Utopia Talk / Politics / tonga eruption

Sam Adams Member	Sat Jan 15 07:52:39 Holy shit that is a gigantic volcano. Pinatubo-krakatoa sized? The main eruptive anvil looks like about the size of germany. Larger than st helens.
murder Member	Sat Jan 15 09:12:32 BBC World Service @bbcworldservice Satellite images captured the moment a giant underwater volcano erupted near Tonga, causing a tsunami Satellite image here ... http://twi...ice/status/1482303373646913538
murder Member	Sat Jan 15 09:13:50 Link to the story ... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-60007119
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sat Jan 15 09:16:59 Is this the end?
murder Member	Sat Jan 15 09:17:27 For the Tongans or for us?
murder Member	Sat Jan 15 09:26:04 "Pinatubo-krakatoa sized?" Can we expect global effects or nah? :o)
murder Member	Sat Jan 15 09:27:51 btw what are the odds that there was a fishing vessel in the area that is now parked next to the ISS?
Rugian Member	Sat Jan 15 09:45:24 I read an article about China's increasing influence in Tonga a couple of months back. http://www...south-pacific-influence-506370 From the sound of it, good riddance.
Sam Adams Member	Sat Jan 15 09:51:34 Can we expect global effects or nah? :o) Good question. Unclear yet... probably not much. my first impression is next year might be slightly cooler than normal. Pinatubo dropped global temperatures by 1 degree F or so for a year. And this might be similar.
Sam Adams Member	Sat Jan 15 09:53:20 Those shortwaves in the satellite!!!
Sam Adams Member	Sat Jan 15 09:53:33 Shockwaves
murder Member	Sat Jan 15 10:05:19 NWS Tsunami Alerts @NWS_NTWC Some #Tsunami observations are coming in now: 35 cm Nikolski AK 30 cm Atka AK 30 cm Adak AK 20 cm Monterey CA Continue to monitor http://tsunami.gov for the most up-to-date information.
Paramount Member	Sat Jan 15 10:11:36 Are you sure that really is an eruption and not Putin doing something?
Rugian Member	Sat Jan 15 10:41:17 Paramount Don't be a ridiculous conspiracy theorist. Putin had nothing to do with this. It was climate change, obviously. Duh.
Sam Adams Member	Sat Jan 15 17:03:44 The shockwave is being clearly recorded with a couple mb pressure anomaly... across europe.
Sam Adams Member	Sat Jan 15 17:07:34 Europe is almost antipodal. Godamn.
patom Member	Sun Jan 16 08:50:53 Did it form a new island for China to claim?
Sam Adams Member	Sun Jan 16 11:38:58 While the initial explosion was extra-large, the volcano has not yet outgassed much sulfer dioxide. Climate impacts are thus expected to be 0.
Sam Adams Member	Sun Jan 30 20:56:25 After a little more research, i conclude that this explosion was a bit larger than the tsar bomb but a little smaller than krakatoa. Figure 100 or so megatons, assuming tsar bomb was 50 and krakatoa 200.
Sam Adams Member	Sun Jan 30 21:00:11 Note size of the detonation and size of the erupted mass are different. This erupted mass was much much smaller than krakatoa.
murder Member	Mon Jan 31 08:00:39 That's a massive discrepancy from this estimate. http://www...ate-tonga-blast-at-10-megatons
jergul large member	Mon Jan 31 08:40:20 Just an order of magnitude off? That is how sammy rolls :D
murder Member	Mon Jan 31 08:47:28 I'm not implying that Sammy is wrong. It sure seemed like a massive blast and was heard as far away as Alaska and Yukon, Canada. That doesn't seem like a tiny 10 megaton blast.
murder Member	Mon Jan 31 08:47:37 http://www...gest-thing-that-weve-ever-seen
Seb Member	Mon Jan 31 10:03:47 Some of it will be about coupling.
Sam Adams Member	Mon Jan 31 10:22:48 Ya, i think that nasa number is underestimating. To be fair one set of noise-energy calculations i did was 10-20 megatons, but that was my lowest confidence method. This blast definetly had a bigger pressure perturbation worldwide than the tsar bomb did. So we can say this blast was definitely more potent than that. Furthermore this pressure perturbation is just a little weaker than krakatoas. So the onlyway to call this 10megatons is if our estimates on those previous blasts are way off.
Seb Member	Mon Jan 31 17:01:20 This was an editorial eruption of an underwater volcano wasn't it? Basically a gigantic steam explosion under compression. I suspect a lot more of the energy ends up in higher overpressure in shockwave compared to an airburst nuclear weapon. Remember the yield of the larger bombs is based on energy released rather than the equivalent amount of explosives to give precisely the same effect. A lot of that energy is released as thermal and electromagnetic radiation. That will probably get you to within a factor of 2 difference.
Sam Adams Member	Mon Jan 31 20:08:12 The nasa guy admits they were only calculating the energy required to blast that island apart. So ya, not the full explosion. So ive always assumed nuke airbursts were pretty efficient... about 50% of a nuke goes into air blast is the common value. Hard to imagine even an underwater volcano is much more efficient. Theres a lot of water you are going to heat up that isnt immediatly going to flash to steam. Even some steam is going to be reabsorbed on its way up. You have to loft a lot of ash to 10-30km. Thats a lot of mgh. I get 20 megatons right there. Not to mention the 10 megatons of island as calculated by NASA that is going to be pulverized but remain solid and not remotely efficient at contributing to overpressure wave.
Sam Adams Member	Mon Jan 31 20:21:47 I forgot the water wave. 1m or so wave across the entire pacific is a decent chunk of energy.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: