We're worrying about the wrong volcanoes, study finds

 We're worrying about the wrong volcanoes, study finds

A new study identifies several clusters of relatively small volcanoes that, if they were to erupt, would devastate critical infrastructure and the global economy.

The most powerful volcanoes, needless to say, inflict a lot of damage and consequently attract much of our concern. But as new research published in Nature Communications points out, giant eruptions are relatively rare, while smaller eruptions occur more frequently. And because small volcanoes are capable of disrupting things like aviation, commerce and communications, they pose significant risks to modern civilization.

"It's time to change the way we look at extreme volcanic risk," explains Lara Mani, lead author of the paper and a researcher at the Centre for the Study of Existential Risk at the University of Cambridge, in a press release. "We need to stop thinking in terms of colossal eruptions that destroy the world, as depicted in Hollywood movies. The most likely scenarios involve smaller magnitude eruptions that interact with our societal vulnerabilities and cascade us toward catastrophe."

Mani and colleagues make a good point. Eruptions are rated with the Volcanic Explosivity Index (VEI), which ranks eruptions on a scale of 1 to 8. Colossal eruptions that rank as high as 7 or 8 on this scale, such as the Yellowstone caldera of 600,000 years ago and the Long Valley caldera of 760,000 years ago, fortunately do not occur very often. That said, large eruptions have occurred in recent history, such as the Tambora eruption of 1815 (VEI 7).

At the same time, eruptions classified 3 to 6, although not as destructive, occur about once every two decades. Good examples include Mount St. Helens in 1980 (VEI 4), Pinatubo in 1991 (VEI 6), and Eyjafjallajökull in 2010 (VEI 4). At the same time, and as the new research points out, a significant portion of our critical infrastructure is located near smaller volcanic centers, and because "moderate volcanic eruptions can have catastrophic cascading effects," our "assessments should consider risk in this light," as the scientists write.

Mani and colleagues identified seven distinct "pinch points" around the world: regions where critical infrastructure is located next to clusters of small but dangerous volcanoes (i.e., VEI 3-6). These pinch points include the northwestern United States, Taiwan, the China-North Korea border, the Luzon Strait (a passage connecting the South China Sea to the Philippine Sea), Malaysia (specifically the Strait of Malacca), the Mediterranean, and the North Atlantic.

Ash clouds, volcanic gases, mudflows, landslides, earthquakes and tsunamis, the researchers argue, could wreak havoc in these regions, breaking undersea cables, destroying crops, damaging power plants, electrical grids and pipelines, and making sea passages impossible to navigate, among other scenarios. This cascade of despair would continue to disrupt international communications networks, global supply chains and financial systems. In some particularly hard-hit regions, an eruption could even result in civil unrest and the overthrow of governments.

As the paper notes, an eruption in the northwestern United States involving Mount Rainier, Glacier Peak, or Mount Baker (~ VEI 6) would generate mudflows and ash clouds near Seattle. Airports and seaports in the region, which account for 2.5% of total U.S. traffic, would come to a halt. Estimated losses would reach $7630 million of global GDP over a five-year period, according to the study.

Other scenarios proposed in the study include the devastation of technology industries near Taipei (especially computer chip manufacturing), broken undersea cables in the Mediterranean, restricted maritime access through the Suez Canal (sounds familiar, that container ship stuck since last March cost $9 billion a day to world trade), the Indonesian archipelago and the Luzon Strait, and air traffic disruptions between London and New York. Fortunately, the eruption of Iceland's Eyjafjallajökull volcano in 2010 caused no loss of life, but cost the global economy more than $5 billion as air traffic was widely disrupted.

The goal of the new study, the researchers argue, is not to scare people, but to motivate preparedness and planning. Unlike the risks posed by giant volcanic eruptions, "where we have little opportunity for prevention, we can work to reduce the fragility and exposure of our critical systems to rapid-onset natural events and ultimately increase our resilience to [global catastrophic risks]," the researchers write.

Of course, getting people to pay attention to this study, whether they are at the top levels of government or at the grassroots, presents a daunting challenge. As a whole, we seem to be bad at things like this and only respond when disasters are nearly imminent, if not already unfolding right under our noses.