Whats going on at yellowstone?

It looks like a lot of weather noise to me.

YJC (Joseph's Coat) the side bar reads exceedingly high 32735 mv (or around that) for most of the data plotted; which more or less means it's garbage. Especially considering most of the park's sensors don't show that happening to them.

YUF (Upper Falls) is garbage too currently.

LKWY (Lakeway) Is almost usable today (shock!) but even then it is 'likely' only showing a distant quake.

YMR (Madison River) and YMV (Mammoth Vault) are similar, though YMR has more noise on it. But from what I can tell it doesn't look like anything to get too worked up over.

earthquake.usgs.gov... Shows a spattering of 4.0's - 6.1.

Several things to take into consideration: It's storm season, and tornado ally has been busy the past few days. Japan is still getting 5.0+'s on a regular basis, not to mention other volcanoes world wide that have been busy.
Also a quick look at the world wide quake list will show you major bumps etc, of which you could cross check easy enough.

M.

so are we all screwed soon?

reply to post by Moshpet


Question: Today is June 22, 2011. I looked at the seismographs for Yellowstone. How would you know if the volcano was in preeruption mode? From what I have read there would be small quakes in the area first. That's happened already. Now we have YJC monitor going nuts and YNR in the area already off line. It has been for a while. YMR is showing significant activity too. Even if you go back to the first part of June and look at the seismo's going forward until now. It is of concern to me, but I'm not an expert. Just been following the pattern developing.
I know you were right about how earthquakes in other parts of the world have an effect here too. That is part of my concern as well.

I saw what happened at Yellowstone on the seismo's when the Japanese quake occurred. Now the Chile quake the other day, and waves going straight up to Yellowstone. How can you tell if this is crap instead of accurately warning of an impending problem? Thanks for your input.

reply to post by kissitgoodbye


Good question... who can tell ...... we never withnessed an supervolcano eruption..an blow at once ore a long period of EQ's....we would wish the second option....and take it for granted...

Campi Flegrei update 22nd June

Italy, update

hisz.rsoe.hu...

5.5 @ 40km

Rainbows
Jane

Originally posted by kissitgoodbye
reply to post by Moshpet

 

Question: Today is June 22, 2011. I looked at the seismographs for Yellowstone. How would you know if the volcano was in preeruption mode? From what I have read there would be small quakes in the area first. That's happened already. Now we have YJC monitor going nuts and YNR in the area already off line. It has been for a while. YMR is showing significant activity too. Even if you go back to the first part of June and look at the seismo's going forward until now. It is of concern to me, but I'm not an expert. Just been following the pattern developing.
I know you were right about how earthquakes in other parts of the world have an effect here too. That is part of my concern as well.

I saw what happened at Yellowstone on the seismo's when the Japanese quake occurred. Now the Chile quake the other day, and waves going straight up to Yellowstone. How can you tell if this is crap instead of accurately warning of an impending problem? Thanks for your input.

In truth, no one living has seen a pre-eruption mode super volcano. We have seen what happens when volcanoes do erupt and we can look back in time at the seismographs, before, during and after them. There are precursors, such as the harmonic tremor, (Google it ) that the scientists look for.

As for if a sensor/station reading is crap I base that on the past activity (long term) from what I've seen just by looking at Yellowstone since this thread started. An' yes I've been fooled by readings before, and by my own ignorance, but I've taken the time to read up and watch the park with others who have the same interest.

If you take the time to go back over the archived days at www.isthisthingon.org... (Puterman rocks btw.) you can see which station seems most reliable during any stretch of time.

Lakeway (LKWY) is weird, I think (personally) that its way overdue for replacement, as it rarely shows any good data. (IMO)

As for quakes in Yellowstone; it's not unusual for small quakes to show on only a few sensors, and not make it into the USGS. Yellowstone has so many that it's impractical to report anything under 1.0, then with all the cultural noise from traffic, buffaloes and so on there are even more false signals getting into the mix. Add in weather noise and you can imagine all the headaches of trying to pick out quakes that the folks there contend with.

If you can find the National Geographic's: Secret Yellowstone in Netflix, it explains about the weather system that is unique to the region better than I can.

I have a few rules I follow when I look at Yellowstone's plots, most of the time they keep me sane.

1- Look at all the seismographs in the region. If there is a similar signal on 95% of them there might be an earthquake.

2- I look at the weather forecast for that region, and even the webcams in the park if its daytime and close to 'real time' that the quake is shown. Thunderstorms etc will screw with sensor.

3- I then look at the UTC (Right hand side), I then compare that time to the USGS list for quakes in the USA. Generally anything less than a 2.0 (from outside of YS) isn't likely to show up in the Park, and even then depending on how far the quake is from Yellowstone it may not even cause a blip.

