Temporal variations of plume activities before the 8 October 2016 eruption of Aso volcano, Japan, detected by ground-based and satellite measurements
KeywordsAso volcano Volcanic eruption Monitoring camera Volcanic plume Plume height SO2 OMPS
above sea level
global navigation satellite system
Japan Meteorological Agency
Japan Standard Time
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Ozone Mapping and Profiler Suite
Suomi National Polar-orbiting Partnership
Coordinated Universal Time
vertical column densities
Phreatomagmatic eruptions are triggered by an interaction of magma with shallow hydrothermal systems (Rouwet et al. 2014). Related to the interaction of ascending magma with the hydrothermal systems, precursory changes of gas geochemistry and fumarolic activity have been documented at some volcanoes (Barberi et al. 1992; de Moor et al. 2015; Sano et al. 2015). Along with the observations of gas geochemistry, visual monitoring of volcanic plumes using cameras is also conducted at many volcanoes (Fukui 1995; Terada et al. 2003, 2005; Behncke et al. 2009; Arason et al. 2011; Fukui and Terada 2013; Shimbori and Fukui 2013). At many Japanese volcanoes, plume height is monitored as an indicator of the apparent intensity of the volcanic plume (Volcanological Division, Seismological and Volcanological Department, JMA 2014). However, the visibility of the plume is highly affected by atmospheric conditions (Matsushima and Shinohara 2006), and the plume height is also influenced by wind conditions (Bursik 2001). Therefore, to monitor the plume activity, the apparent intensity of the plume has rarely been treated quantitatively.
The supply of magma and volcanic gas is frequently monitored as the emission rate of sulfur dioxide (SO2) using ground-based (Stoiber et al. 1983; Galle et al. 2002) and satellite remote sensing techniques (Krueger 1983). Concerning the satellite remote sensing, satellite measurements of SO2 emissions to date are not limited in volcanic plumes of large explosions but also applied to those of passive degassing (Carn et al. 2008; Campion 2014). These previous studies have revealed that the satellite measurements of SO2 emissions have sufficient precision and temporal resolution to be used for the monitoring. Although the satellite measurements have a potential to monitor the passive degassing activity, the application of them is still rare at many volcano observatories.
This study focuses on the precursory changes of the plume activity before the phreatomagmatic eruptions using the ground-based monitoring of the plume intensity and the satellite measurements of SO2 emissions. We evaluate the plume intensity as the plume height and compare it with the SO2 mass estimated by the satellite measurements. Comparing a semiquantitative value (plume height) with a quantitative value (SO2 mass), we appraise an efficiency of the plume monitoring. As a case study, we choose the phreatomagmatic explosion of Aso volcano, Japan, on 8 October 2016. We show the temporal variations of the plume height and SO2 mass during 7 months before and after the explosion.
After a series of intermittent ash emissions and Strombolian explosions from November 2014 to May 2015, a phreatomagmatic explosion occurred on 14 September 2015 (Miyabuchi et al. 2018). It was followed by a small phreatomagmatic explosion on 23 October 2015 and some minor phreatic explosions from December 2015 to March 2016 (JMA 2017). In March 2016, the lake water started to refill the crater bottom, and the surface area of the lake increased to 70% of the crater bottom in July 2016. During March and September 2016, quite minor wet ash emissions from the crater bottom were frequently observed (JMA 2017). A minor explosion occurred at 21:52 JST (UTC + 09:00) on 7 October 2016 followed by a large phreatomagmatic explosion at 01:46 JST on 8 October 2016 (JMA 2017). For the latter explosion, the top of the plume height observed by a geostationary meteorological satellite Himawari-8 was estimated to be 13–14 km asl (Ishii et al. 2018). The total eruptive mass of the 7–8 October explosions was estimated to be 6.0–6.5 × 106 tons, and the juvenile magma erupted by the explosions accounted for 20% of the deposits (Miyabuchi et al. 2017).
To estimate the plume height between April and October 2016, we used the monitoring video camera that was maintained by JMA (WV-E850, Panasonic Corp.) and located at 3.1 km west of the crater (Fig. 1). The 30-Hz video was captured every 2 s, and the captured image was compressed and saved into a jpeg file with a size of 640 × 480 pixels. To dismiss short-term (from seconds to minutes) disturbances by wind and other meteorological conditions, the images of an hour (1800 images at maximum) were first composited into one image. Then, based on the composite image, the plume height was estimated manually. In this study, the plume height is presented in meters above the crater rim (1270 m asl at the western side of the crater where the crater rim is visible in the image). From April to October 2016, the crater had always been filled with the lake water, and the volcanic plume had persistently risen from the lake surface and the fumarolic area on the southern wall of the crater (JMA 2017). This approximately constant geometry of the source of the volcanic plume hardly affects the estimation of the plume height.
