New Zealand) Michael. J Volcanol Geotherm Res.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2016.12.004
  45. Hedenquist JW, Arribas AN, Gonzalez-Urien E (2000) Exploration for epithermal gold deposits. Rev Econ Geol 13:245–277Google Scholar
  46. Hedenquist JW, Browne PRL (1989) The evolution of the Waiotapu geothermal system, New Zealand, based on the chemical and isotopic composition of its fluids, minerals and rocks. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 53:2235–2251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hedenquist JW, Lowenstern JB (1994) The role of magma in the formation of hydrothermal ore deposits. Nature 370:519–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Houghton BF, Nairn IA (1991) The 1976-1982 Strombolian and phreatomagmatic eruptions of White Island, New Zealand: eruptive and depositional mechanisms at a “wet” volcano. Bull Volcanol 54:25–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Inguaggiato S, Mazot A, Inguaggiato C et al (2012) Total CO 2 output from Vulcano island (Aeolian Islands, Italy). Geochemistry, Geophys Geosystems 13:1–19.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GC003920 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Isaia R, Marianelli P, Sbrana A (2009) Caldera unrest prior to intense volcanism in Campi Flegrei (Italy) at 4.0 ka B.P.: implications for caldera dynamics and future eruptive scenarios. Geophys Res Lett 36:1–6.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL040513 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Isaia R, Vitale S, Di Giuseppe MG et al (2015) Stratigraphy, structure, and volcano-tectonic evolution of Solfatara maar-diatreme (Campi Flegrei, Italy). Geol Soc Am Bull:1–20.  https://doi.org/10.1130/B31183.1
  52. John DA, Sisson TW, Breit GN et al (2008) Characteristics, extent and origin of hydrothermal alteration at Mount Rainier Volcano, Cascades Arc, USA: implications for debris-flow hazards and mineral deposits. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 175:289–314.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2008.04.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Johnson TC, Roelof J, Ward A, et al (2016) Improved hydrogeophysical characterization and monitoring through parallel modeling and inversion of time-domain resistivity and induced-polarization data. Geophysics 75:WA27–WA41Google Scholar
  54. Kozák J, Čermák V (2010) Phleghraean Fields. In: Kozák J, Čermák V (eds) The illustrated history of natural disasters. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, pp 67–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Le Guern F, Tazieff H, Pierret RF (1982) An example of health hazard: people killed by gas during a phreatic eruption: Diëng plateau (Java, Indonesia), February 20th 1979. Bull Volcanol 45:153–156.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02600430 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Loke M H (2002) Tutorial: 2D and 3D Electrical Imaging Survey. Malaysia: Geotomo SoftwareGoogle Scholar
  57. Makó A, Elek B, Dunai A, Hernádi H (2009) Comparison of nonaqueous phase liquids ’ conductivity and air permeability of different soils. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 40:787–799.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00103620802694993 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Marini L, Principe C, Chiodini G et al (1993) Hydrothermal eruptions of Nisyros (Dodecanese, Greece). Past events and present hazard J Volcanol Geotherm Res 56:71–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Mayer K, Scheu B, Gilg HA et al (2015) Experimental constraints on phreatic eruption processes at Whakaari (White Island volcano). J Volcanol Geotherm Res 302:150–162.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2015.06.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Mayer K, Scheu B, Montanaro C et al (2016) Hydrothermal alteration of surficial rocks at Solfatara (Campi Flegrei): petrophysical properties and implications for phreatic eruption processes. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 320:128–143.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2016.04.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Mayer K, Scheu B, Rott S et al (2017) Phreatic activity and hydrothermal alteration in the Valley of Desolation, Dominica. Lesser Antilles, Bull Volcanol (Accepted)Google Scholar
  62. Mercati M (1570) Metallotheca Vaticana-Opus posthumum 1717 & 1719 (Plate between pages 79–80) https://archive.org/stream/bub_gb_xB2JGNFbtj4C#page/n155/mode/2up/search/pouz.
