I understand that Mt St Helens is likely to blow any day now - any thoughts
on how this will change our weather this Autumn, or will it have to be a
huge event to have any effect here ?

live web cam of the mountain at

http://www.fs.fed.us/gpnf/volcanocams/msh/

--
Paul Crabtree
Brampton N.E. Cumbria 117m ASL
Climatological Station 7076

http://www.bramptonweather.co.uk

In article ,
says...
I understand that Mt St Helens is likely to blow any day now - any thoughts
on how this will change our weather this Autumn, or will it have to be a
huge event to have any effect here ?


Just had a minor eruption which started about half an hour ago if
anybodies interested.

http://www.fs.fed.us/gpnf/volcanocams/msh/

--
Alan LeHun

================================================== ==================
This posting expresses the personal view and opinions of the author.
Something which everyone on this planet should be able to do.
================================================== ==================

I was pondering this this morning. If debris gets injected into the stratosphere
in any large quantities then I would say that next summer could be a lot cooler
(and perhaps wetter) than normal. Major volcano eruptions tend to cool the earth
temporarily. The eruption could be too late now to give us a cold winter as it
takes time for the debris to spread out in the upper atmosphere.

Will.
--
" A cup is most useful when empty "
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A COL BH site in East Dartmoor at Haytor, Devon 310m asl (1017 feet).

mailto:
www: http://www.lyneside.demon.co.uk

DISCLAIMER - All views and opinions expressed by myself are personal
and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Paul Crabtree wrote in message ...
I understand that Mt St Helens is likely to blow any day now - any thoughts
on how this will change our weather this Autumn, or will it have to be a
huge event to have any effect here ?

live web cam of the mountain at

http://www.fs.fed.us/gpnf/volcanocams/msh/

--
Paul Crabtree
Brampton N.E. Cumbria 117m ASL
Climatological Station 7076

http://www.bramptonweather.co.uk

"Will" wrote in message
...
I was pondering this this morning. If debris gets injected into the
stratosphere
in any large quantities then I would say that next summer could be a
lot cooler
(and perhaps wetter) than normal. Major volcano eruptions tend to cool
the earth
temporarily. The eruption could be too late now to give us a cold
winter as it
takes time for the debris to spread out in the upper atmosphere.

.... the 1980 event ejected material into the stratosphere, but the
primary thrust of the explosion was horizontal rather than vertical, and
if I understand the data correctly, the stratospheric loading from that
was minimal. As you say, whether this one would do something different
will be interesting to say the least. However, I wonder if Mt. St.Helens
is a bit far north for major long-lasting effects anyway: I understand
that to have world-wide impact, the event would need to be in the
tropical/sub-tropical belt? However, would be glad to be corrected if
anyone has got more on this.

Martin.

"Martin Rowley" wrote in
message ...

... the 1980 event ejected material into the stratosphere, but the
primary thrust of the explosion was horizontal rather than vertical,
and if I understand the data correctly, the stratospheric loading from
that was minimal. As you say, whether this one would do something
different will be interesting to say the least. However, I wonder if
Mt. St.Helens is a bit far north for major long-lasting effects
anyway: I understand that to have world-wide impact, the event would
need to be in the tropical/sub-tropical belt? However, would be glad
to be corrected if anyone has got more on this.

Just to follow up on this.... these higher latitude events can have
*regional* / local effects of course - here a note I have of the Laki
event with dates given:

1783/84: Icelandic volcanic eruption (Laki): Primary eruptions (five)
from June 8th to July 8th, 1783(60% of the total volume of ejection),
but minor eruptions occurred until early February, 1784. A major event,
with huge production of sulphur & acid products. The majority of
emissions are thought to have been confined to the troposphere, but the
initial ejections of each of the five major events did penetrate the
tropopause into the stratosphere. The intense period of eruption tallied
with contemporary reports across Europe of a blue haze or dry-fog in the
atmosphere, damage to vegetation and occurrence of respiratory problems.
These effects are consistent with increased atmospheric loading of acid
aerosols, particularly sulphates.

Because of the lack of major stratospheric impact, there is controversy
surrounding this event: For Iceland itself, the following winter
(1783/84) was known as the 'Famine Winter': 25% of the population died.
However, did it really cause changes to the regional/European climate in
the years 1783, 1784 etc?



Martin.

In article ,
Martin Rowley writes:
However, I wonder if Mt. St.Helens
is a bit far north for major long-lasting effects anyway: I understand
that to have world-wide impact, the event would need to be in the
tropical/sub-tropical belt? However, would be glad to be corrected if
anyone has got more on this.

ISTR HH Lamb saying that in "Climate, History and the Modern World."
--
John Hall

You can divide people into two categories:
those who divide people into two categories and those who don't

Yn erthygl , sgrifennodd
Will :
I was pondering this this morning. If debris gets injected into the stratosphere
in any large quantities then I would say that next summer could be a lot cooler
(and perhaps wetter) than normal. Major volcano eruptions tend to cool the earth
temporarily. The eruption could be too late now to give us a cold winter as it
takes time for the debris to spread out in the upper atmosphere.

From what I have been hearing, it is not believed that this eruption will
be anything like the size of the previous one. I suspect the reason it is
getting the coverage it is, is simply because of the devastation caused
by the last eruption.

Adrian

--
Adrian Shaw ais@
Adran Cyfrifiadureg, Prifysgol Cymru, aber.
Aberystwyth, Ceredigion, Cymru ac.
http://users.aber.ac.uk/ais uk

"John Hall" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Martin Rowley writes:
However, I wonder if Mt. St.Helens
is a bit far north for major long-lasting effects anyway: I understand
that to have world-wide impact, the event would need to be in the
tropical/sub-tropical belt? However, would be glad to be corrected if
anyone has got more on this.

ISTR HH Lamb saying that in "Climate, History and the Modern World."
--
Found this on the CRU site which might help .... they imply that for
*maximum* effect such activity should be at lower latitudes etc.

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/info/volcano/

Martin.

Yes that's what I thought. Is there any reason to believe that this
predicted, albeit on a smaller scale than 1980 eruption, will go vertically?




"Martin Rowley" wrote in message
...

"Will" wrote in message
...
I was pondering this this morning. If debris gets injected into the
stratosphere
in any large quantities then I would say that next summer could be a
lot cooler
(and perhaps wetter) than normal. Major volcano eruptions tend to cool
the earth
temporarily. The eruption could be too late now to give us a cold
winter as it
takes time for the debris to spread out in the upper atmosphere.

... the 1980 event ejected material into the stratosphere, but the
primary thrust of the explosion was horizontal rather than vertical, and
if I understand the data correctly, the stratospheric loading from that
was minimal. As you say, whether this one would do something different
will be interesting to say the least. However, I wonder if Mt. St.Helens
is a bit far north for major long-lasting effects anyway: I understand
that to have world-wide impact, the event would need to be in the
tropical/sub-tropical belt? However, would be glad to be corrected if
anyone has got more on this.

Martin.

Adrian D. Shaw wrote:

From what I have been hearing, it is not believed that this eruption will
be anything like the size of the previous one. I suspect the reason it is
getting the coverage it is, is simply because of the devastation caused
by the last eruption.

I hope so! I might be going to a conference in Portland (50 miles to the
south) soon...

Certainly a magnificent sight when I saw it in the distance behind Mount
Rainier when flying from Seattle earlier this year.

--
Jonathan Stott
Canterbury Weather: http://www.jstott.me.uk/weather/