The analysis of SO2 mass between April and October 2016 was performed using the Ozone Mapping and Profiler Suite (OMPS) nadir mapper instrument (Flynn et al. 2014; Seftor et al. 2014) onboard the NASA/NOAA Suomi National Polar-orbiting Partnership (Suomi-NPP) satellite. Suomi-NPP is in a polar orbit with a local equator crossing time of 13:30. The instrument measures UV (300–380 nm) backscatter radiances and provides daily global mapping data of ozone, SO2, and other trace gases. The spatial resolution of the instrument is 50 × 50 km at nadir. The SO2 vertical column densities (VCDs) retrieved by the algorithm of Li et al. (2013, 2017) are provided by NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (https://avdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/pub/data/satellite/Suomi_NPP/L2/NMSO2-PCA-L2/). In this study, to analyze the SO2 mass of the passive degassing, the SO2 VCDs assuming an SO2 profile centered in the planetary boundary layer (PBL, a center of mass altitude of 0.9 km asl) and the lower troposphere (TRL, a center of mass altitude of 3 km asl) were normally used, whereas those in the upper troposphere (TRU, a center of mass altitude of 13 km asl) were used only in the analysis of the SO2 mass emitted by the 8 October 2016 eruption. Although SO2 PBL might overestimate the SO2 mass considering of an altitude of the crater rim (1270 m asl), the main topic in this study is passive degassing and thus we will mainly focus on SO2 PBL in the following sections. The SO2 VCDs are presented in DU (Dobson units, 1 DU = 2.69 × 1016 molecules cm−2).
In each daily map of the SO2 VCDs, the volcanic SO2 signal was basically weak, and the volcano was sometimes covered with cloud. Therefore, the daily SO2 mass was not basically estimated in this study. Instead, the averaged SO2 mass for PBL and TRL in certain periods (10 days and 1 month) was calculated following the method presented by Carn et al. (2008) and Campion (2014). The daily SO2 VCDs in each period were first gridded in a step of 0.1°, and then, they were stacked and averaged by the number of days. The time-averaged volcanic SO2 mass was calculated by summing the SO2 VCDs in a volcanic region (4° in longitude × 2° in latitude, red rectangle in Figs. 3 and 4) that were higher than a threshold value (mean + standard deviation of the SO2 VCDs in an SO2-free region for each period, blue rectangle in Figs. 3 and 4). Further details on the analysis method of SO2 mass and the influence of cloud cover are provided in the supporting information of this article (Additional file 1: Sections 1 and 2).
In Fig. 2, some maxima of the plume height in a week–month scale were found at 10 April, 12 May, 3 June, 10 August, 6 September, and 7 October. Especially at 16:00 JST, 7 October (the image shown in Fig. 2), the plume height was 1010 m, which was the maximum value in this study. Looking closely before the 8 October eruption, the plume height increased on 1 and 2 October to 720 m, then decreased to 160 m on 4 October, and increased again to 740 m on 6 October and 1010 m on 7 October.
To clarify the similar temporal variations between the plume height (Fig. 5b) and the SO2 mass, we compare the 10-day averaged SO2 mass with the fourth power of the maximum plume height in the corresponding period (Fig. 5d and Additional file 1: Figure S5b). We used the fourth power of the plume height because it is proportional to heat discharge rate assuming that the plume is maintained from the steady source (Morton et al. 1956). We added 100 m to the plume height because the crater rim was 100 m higher than the crater bottom (Fig. 1). Although some points are plotted far from the fitted line, positive correlation was roughly found between the SO2 mass and the fourth power of the plume height (R2 = 0.37 for PBL and 0.28 for TRL; Fig. 5d and Additional file 1: Figure S5b). The points far from the fitted line can be dismissed because they are influenced by the cloud fraction problem (details are written in Additional file 1: Section 4). The influence of the wind speed on the plume height was not found in these plots (Additional file 1: Figure S7). A rough positive correlation was also found between the SO2 mass and the SO2 flux measured by car traverses (R2 = 0.41 for PBL and 0.23 for TRL; Fig. 5b, e; Additional file 1: Figure S6 and Section 5).