  63. Montanaro C, Scheu B, Cronin SJ et al (2016a) Experimental estimates of the energy budget of hydrothermal eruptions; application to 2012 Upper Te Maari eruption, New Zealand. Earth Planet Sci Lett 452:281–294.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2016.07.052 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Montanaro C, Scheu B, Gudmundsson MT et al (2016b) Multidisciplinary constraints of hydrothermal explosions based on the 2013 Gengissig lake events, Kverkfjöll volcano, Iceland. Earth Planet Sci Lett 434:308–319.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2015.11.043 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Moretti R, Arienzo I, Civetta L et al (2013) Multiple magma degassing sources at an explosive volcano. Earth Planet Sci Lett 367:95–104.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2013.02.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Mormone A, Troise C, Piochi M et al (2015) Mineralogical, geochemical and isotopic features of tuffs from the CFDDP drill hole: hydrothermal activity in the eastern side of the Campi Flegrei volcano (southern Italy). J Volcanol Geotherm Res 290:39–52.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2014.12.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Mormone A, Tramelli A, Di VM a et al (2011) Secondary hydrothermal minerals in buried rocks at the Campi Flegrei caldera, Italy: a possible tool to understand the rock-physics and to assess the state of the volcanic system. Period di Mineral 80:385–406.  https://doi.org/10.2451/2011PM0027 Google Scholar
  68. Notsu K, Mori T, Do Vale SC et al (2006) Monitoring quiescent volcanoes by diffuse CO 2 degassing: case study of Mt. Fuji, Japan. Pure Appl Geophys 163:825–835.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-006-0051-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Pantaleo M, Walter TR (2014) The ring-shaped thermal field of Stefanos crater, Nisyros Island: a conceptual model. Solid Earth 5:183–198.  https://doi.org/10.5194/se-5-183-2014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Petrosino S, Damiano N, Cusano P et al (2012) Subsurface structure of the Solfatara volcano (Campi Flegrei caldera, Italy) as deduced from joint seismic-noise array, volcanological and morphostructural analysis. Geochemistry, Geophys Geosystems 13:1–25.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GC004030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Piochi M, Mormone A, Balassone G et al (2015) Native sulfur, sulfates and sulfides from the active Campi Flegrei volcano (southern Italy): genetic environments and degassing dynamics revealed by mineralogy and isotope geochemistry. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 304:180–193.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2015.08.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Pola A, Crosta G, Fusi N et al (2012) Influence of alteration on physical properties of volcanic rocks. Tectonophysics 566–567:67–86.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2012.07.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Pola A, Crosta GB, Fusi N, Castellanza R (2014) General characterization of the mechanical behaviour of different volcanic rocks with respect to alteration. Eng Geol 169:1–13.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2013.11.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Possemiers M, Huysmans M, Peeters L et al (2012) Relationship between sedimentary features and permeability at different scales in the Brussels Sands. Geol Belgica 15:156–164Google Scholar
  75. Revil A, Finizola A, Piscitelli S et al (2008) Inner structure of La Fossa di Vulcano (Vulcano Island, southern Tyrrhenian Sea, Italy) revealed by high-resolution electric resistivity tomography coupled with self-potential, temperature, and CO 2 diffuse degassing measurements. J Geophys Res 113:1–21.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JB005394 Google Scholar
  76. Ricci T, Finizola A, Barde-Cabusson S et al (2015) Hydrothermal fluid flow disruptions evidenced by subsurface changes in heat transfer modality: the La Fossa cone of Vulcano (Italy) case study. Geology 43:G37015.1.  https://doi.org/10.1130/G37015.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Robb L (2004) Introduction to ore-forming processes. Blackwell Publishing, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  78. Robert G, Knipping JL, Scherbarth S et al (2014) Heat capacity and viscosity of basaltic melts with H 2 O ± F ± CO 2. Chem Geol.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemgeo.2014.07.015
  79. Rye RO (2005) A review of the stable-isotope geochemistry of sulfate minerals in selected igneous environments and related hydrothermal systems selected igneous environments and related hydrothermal systems. Chem Geol 215:5–36.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemgeo.2004.06.034 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Rye RO, Bethke PM, Wasserman MD (1992) The stable isotope geochemistry of acid sulfate alteration. Econ Geol 87:225–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Schöpa A, Pantaleo M, Walter TR (2011) Scale-dependent location of hydrothermal vents: stress field models and infrared field observations on the Fossa Cone, Vulcano Island, Italy. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 203:133–145.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2011.03.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Serra M, Festa G, Roux P et al (2016) A strongly heterogeneous hydrothermal area imaged by surface waves: the case of Solfatara, a strongly heterogeneous hydrothermal area imaged by surface waves: the case of Solfatara, Campi Flegrei. Italy Geophys J Int Adv.  https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggw119
  83. Sicardi L (1956) La Solfatara di Pozzuoli. Bull Volcanol 18:151–158.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02596618.
  84. Signore F (1930) Sur la variation d' activite du volcan de Boue (" fangaia ,,) de la Solfatare de Pouzzoles (Naples ) par suite du grand tremblement de terre de l'Irpinla, 23 Juillet 1930. Bull Volcanol 6Google Scholar
  85. Tassi F, Nisi B, Cardellini C et al (2013) Diffuse soil emission of hydrothermal gases (CO2, CH4, and C6H6) at Solfatara crater (Campi Flegrei, southern Italy). Appl Geochem 35:142–153.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeochem.2013.03.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Tranfaglia G, Esposito E, Porfido S, Pece R (2011) The 23 July 1930 earthquake (Ms = 6.7) in the southern Apennines (Italy). Assoc Geofis Ital 1–4:63–86Google Scholar
  87. Valentino GM, Stanzione D (2004) Geochemical monitoring of the thermal waters of the Phlegraean Fields. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 133:261–289.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-0273(03)00402-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Vignaroli G, Aldega L, Balsamo F et al (2015) A way to hydrothermal paroxysm, Colli Albani volcano, Italy. Geol Soc Am Bull 127:672–687.  https://doi.org/10.1130/B31139.1. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Vitale S, Isaia R (2014) Fractures and faults in volcanic rocks (Campi Flegrei, southern Italy): insight into volcano-tectonic processes. Int J Earth Sci 103:801–819.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00531-013-0979-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Wyering LD, Villeneuve MC, Wallis IC et al (2014) Mechanical and physical properties of hydrothermally altered rocks, Taupo Volcanic Zone, New Zealand. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 288:76–93.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2014.10.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Zimbone SM, Vickers A, Morgan RPC, Vella P (1996) Field investigations of different techniques for measuring surface soil shear strength. Soil Technol 9:101–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Earth & Environmental SciencesLudwig-Maximilians-Universität MünchenMunichGermany
  2. 2.School of EnvironmentUniversity of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand
  3. 3.Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (Osservatorio Vesuviano)ErcolanoItaly
  4. 4.ISTerreUniversité Savoie Mont BlancLe Bourget du LacFrance
  5. 5.Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e VulcanologiaRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations