In his daily posting over at Virtual Mirage, "Bad Moon Rising," Larry Lambert mentioned the incredible volcanic eruption of Hunga Tonga, more properly Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai, that erupted in January of '22. I've written about the eruption and its effects several times and by coincidence had recently been thinking that we're closing in on five years since that eruption. Shortly after the eruption, reports began appearing that the "experts" were saying this was the most violent explosion ever recorded by the worldwide network that monitors for nuclear explosions:
Titled “A nuclear-test monitor calls Tonga volcano blast 'biggest thing that we've ever seen',” it reports that an international group that monitors for likely atomic detonations has reported that at every one of their sites around the world - 53 of them - the infrasonic wave from the Tongan volcano is the largest thing they've ever measured, even bigger than the Soviet Union's Tsar Bomba, the biggest nuclear detonation in history. [BOLD added - SiG]
It absolutely wasn't just another volcano going off. Hunga Tonga injected three times more water into the upper stratosphere than was originally estimated. It injected 150-million metric tons or almost 40 Trillion gallons of water vapor into the atmosphere. The concern expressed at the time of the eruptions was that water vapor is a potent greenhouse gas and it was going to affect the weather for years. How big an effect and for how long?
The problem with answering that is hidden in the part about "most violent eruptions ever seen" - nobody had any real experience to base calculations on. How can anyone trust a model that has never been verified to properly model this sort of input?
For what it's worth, after about a year, a consensus began to circulate that it would cause warming for five years. It took perhaps a whole minute to get this copy of the University of Alabama Huntsville plot of global temperatures as reported by the experts, and draw a vertical line on it to show the eruption of Hunga Tonga. (On the right at 2022 and a black line)
It's a busy plot. When the volcano blew at the start of 2022, the running average temperature in red was cooler than the prediction dotted line, and it started warming noticeably by the beginning of 2023. As of the end of the red line at the beginning of year four, the red line is still above the predicted temperature's dotted line, which includes the modeled global warming. You'll note that the peak temperature in early '24 is the highest temperature on the entire chart.
The right side of this plot is the beginning of 2027, and I think the current shape of the plot looks like the temperature will be close to the predicted, dotted line by the start of next year.
Hunga Tonga was a very different event than people are used to even for big volcanic eruptions. Typically, volcanic eruptions cause cooling because they're a source of sulfur dioxide, SO2. Instead, Hunga Tonga injected the trillions of gallons of seawater which causes warming.
It's practically a running joke that people think whatever weather they had when they were five years old is the way it always was and always should be. They don't recognize that changes happen both over short and long time intervals; basically "the only thing that's constant is change". Look at the plots I posted in my Earf Day piece and tell me what the temperature should be to within a tenth of a degree.

Were you in 8th grade at Colmer Junior High in 1983? I thought we were the only ones with an Earf Day because our earth sciences teacher had a lisp. Imagine having to teach a class who's main subject is a word you can't pronounce...
ReplyDeleteNope. I was 29 in 1983, and while the public schools hadn't adopted that "you can't make them repeat a grade - it'll hurt their self-esteem!" policy, being held back 20 years just didn't happen.
DeleteYou know there are people who'll look at that up-sloping linear trend line and yell about global warming.
ReplyDeleteIf I were ambitious, I'd look at the same sort of plot, using Pinatubo.
- jed
I was going to say it's already there, but only the 1991 eruption is there. I assume there have been others in the past. This is where the part about most eruptions causing global cooling instead of warming comes in.
DeleteThe positive sloped line is indeed showing warming. It's just less than predicted, and pretty much inconsequential. Over any time interval, the chances of that line being perfectly flat - showing no change at all, warmer or cooler - is going to be just about zero.
Most people think a long time = six months.
ReplyDelete