The daily SO2 mass on 2, 6, and 7 October was so high that it was able to be calculated (Fig. 5f–h), when the plume height was also high as mentioned above. The daily SO2 TRL mass on 2, 6, and 7 October was calculated to be 769, 434, and 1120 tons, respectively. The erupted SO2 of the 8 October phreatomagmatic explosion was captured on the daily map on the same day (Fig. 5i). Location of the SO2 cloud detected by OMPS is almost the same as that detected by a meteorological satellite Himawari-8 (Ishii et al. 2018). The SO2 mass emitted by the explosion was estimated to be 10,810 tons.
Discussion and concluding remarks
By comparing Fig. 5a and b, the time series of the plume height, the averaged SO2 mass, and the SO2 flux showed similar temporal variations. Although the correlation between the plume height and the SO2 mass was not good as shown in Fig. 5d and Additional file 1: Figure S5b, the rough positive correlation was found. A similar positive correlation was also found between the SO2 mass and the SO2 flux observed by JMA (Fig. 5e and Additional file 1: Figure S6). These correlations likely indicate that, although the correlations were rough, the degassing system represented by the heat discharge rate and SO2 flux (= SO2 mass) had been stable during the whole study period, except for some data in middle May, middle August, and early October (points far from the fitted line in Fig. 5d, details are written in Additional file 1: Section 4).
As found in the time series of both the plume height and the SO2 mass, the degassing activity was intensified especially in middle August. Then, both values decreased in September, and some extremely high values were observed again in early October (Fig. 5a, b). The maxima in middle August coincides with the inflation timing of the deep magmatic source observed by GNSS networks (JMA 2017). Thus, the input of deep magma might have started since this period. Both values slightly decreased in September. In early October, the plume height started to increase since 1 October, and the SO2 mass also increased on 2 October as shown in the daily SO2 map (Fig. 5f). Both values temporally decreased, but the plume height and the SO2 mass started to increase again on 6 and 7 October, respectively. The decreasing trend from August to October is similar to the decreasing trend of the conduit pressure before Vulcanian explosions proposed by Iguchi et al. (2008). Although the duration of a decrease in this study is much longer than the precursory change in the case of Iguchi et al. (2008), similar accumulation of volcanic gas in the conduit might have occurred in the case of the 8 October eruption of Aso volcano. Following this model, the increase in early October might be explicable by leakage of the accumulated gas just before the explosion. This leakage might have contributed to a decrease of the conduit pressure. Consequently, an interaction of magma with infiltrating waters from the hydrothermal system into the conduit and/or a sudden outgassing of the magma might trigger the explosion.
As mentioned above, the erupted SO2 mass of the 8 October explosion was estimated to be 10,810 tons. According to a petrological study by Saito et al. (2018), sulfur content of the melt inclusions in plagioclases, clinopyroxenes, and olivines in scoriae from the 2014 eruption ranged from 0.008 to 0.036 wt% S. Assuming that the sulfur content in the pre-eruptive magma is 0.036 wt% that was the maximum value of the sulfur content, the amount of the pre-eruptive magma for this explosion is estimated to be 1.5 × 107 tons. The total eruptive mass of the 7–8 October explosions was estimated to be 6.0–6.5 × 106 tons with the juvenile magma accounting for 20% of the deposits (Miyabuchi et al. 2017). Therefore, most of the pre-eruptive magma associated with the explosion might reside in depth, and only the volcanic gas accumulated in depth might be emitted by the explosion. The presence of the accumulated gas is consistent with the model proposed above.
Finally, we emphasize the importance of plume monitoring. Although our result did not show a good correlation between the plume height and the SO2 mass, the plume height measurement can be sufficient to monitor the degassing activity. To reveal the relationship more clearly, accumulation of the data and the precise analysis of the SO2 mass from the passive degassing will be necessary. To the latter case, a recently launched instrument, the Tropospheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI) that can detect the SO2 VCDs in low altitude at higher spatial resolutions (Theys et al. 2017), might contribute.
MM performed the whole part of this study. The author read and approved the final manuscript.
The camera images were provided by JMA. The author is grateful to Drs. Akihiko Yokoo, Takehiko Mori, Toshiya Mori, Hiroshi Shinohara, Akihiko Terada, and Genji Saito for data acquisition and discussion. The author would like to thank Dr. Takahiro Ohkura and three anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments that significantly improved the manuscript.
The author declares that he has no competing interests.
