True-color satellite image of Cleveland Volcano collected by the Quickbird-2 sensor on October 15, 2011. The summit of the volcano is mostly snow-covered, and the growing lava dome is seen as the dark feature in the center of the image. Some snow-free ground is observed on the southern upper flanks of the volcano, just south (below) of the crater. A faint steam and gas plume is observed moving towards the east (right). Image Copyright: Digital Globe, 2012

Two of Alaska’s most active volcanoes—Pavlof and Cleveland—are currently erupting. At the time of this post, their activity continues at low levels, but energetic explosions could occur without warning.

Located close to the western end of the Alaska Peninsula, Pavlof is one of the most active volcanoes in the Aleutian arc, having erupted more than 40 times since the late 1700’s.

Pavlof has been erupting since May 13, 2013, with relatively low-energy lava fountaining and minor emissions of ash, steam, and gas. So far, volcanic ash from this eruption has reached as high as 22,000 feet above sea level. The ash plume has interfered with regional airlines and resulted in trace amounts of ash fall on nearby communities. The ash plume is currently too low to impact commercial airliners that fly between North America and Asia at altitudes generally above 30,000 feet.

Cleveland, located on Chuginadak Island in the Aleutian Islands, is also one of Alaska’s most persistently active volcanoes. It has exhibited some sign of unrest almost annually since the early 1980’s, with at least 19 confirmed eruptive events since then.

The current episode of eruptive activity at Cleveland has been characterized by single, discrete explosions, minor ash emissions, and small flows of lava and debris on the upper flanks of the volcano. On several occasions, ash-producing explosions have occurred reaching as high as 35,000 feet.

A small lava dome formed in the summit crater of Cleveland volcano in late January, 2013. At that time, the dome was about 300 feet in diameter and remained that size until a brief eruption on May 4 explosively removed a portion of the dome. The presence of a lava dome increases the possibility of an explosive eruption, but it does not necessarily indicate that one will occur.

Start with Science

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is responsible for monitoring and issuing timely warnings of potential volcano activity. The USGS and its partners operate five volcano observatories, and monitoring of these two volcanoes is coordinated through the Alaska Volcano Observatory (AVO).

AVO is a joint program of the USGS, University of Alaska Fairbanks Geophysical Institute, and the State of Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys.

Scientists at AVO were able to detect unrest at both Pavlof and Cleveland volcanoes that confirmed eruptive activity was occurring. AVO immediately sent notifications out to emergency-management authorities and those potentially affected.

When Will the Eruptions Stop?

Volcanic eruptions can last weeks to months, and sometime years, so the exact timing is unknown for when these two volcanoes will rest. AVO will continue to monitor them and provide updates in the event of future activity.

Pavlof eruption on May 18, 2013. Photo Credit: Brandon Wilson

Detecting Signs of Unrest

Signs that the volcanoes were becoming restless were determined through a combination of monitoring data.

At Pavlof, a strong thermal signal was observed in satellite data at the summit that coincided with elevated seismic levels. Soon after these observations were made, more satellite data and pilot reports indicated that ash emissions were occurring.

At Cleveland volcano, explosions from the summit vent were detected by an infrasound array and seismic instruments on Umnak Island about 80 miles to the east, and later a thermal feature was observed at the summit in satellite imagery, which indicated hot material at or near the surface. The pressure sensors in the infrasound array pick up air waves generated by volcanic explosions. Because of the relatively slow speed of these waves, it took nearly 40 minutes to detect the explosion from that distance and issue an alert.

Ash Cloud Forecasts

AVO’s analysis of the eruption, including the amount of ash and the duration of the explosive phases, are key inputs into the forecasts by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Weather Service (NWS) of where the ash cloud will form and drift. These forecasts by NWS are used by the aviation industry to avoid flying into the ash.

The USGS developed a new ash cloud dispersal and fallout tool—a computer model known as Ash3d—that is being employed by AVO. The tool details where, when, and the amount of ash fall that is expected to occur. This information helps guide decisions on whether planes can safely land or depart, health warnings, potential impacts to infrastructure, and even when ash will stop falling and cleanup can begin.

