I abstained from the news for 24 hours and the title shocked me - did I miss a Yellowstone eruption ... Thank you for putting out scientific facts and probabilities!
Always an interesting update, and great for keeping REAL information on social media to combat the alarmist mis-informers. When I see Mike on a thumbnail, I click, and am never disappointed.
Wow... Someone talking about the Yellowstone Supervolcano that actually knows what a Supervolcano is. Excuse me while I keel over from the shock of it all.
I see UA-cam videos and other sources that give the impression that Yellowstone could erupt with a "big one" any time and we should worry about it. But this is disregarding the scale of geologic time! The last Yellowstone "big one" was 631,000 years ago. At that time, Neanderthals hadn't evolved yet. Several ice ages and interglacial periods hadn't happened yet. Most all the current big Cascade volcanic peaks hadn't formed yet, and peaks that existed back then have eroded to low hills by now. While the Yellowstone volcanic hot spot may very well produce another "big one" in the distant future, it is not something we should lie awake at night worrying it will happen anytime soon.
The recurrence interval is about 600,000 to 800,000 years, so we are within that range. That means it could happen next year, but just as easily it could happen in a century, a millennium, or even 100,000 or more years from now. It is good to at least think about how we would deal with an eruption, but it is very low probability event for any of our lifetimes.
One place that I'd like to see an in-depth investigation of is "Two Buttes" in southeastern Colorado. It stands alone on a relatively flat plane, which suggests volcanic in origin, but the stone on top is sandstone. Oil well geologists that I have talked to have told me that they structure extends far underground, with the underground rock formations sloping up towards the "mountain".
You're right -- it is magmatic in origin. The rock slopes away from the Two Buttes area in all directions because there is a magmatic intrusion beneath the sediment that caused the region to swell. Some of that igneous rock is exposed at the surface immediately south of Two Buttes. The magmatic activity might have slightly metamorphosed some of the overlying rock, making it more resistant to erosion -- thus, the Two Buttes feature sticks out above the surrounding landscape.
I'm more concerned with Mount Tambora or Krakatoa, both on the other side of the Pacific. In the US proper, Mount Rainier's inevitable eruption will produce lahars and tsunamis that will take out a great many people in the PNW. Mount Hood will be almost as bad. There's even a volcano in downtown Portland. Check out the flood basalts around the Columbia River to see what the hot spot under Yellowstone is capable of. Volcanism is fascinating and terrifying at the same time.
@@dystopiaisutopia they said it won’t erupt anytime soon but it will definitely erupt again. Earlier surveys have revealed not one massive magma chamber but another even bigger chamber feeding into the first. Why do think Yellowstone is extinct? The geysers, thermo vents say otherwise.
@@phillm156 Yellowstone is far from extinct and is incredibly active. Because of the amount of water in the area, even a small eruption will be pretty explosive. I'm just an aspiring geologist so I could be wrong.
Well, first of all, there's no indication of an impending "big one" from Yellowstone -- the magma chamber remains mostly solid, and there's no suggestion of the recharge that would be needed to feed a large eruption. Regardless, an impact on New Madrid is unlikely. The way a volcano could trigger a distant fault (or vice versa) is mostly through changes in stress. And those sorts of changes just don't get transmitted over such great distances.
Rain doesn't really have an impact on volcanoes. In Yellowstone, there is a broad correlation between environmental conditions and geyser activity, though. During "wet" years, when there is more water available, some geysers erupt slightly more often. For instance, at Old Faithful, the average time between eruptions might decrease by a couple of minutes. And during dry years, the opposite effect occurs. During prolonged droughts, it's possible that some geysers even turn off! This seems to have happened at Old Faithful about 650-800 years ago during a major drought in the western USA (more about that at www.usgs.gov/observatories/yvo/news/a-time-when-old-faithful-wasnt-so-faithful). In Yellowstone specifically, there could also be, perhaps, slightly more seismicity in wet years, since most of the quakes there are caused by groundwater interacting with existing tectonic faults. But no real impact on volcanic activity or potential for future activity.
The groundwater-related deformation is seasonal. As snowmelt and runoff recharge the water table, the ground puffs up a bit, and that interrupts the downward. As groundwater levels drop in the fall and winter, the "puffiness" goes away. That downward trend itself is not caused by groundwater, but rather some caldera-wide process -- for example, drainage of hydrothermal fluids or magma, cooling and contraction of magma, etc. it's hard to tell the specific source of the subsidence, but the groundwater signal is sort of superimposed seasonally on that more dominant signal. The groundwater signal has been especially visible since 2015 because the caldera-wide subsidence has been so steady, but that's not always the case . Yellowstone caldera goes up and down, so it can be hard to see the more subtle seasonal changes if there are lots of larger-scale processes happening too. For a deeper dive into Yellowstone ground deformation, check out ua-cam.com/video/y0yq3DtR5Y4/v-deo.html.