4- Next I check the world wide list in USGS. If there was a 4.0 within say 30 minutes or less than the UTC time, more than likely it's not a quake in the park. Quake travel times varies so I try and give myself a bit of extra leeway when looking at far quakes. (Puterman has a chart somewhere in his really cools web page for travel times.)

5- Then if I really feel the need to confirm a quake in the park, I Google. it There are several sites that report quakes, feel free to Google for them and make up a folder with links to them in your web browser.

6- If I am totally baffled I put a note here saying "Hey what does this look like folks?"

7- Or I wait and see if USGS or Puterman (and the rest of us) beats me to it.
--------------

As for knowing to worry if Yellowstone is or isn't about to blow, you could give yourself ulcers worrying about it. When it gets ready to blow, the odds are just as good that the folks here in ATS will spot it before it goes. (Or before the USGS folks see it. )

The best I can suggest is for you, yourself, to spend a few hours or more looking up quake and volcano prediction on the web. Look at Mt. St. Hellens and the Alaskan region for past volcanoes and the recordings they have about them. Familiarize yourself with the recorded proven quakes/volcanoes, so you can pick out the various signals that matter. Look up how volcanoes form, and what precursors have been noted before.

Have fun and try to enjoy the process of discovery, staying up for hours watching the quakes and so on is optional

M.

Has YJC had an error for the last couple of days?

The readings from the interveners are strange.

sorry....here is a link that illustrates what I'm talking about.. Here

reply to post by MrB0B


Yes, that is an error.

I guess the YVO has used their stimulus money on other things. I was hoping by now they would have dealt with the many issues with the equipment. I've noticed no changes.

reply to post by angelchemuel


Sorry Jane but RSOE are having a problem with the location of Japan. They think it is off the coast of Italy.

This post explains

There has NOT, I repeat NOT been a 5.5 at Campi Flegri.

May I suggest that this site would be best for Campi Flegri or EMSC. No sites are perfect but I can't be doing with site that can't be bothered to correct their mistakes. (Maybe they don't even recognise them as they are all automated)

reply to post by Moshpet


LKWY is the only instrument in the park that is on a different network. It is in the US network and under the control of USGS. Data is uploaded by satellite link and it can indeed be dodgy - especially the LHZ channel. BHZ is usually better, and anyway as a broadband instrument probably tells you more - but it is useful to have a long period instrument in the park.

LKWY.US.00.BHZ.2011.176

ETA
Actually I tell a slight pork pie there as there are of course a few PB instruments and a TA, but LKWY is the only one that is not on the same telemetry system which is why when it goes down other don't and vice versa.

reply to post by kissitgoodbye


Moshpet has given you some good answers.

I just wanted to pick up on this point.

I saw what happened at Yellowstone on the seismo's when the Japanese quake occurred. Now the Chile quake the other day, and waves going straight up to Yellowstone.

I will leave you to have a look at some of the items on this page

In particular the first example of reading one of the recorders on the Live Internet Seismic Servers page (LISS) if you are not familiar with that, and one you should also look at is the link to the 1999 AUG17, Turkey Earthquake under reading materials. When you get down to just past the second diagram you will read a paragraph that basically explains what happens in Yellowstone when the waves from a big quake come through. Not just Yellowstone of course, but everywhere.

Triggering effects of earthquakes are not generally known to affect areas beyond about 600km from the epicentre.

There is a suggestion that Alaska may have an effect on Yellowstone but at at distances of between 3000 and 4000 km I personally don't see it unless there is some connection very deep (surge channels?)(You are probably not ready for that yet but if you are interested Google surge tectonics under Earth dynamics).

Even the New Madrid is too far away to have an effect BUT it Long Valley had a very large quake then that possibly would affect Yellowstone in some way even though it is about 1000km distant. The thing is that areas like Yellowstone and Long Valley are actually not likely to have VERY large earthquakes since these are generally not associated with volcanoes.

Originally posted by asmall89
Uh so is this not normal then? I go to college right next to the thing! Now I really don't want to go back there after break. From somewhere I heard the date was 2010 or 2012, too bad I can't recall the source... Thats scary.

The date for what? Can you elaborate please? Do you mean an eruption, seismic activity?

Peace,
Marriah

Originally posted by Springheel Jack
I think that some here are giving in to the fear monster a bit. Yes Yellowstone is a supervolcano and yes it is seismically active, and yes it could erupt but just a few minutes of reading can help us understand that there are many telltales leading up to an eruption.....

General principles of volcano seismology

Seismic activity (earthquakes and tremors) always occurs as volcanoes awaken and prepare to erupt and are a very important link to eruptions.........

Be prepared. Make sure if you live near that beast you have a plan, but don't go running around saying the sky is falling yet. I would bet the USGS keeps a close tabs on it.