Availability of data and materials
The satellite SO2 data are available at https://avdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/pub/data/satellite/Suomi_NPP/L2/NMSO2-PCA-L2/. The other datasets used in this study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
This study received no specific grant from any funding agency.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
- de Moor JM, Aiuppa A, Pacheco J, Avard G, Kern C, Liuzzo M, Martínez M, Giudice G, Fischer TP (2015) Short-period volcanic gas precursors to phreatic eruptions: insights from Poás Volcano, Costa Rica. Earth Planet Sci Lett 442:218–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2016.02.056 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Flynn L, Long C, Wu X, Evans R, Beck CT, Petropavlovskikh I, McConville G, Yu W, Zhang Z, Niu J, Beach E, Hao Y, Pan C, Sen B, Novicki M, Zhou S, Seftor C (2014) Performance of the Ozone Mapping and Profiler Suite (OMPS) products. J Geophys Res Atmos 119:6181–6195. https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020467 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Fukui K, Terada A (2013) Heat and H2O discharge rate at the Shinmoedake volcano in February 2011. Q J Seis (Kenshin Jiho) 77:223–228 (in Japanese with English abstract) Google Scholar
- Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) (2017) Annual report on volcanic activities of Aso volcano in 2016. http://www.data.jma.go.jp/svd/vois/data/tokyo/STOCK/monthly_v-act_doc/fukuoka/2016y/503_16y.pdf. Accessed 13 Jan 2019
- Li C, Krotkov NA, Carn S, Zhang Y, Spurr RJD, Joiner J (2017) New-generation NASA Aura Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) volcanic SO2 dataset: algorithm description, initial results, and continuation with the Suomi-NPP Ozone Mapping and Profiler Suite (OMPS). Atmos Meas Tech 10:445–458. https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-445-2017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Miyabuchi Y, Maeno F, Nakada S, Nagai M, Iizuka Y, Hoshizumi H, Tanaka A, Itoh J, Kawanabe Y, Oishi M, Yokoo A, Ohkura T (2017) The October 7–8, 2016 eruptions of Nakadake crater, Aso Volcano, Japan and their deposits. Paper presented at Japan geoscience union-American geophysical union joint meeting. Chiba, Japan, SVC47-11, 22 May 2017. (in Japanese with English abstract)Google Scholar
- Miyabuchi Y, Iizuka Y, Hara C, Yokoo A, Ohkura T (2018) The September 14, 2015 phreatomagmatic eruption of Nakadake first crater, Aso Volcano, Japan: eruption sequence inferred from ballistic, pyroclastic density current and fallout deposits. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 351:41–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2017.12.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ohsawa S, Saito T, Yoshikawa S, Mawatari H, Yamada M, Amita K, Takamatsu N, Sudo Y, Kagiyama T (2010) Color change of lake water at the active crater lake of Aso volcano, Yudamari, Japan: is it in response to change in water quality induced by volcanic activity? Limnology 11:207–215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10201-009-0304-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ono K, Watanabe K (1985) Geological map of Aso volcano 1:50,000. Geological Survey of Japan. https://gbank.gsj.jp/volcano/Act_Vol/aso/index-e.html. Accessed 13 Jan 2019
- Shimbori T, Fukui K (2013) Eruption column height and magma discharge rate as inferred from camera images—the eruption of the Shinmoedake Volcano on March 13, 2011. Q J Seis (Kenshin Jiho) 77:119–138 (in Japanese) Google Scholar
- Shinohara H, Yoshikawa S, Miyabuchi Y (2015) Degassing activity of a volcanic crater lake: Volcanic plume measurements at the Yudamari crater lake, Aso Volcano, Japan. In: Rouwet D, Christenson B, Tassi F, Vandemeulebrouck J (eds) Volcanic lakes. Springer, Berlin, pp 201–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36833-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Stoiber RE, Maliconico LL, Williams SN (1983) Use of the correlation spectrometer at volcanoes. In: Tazieff H, Sabroux JC (eds) Forecasting volcanic events. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 425–444Google Scholar
- Terada A, Ida Y, Iijima S, Yoshimoto M, Shimano T (2005) The kinematic features of volcanic clouds: a series of small eruptions from 15 to 18, September 2004, at Asama volcano, Japan. Bull Volcanol Soc Jpn 50:555–565. https://doi.org/10.18940/kazan.50.6_555 (in Japanese with English abstract) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Theys N, De Smedt I, Yu H, Danckaert T, van Gent J, Hörmann C, Wagner T, Hedelt P, Bauer H, Romahn F, Pedergnana M, Loyola D, Van Roozendael M (2017) Sulfur dioxide retrievals from TROPOMI onboard Sentinel-5 Precursor: algorithm theoretical basis. Atmos Meas Tech 10:119–153. https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-119-2017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Volcanological Division, Seismological and Volcanological Department JMA (2014) Installation of new volcano monitoring systems for 47 volcanoes in Japan. Q J Seis (Kenshin Jiho) 77:241–310 (in Japanese with English abstract) Google Scholar
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.