When visiting Ashfall Fossil Bed State Park in NE Nebraska, the personal did not seem to know from what volcano their ash deposit came from. Does anyone know?
Yep! That ash is from the Bruneau-Jarbidge caldera complex, which is about 12 million years old and located in southern Idaho -- it's part of the Yellowstone hotspot track, and was extinct by 10 million years ago as plate motion caused the hotspot activity to migrate to the NE. You can see a map of where that caldera system is located at www.usgs.gov/media/images/locations-yellowstone-hotspot-volcanic-fields. And more about the pattern of hotspot volcanism in southern Idaho is available at www.usgs.gov/observatories/yvo/news/a-window-yellowstones-interior-part-i-how-yellowstone-shapes-western-usa.
There is an ash deposit near me in SE New Mexico, but the coordinates are in sections, township, range and at best I have it narrowed to about a half-mile square. I am at a loss as to how to identify it compared to the more expected anhydrite. It's a fair walk from the nearest road,, so I have only explored the area once.
If it is ash, that could definitely be from Yellowstone eruptions (as long as it is not under lots and lots of other rock -- rather, it should have relatively little overburden, since the ash is geologically recent). It outcrops in areas around Socorro, for example.
The Sandhills formed from sediment eroded by glaciers and transported away from the Rocky Mountains by rovers and streams, and then shaped by wind. There's also the ashfall beds in Nebraska -- that's volcanic ash from an eruption of a volcanic system associated with a previous version of Yellowstone, called the Bruneau-Jarbidge complex, located in southern Idaho. Pretty neat geology out there!
Yes, the North American plate is moving to the southwest. Because the hotspot is more or less fixed, that means you get a chain of volcanic calderas that get younger to the northeast (the oldest in the range is McDermitt caldera, on the border of Nevada and Idaho). You can find more information about this at www.usgs.gov/observatories/yvo/news/a-window-yellowstones-interior-part-i-how-yellowstone-shapes-western-usa.
First, as a disclaimer just in case, I am still a student and not from the USGS. Now let's get into it! I don't think the Yellowstone can trigger a tsunami for at least one reason: These events occur when the eruption is located in a sea or ocean. Furthermore, tsunamis are mostly related to fast events like an explosion or the collapse of a volcanic edifice in water. Thus I strongly doubt that ash fall only in the case of an explosive eruption and from that far from shores can trigger a tsunami (If someone knows better about this, I would be happy to hear more though). I cannot support this answer with direct sources but I do recommend to check scientific articles on the question. I wrote this from the knowledge I obtained from my student course. That's it! have a good day! 🌋
Nope! A tsunami on the ocean is generated by displacing water -- typically by moving the ocean floor in an earthquake or by a landslide into the ocean. There have also been tsunami from ash flows impacting the ocean, as at Krakatau in 1883. An eruption at Yellowstone could not cause such a change in the oceans -- it's too far away.
Why do nearly all geologists adhere to a timeline that goes against the Bible? What is the motivation, incentive, or assumptions that cause that hubris? Is it because you want to gain knowledge for yourselves apart from God?
Why do all Christians assume theirs is the only right religion when there’s over 3000 of them in the world. If science followed a particular religion then it would be biased which is the exact opposite of what science needs to be…impartial.
I look forward to this update every month. Thanks Mike and USGS team!
I abstained from the news for 24 hours and the title shocked me - did I miss a Yellowstone eruption ... Thank you for putting out scientific facts and probabilities!
Loved the lesson of Yellowstone volcanic ash dispersal! Thanks Mike
I always look forward to these updates. Thank you for taking the time to put them together for us.
Great reporting packed with lots of interesting information, thanks !
"No place like home."
The Nebraska ashfall state park is worth doing a search as well.
The power of those super volcanoes is scary
Yellowstone is a very special place.
Always an interesting update, and great for keeping REAL information on social media to combat the alarmist mis-informers. When I see Mike on a thumbnail, I click, and am never disappointed.
Wow... Someone talking about the Yellowstone Supervolcano that actually knows what a Supervolcano is. Excuse me while I keel over from the shock of it all.
Thank you!!
I see UA-cam videos and other sources that give the impression that Yellowstone could erupt with a "big one" any time and we should worry about it. But this is disregarding the scale of geologic time! The last Yellowstone "big one" was 631,000 years ago. At that time, Neanderthals hadn't evolved yet. Several ice ages and interglacial periods hadn't happened yet. Most all the current big Cascade volcanic peaks hadn't formed yet, and peaks that existed back then have eroded to low hills by now. While the Yellowstone volcanic hot spot may very well produce another "big one" in the distant future, it is not something we should lie awake at night worrying it will happen anytime soon.
The recurrence interval is about 600,000 to 800,000 years, so we are within that range. That means it could happen next year, but just as easily it could happen in a century, a millennium, or even 100,000 or more years from now. It is good to at least think about how we would deal with an eruption, but it is very low probability event for any of our lifetimes.
It’s only tornadoes🌪️ hurricane, tsunami earthquake
Thank you!😊
Put Month's w🎉rap-up in the title
Thanks for the suggestion -- we made that change.
Thanks Mike. Awesome report.
I love these educational videos
Warstwy skał to jak znaki w rurznuch czsah na przeszczni lat❤👁️🙏
One place that I'd like to see an in-depth investigation of is "Two Buttes" in southeastern Colorado. It stands alone on a relatively flat plane, which suggests volcanic in origin, but the stone on top is sandstone. Oil well geologists that I have talked to have told me that they structure extends far underground, with the underground rock formations sloping up towards the "mountain".
You're right -- it is magmatic in origin. The rock slopes away from the Two Buttes area in all directions because there is a magmatic intrusion beneath the sediment that caused the region to swell. Some of that igneous rock is exposed at the surface immediately south of Two Buttes. The magmatic activity might have slightly metamorphosed some of the overlying rock, making it more resistant to erosion -- thus, the Two Buttes feature sticks out above the surrounding landscape.
Yellowstones past eruption is a scary foretelling of what’s coming.
I'm more concerned with Mount Tambora or Krakatoa, both on the other side of the Pacific. In the US proper, Mount Rainier's inevitable eruption will produce lahars and tsunamis that will take out a great many people in the PNW. Mount Hood will be almost as bad. There's even a volcano in downtown Portland. Check out the flood basalts around the Columbia River to see what the hot spot under Yellowstone is capable of. Volcanism is fascinating and terrifying at the same time.
Yellowstone won't erupt. USGS made a long video about it.
Stop watching movies.
@@dystopiaisutopia they said it won’t erupt anytime soon but it will definitely erupt again.
Earlier surveys have revealed not one massive magma chamber but another even bigger chamber feeding into the first.
Why do think Yellowstone is extinct? The geysers, thermo vents say otherwise.
@@phillm156 They also said it won't erupt into a massive explosion like Hollywood said it will.
@@phillm156 Yellowstone is far from extinct and is incredibly active. Because of the amount of water in the area, even a small eruption will be pretty explosive. I'm just an aspiring geologist so I could be wrong.
If the big one happens in Yellowstone will it have a ripple effect on the New Madrid fault line where I live ???
Well, first of all, there's no indication of an impending "big one" from Yellowstone -- the magma chamber remains mostly solid, and there's no suggestion of the recharge that would be needed to feed a large eruption.
Regardless, an impact on New Madrid is unlikely. The way a volcano could trigger a distant fault (or vice versa) is mostly through changes in stress. And those sorts of changes just don't get transmitted over such great distances.
Stop watching movies
How does the amount of rain during drought or deluge affect the volcanoes in Yellowstone ?
Rain doesn't really have an impact on volcanoes. In Yellowstone, there is a broad correlation between environmental conditions and geyser activity, though. During "wet" years, when there is more water available, some geysers erupt slightly more often. For instance, at Old Faithful, the average time between eruptions might decrease by a couple of minutes. And during dry years, the opposite effect occurs. During prolonged droughts, it's possible that some geysers even turn off! This seems to have happened at Old Faithful about 650-800 years ago during a major drought in the western USA (more about that at www.usgs.gov/observatories/yvo/news/a-time-when-old-faithful-wasnt-so-faithful).
In Yellowstone specifically, there could also be, perhaps, slightly more seismicity in wet years, since most of the quakes there are caused by groundwater interacting with existing tectonic faults.
But no real impact on volcanic activity or potential for future activity.
"No place like home!" - Any evidence of volcanic ash in the Land of Oz?
We hear that the Tin Man is also a geologist, so we'll check with him and get back to you. :)
cool
It’s only tornadoes🌪️
Why does the ground water deformation continue the downward trend?
The groundwater-related deformation is seasonal. As snowmelt and runoff recharge the water table, the ground puffs up a bit, and that interrupts the downward. As groundwater levels drop in the fall and winter, the "puffiness" goes away.