Im sorry dude, but I kinda have to call BS on your reply, you tell everyone they are feeding into the fear monster, THEN you provide us with a science journal link about how an increase in seismic activity is a good indication of a volcanic eruption And many fear what a Yellowstone volcanic eruption may be like. So, please tell me, how did you just put anyone's minds at ease after that quoted source then to end your post with a "be prepared." I'm sorry I'm not tryin to be a Bitc* today you guys, it's just I'm a little tired of people being judgmental and condescending towards others concerns or views in one sentence and then in the next sentence doing the exact same thing they were just bitc*ing at the other person about.

All you did was support a theory that this increase in seismic activity may be the sign of something bigger to come, don't call me a fear-monger please, cause I didn't say it. Ok, ok rant over.


On the other hand, seismic activity is very normal around this area, it could be the cause of a couple things, 1- there is a supporting theory that states that larger quakes along one fault line can trigger tremors and smaller quakes as far as 2000 km away according to a study done by geologists (USGS, sorry can't find the link), and so it is possible that the Alaskan quake just triggered one at Yellowstone, but more studies need to be done IMO to support this theory, 2- It's just a coincidence and there are natural fault lines here that may just be releasing a bit of pressure, and with the recent quakes we are all kinda on edge, for good reason I think, there has been a lot goin on this year....or 3- Hell, maybe she's gonna blow

I LOVE this link..... volcanoes.usgs.gov... - this is a peer reviewed science journal, not just a USGS reporter ok, by a couple geologists with awesome accurate info on Yellowstone

here is an excerpt from the link

Overall, geophysical and geochemical evidence points strongly towards the presence of a large thermal anomaly in the shallow- to mid-crust. Given the size of the caldera and the implied depths, it is reasonable to infer that at least 15 000 km 3 of crystal-melt mush are located beneath the Yellowstone caldera, at depths from Figure 2. Diagram illustrating seismic-wave-velocity anomalies in the shallow crust beneath Yellowstone as viewed from the southwest (adapted from Husen et al. 2004a). The orange volume outlines the anomaly attributed to partially molten rock extending above the main magma chamber (and beneath the surface expressions of the Sour Creek and Mallard Lake resurgent domes).

The red volume is an anomaly with properties suggesting gas-filled fractured rock. The green dots are hypocentres from the 1985 earthquake swarm. The arrows are postulated trends of hydrothermal fluid flow from the magma body to the inferred gas-filled body as discussed by Waite & Smith (2002) and Husen et al. (2004a). Though the tomographic imaging of Husen et al. (2004a) did not extend beneath 12 km depths, other workers have inferred partially molten crustal magma chambers extending to ca 20 km beneath the caldera (Iyer et al. 1981; Lehman et al. 1982). Monitoring super-volcanoes 2061 Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A (2006)ca 8 to 18 km.

If melt fractions are 0.1–0.15, then sufficient melt exists to form the mass for a super-eruption—if it can be extracted and accumulated into an eruptible volume. Most geophysical images have insufficient resolution to define volumes less than ca 10 km on a side. It is fully plausible that volumes with high melt fractions (more than 0.6) exist within dikes and sills within the greater magma chamber, and could erupt as moderate-volume (less than 100 km 3 ) lavas or pyroclastic flows. Current evidence suggests, however, that the gravity and seismic anomalies are not sufficiently large to allow for a larger, highly molten (and thereby eruptible) volume of magma beneath Yellowstone at this time.

. Yellowstone: current activity Despite Yellowstone’s long period of volcanic dormancy, now over 70 000 years, the caldera continues to be an active and dynamic environment, with thousands of earthquakes, active ground deformation and considerable heat and mass flux. The monitoring system of the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory (volcanoes.usgs. gov/yvo) is designed to listen to these signals, to see how they relate to each other, and to provide adequate characterization of background activity. Only by cataloguing the range of normal activity can we start to decipher the signals emanating from caldera systems headed towards eruption. Here, we now address the kinds of Earth signals documented over the past 50 years

Based on this report, I can honestly say that I can not say for sure whether or not these mini quakes have anything to do with the volcanic possibility since it seems that these guys nor anyone with USGS for that matter can predict exactly how and when a volcano is going to erupt. This is simply because they don't have enough of them to study, there isn't enough data, but there is pretty good speculation based on our knowledge of the geology of the earth itself. My opinion is that it's most likely just a coincidence and there are a few fault lines in and around that particular lake, plus the depth of these is consistent with past depths of little quakes at Yellowstone. My only concern is that this science report from 2006-07 states that EQ activity does and can very well be an indicator of a volcanic eruption and that the depths of the quakes should be between "8-18 km" which does seem to be the case with almost all seismic activity at Yellowstone in the last couple years.


And there was some quakes in Ethiopia right before that last volcanic eruption that week. But overall, I think there's always that possibility, but I'm leaning more toward fault line activity and not melt fractions (volcanic activity), plus it says there are thousands of EQ's at Yellowstone since they've been monitoring. Just remember though, according to this report, we DONT NEED to see a5.0 + magnitude or greater before any volcanic activity is predicted, small quakes are just as likely of indicators--- "Current evidence suggests, however, that the gravity and seismic anomalies are not sufficiently large to allow for a larger, highly molten (and thereby eruptible) volume of magma beneath Yellowstone"(Lowenstern et. al., 2006)


Def. check out that report, its got great maps, graphs and data on this subject, I love a good source, enjoy...
Peace,
Marriah



Mod Edit: External Source Tags Instructions – Please Review This Link.

reply to post by marriah3330


Whoops, I mis-read that last quote, maybe it is saying that the current seismic activity at Yellowstone is too small in their opinion to be an indication of an eruption? In other words, I think I was wrong, the magnitude does have to be greater than the current mini ones if I'm reading this right. So forget that last part I wrote above please, sorry.
Peace,
Marriah

The only reason I think this report is valuable is that the YVO clearly explains what would happen to cause an elevation in the threat level.

www.msnbc.msn.com...

reply to post by marriah3330

1- there is a supporting theory that states that larger quakes along one fault line can trigger tremors and smaller quakes as far as 2000 km away according to a study done by geologists (USGS, sorry can't find the link)

This is something that I have heard of and like you cannot find the link, but I am not convinced. There are other studies (also by USGS) that suggest this is not the case. A sample below.

Remote triggering of Earthquakes (USGS PDF)

3.0 Non-technical Summary
We hypothesize that large remote earthquakes trigger earthquakes in southern California. We assume the same mechanism of triggering applies to both local and remote mainshocks. We quantitatively estimate a triggering (non-triggering) threshold using local mainshocks, and find triggering events generally reach higher spectral amplitudes in the range of 0.1-10 Hz. Assessing ~40 remote mainshocks (M>7.0) we find no obvious signature of remote triggering. Comparing spectral characteristics, we conclude: (1) triggering is a complex combination of amplitude and frequency; and/or (2) there is a time-to-failure component we have not accounted for; and/or (3) remote and local events have different triggering mechanisms.

There is another study that I read recently that states that the effects of a larger quake only extend to trigger up to about 600km. I will look for the link for that and get back to you.

BTW from that PDF you linked:

and could erupt as moderate-volume (less than 100 km3)

Love that little throw-away line. That is only 100 x greater than Eyjafjallajökull (VEI 4 @ 1 km3).

The second phase is estimated to be a VEI 4 eruption

To PuterMan

1- there is a supporting theory that states that larger quakes along one fault line can trigger tremors and smaller quakes as far as 2000 km away according to a study done by geologists (USGS, sorry can't find the link)


This is something that I have heard of and like you cannot find the link, but I am not convinced. There are other studies (also by USGS) that suggest this is not the case. A sample below.

Is this what they call creep, or what I call 'jackhammering'? I think I could find a link to this if that's the case

Rainbows
Jane

Hi guys, I've just been looking at the Yellowstone thumbnails here and most of them have some sort of activity on them. Is there adverse/bad weather there at the moment or some other reason why most of them have activity?

I've looked here and the most recent quake was on 26th June - this one.

I'm only asking as I've been viewing the thumbnails over the past week and not seen as many stations show activity at the same time.

She's been sleepy - Even They think so. - Kind of abnormal for her. I always get uneasy when things get to quiet - like the calm before the storm.

YELLOWSTONE VOLCANO OBSERVATORY MONTHLY UPDATE
Friday, July 1, 2011 11:31 AM MDT (Friday, July 1, 2011 17:31 UTC)


YELLOWSTONE VOLCANO (CAVW #1205-01-)
44°25'48" N 110°40'12" W, Summit Elevation 9203 ft (2805 m)
Current Volcano Alert Level: NORMAL
Current Aviation Color Code: GREEN

During the month of June 2011, 64 earthquakes were located in the Yellowstone National Park region. The largest was a magnitude 2.3 event on June 19 at 3:14 AM MDT, located about 10 miles south southeast of West Yellowstone, MT. No swarms were recorded in June.

Earthquake activity continues at relatively low background levels. For a map of recent earthquakes, please see:

www.seis.utah.edu...

Ground Deformation Summary: The period of caldera uplift that began in 2004 ended over one year ago. Since then, the caldera has been subsiding, though seasonal deformation from ground water changes may temporarily mask the trend. Please see: www.uusatrg.utah.edu... for a map of GPS stations in the Yellowstone vicinity. For a graph of daily GPS positions at White Lake, within the Yellowstone caldera, please see: pboweb.unavco.org...�eries=raw.

Source