That downward trend itself is not caused by groundwater, but rather some caldera-wide process -- for example, drainage of hydrothermal fluids or magma, cooling and contraction of magma, etc. it's hard to tell the specific source of the subsidence, but the groundwater signal is sort of superimposed seasonally on that more dominant signal. The groundwater signal has been especially visible since 2015 because the caldera-wide subsidence has been so steady, but that's not always the case . Yellowstone caldera goes up and down, so it can be hard to see the more subtle seasonal changes if there are lots of larger-scale processes happening too.
For a deeper dive into Yellowstone ground deformation, check out ua-cam.com/video/y0yq3DtR5Y4/v-deo.html.
It’s never gonna come
Being from Kansas. I find that very interesting
I saw sooooo many fossils in Salina Kansas. 15 years ago.
Beautiful.
When visiting Ashfall Fossil Bed State Park in NE Nebraska, the personal did not seem to know from what volcano their ash deposit came from. Does anyone know?
Yep! That ash is from the Bruneau-Jarbidge caldera complex, which is about 12 million years old and located in southern Idaho -- it's part of the Yellowstone hotspot track, and was extinct by 10 million years ago as plate motion caused the hotspot activity to migrate to the NE. You can see a map of where that caldera system is located at www.usgs.gov/media/images/locations-yellowstone-hotspot-volcanic-fields. And more about the pattern of hotspot volcanism in southern Idaho is available at www.usgs.gov/observatories/yvo/news/a-window-yellowstones-interior-part-i-how-yellowstone-shapes-western-usa.
There is an ash deposit near me in SE New Mexico, but the coordinates are in sections, township, range and at best I have it narrowed to about a half-mile square. I am at a loss as to how to identify it compared to the more expected anhydrite. It's a fair walk from the nearest road,, so I have only explored the area once.
If it is ash, that could definitely be from Yellowstone eruptions (as long as it is not under lots and lots of other rock -- rather, it should have relatively little overburden, since the ash is geologically recent). It outcrops in areas around Socorro, for example.
👠👠 🌋 or 🌪no place like home? 😂
If you can identify the sources of the ash in Kansas, can you identify the sources of the sand in the Nebraska Sandhills?
The Sandhills formed from sediment eroded by glaciers and transported away from the Rocky Mountains by rovers and streams, and then shaped by wind.
There's also the ashfall beds in Nebraska -- that's volcanic ash from an eruption of a volcanic system associated with a previous version of Yellowstone, called the Bruneau-Jarbidge complex, located in southern Idaho. Pretty neat geology out there!
No place like home❤❤
Please include Update in future videos that include updates.
Good suggestion! We made that change to this video.
Great information. So the magma plume was under Idaho and now under Wyoming, so the North America landmass is moving west?
Yes, the North American plate is moving to the southwest. Because the hotspot is more or less fixed, that means you get a chain of volcanic calderas that get younger to the northeast (the oldest in the range is McDermitt caldera, on the border of Nevada and Idaho). You can find more information about this at www.usgs.gov/observatories/yvo/news/a-window-yellowstones-interior-part-i-how-yellowstone-shapes-western-usa.
@@usgs thanks
It’s only tornadoes🌹😮
Nice
Will Yellowstone get a tsunami if erupt
First, as a disclaimer just in case, I am still a student and not from the USGS. Now let's get into it!
I don't think the Yellowstone can trigger a tsunami for at least one reason: These events occur when the eruption is located in a sea or ocean. Furthermore, tsunamis are mostly related to fast events like an explosion or the collapse of a volcanic edifice in water. Thus I strongly doubt that ash fall only in the case of an explosive eruption and from that far from shores can trigger a tsunami (If someone knows better about this, I would be happy to hear more though). I cannot support this answer with direct sources but I do recommend to check scientific articles on the question. I wrote this from the knowledge I obtained from my student course.
That's it! have a good day! 🌋
Nope! A tsunami on the ocean is generated by displacing water -- typically by moving the ocean floor in an earthquake or by a landslide into the ocean. There have also been tsunami from ash flows impacting the ocean, as at Krakatau in 1883. An eruption at Yellowstone could not cause such a change in the oceans -- it's too far away.
Umm no
Why do nearly all geologists adhere to a timeline that goes against the Bible? What is the motivation, incentive, or assumptions that cause that hubris? Is it because you want to gain knowledge for yourselves apart from God?
Why do all Christians assume theirs is the only right religion when there’s over 3000 of them in the world. If science followed a particular religion then it would be biased which is the exact opposite of what science needs to be…impartial.