Monitoring Tools

Pavlof is monitored with on-the-ground seismic stations (although only three of the seven instruments are currently operational), satellite remote sensing, and web cameras operated by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). A regional infrasound network operated by the University of Alaska Geophysical Institute has also helped detect explosions from Pavlof and Cleveland volcanoes.

Cleveland does not have a local seismic network and is monitored using only distant seismic and infrasound instruments and satellite data. Without local seismic instrumentation, scientists cannot forecast eruptions and smaller eruptions can be missed, especially because in the Aleutians, clouds commonly obscure the volcanoes in satellite data.

Updated Alerts and Webcams

Visit the AVO website for updated alerts and activity reports on Pavlof and Cleveland volcanoes. Virtually travel to these locations through an AVO webcam of Cleveland volcano and a FAA webcam located in Cold Bay about 37 miles west of Pavlof.

Alaska has 31% of all Active Volcanoes in the United States

Alaska’s volcanoes make up about 31% of all active volcanoes in the United States. There are 52 that have been active within the last 10,000 years and can be expected to erupt again. At present, 28 are monitored with ground-based instrumentation, and all are monitored daily using satellite remote sensing.

See a full list of all volcanoes in Alaska and view an interactive map of their location.

Although most of the volcanoes in Alaska are remote and not close to populated areas, millions of dollars of air freight and 20,000-30,000 people fly over active Alaskan volcanoes daily traveling between North America and Asia. In fact, the Anchorage International Airport is ranked the fifth busiest air cargo hub in the world based on tonnage. In addition to the threat that volcanic ash poses for aviation safety, the economic impacts due to disruption of air traffic can be substantial. One study estimated costs of five billion dollars from the week-long closure of European airspace caused by the eruption of Iceland’s Eyjafjallajökull volcano in 2010.

USGS Science for Volcano Hazards

USGS science is helping keep what are natural events from turning into major disasters.

The United States has approximately 169 active volcanoes, and more than half of them could erupt explosively. When the violent energy of a volcano is unleashed, the results can be catastrophic. Lava flows, debris avalanches, and explosive blasts have devastated communities. Noxious volcanic gas emissions have caused widespread lung problems. Airborne ash clouds from explosive eruptions have caused millions of dollars damage, including causing engines to shut down in flight.

To keep communities safe, it is essential to monitor volcanoes so that the public knows when unrest begins and what hazards can be expected. USGS efforts have improved global understanding of how volcanoes work and how to live safely with volcanic eruptions.

The USGS Volcano Hazards Program operates a total of five volcano observatories in cooperation with universities and state agencies. They are the Cascades Volcano Observatory, Yellowstone Volcano Observatory, California Volcano Observatory, Hawaiian Volcano Observatory, and Alaska Volcano Observatory. USGS also monitors and reports on volcanoes in the northern Marianas Islands.

In April, 2013, AVO celebrated 25 years of monitoring and studying Alaska volcanoes.

Learn More

Find out about the National Volcano Early Warning System (NVEWS), which is a proposed national-scale plan to ensure that volcanoes are monitored at appropriate levels given their associated threats.

Watch a video about USGS science on volcano hazards.

Aleutian Arc Volcanoes

With over 500 beaches and nearly 11,000 miles of coastline, the Great Lakes are major summertime recreation and tourist destinations in the U.S

As schools close for the year and summer weather beckons, many recreationalists head to the Great Lakes’ public beaches. However, these coastal areas can become contaminated with disease-causing bacteria that threaten public health, disrupt water recreation, and pay a toll on the Great Lakes economies that depend on summer tourism.

The U.S. Geological Survey Great Lakes Beach Health initiative provides science-based information and methods that help beach managers make more accurate beach closure and advisory decisions, preventing unnecessary beach closures while protecting public health.

Lifeguarding Through Science

With over 500 beaches and nearly 11,000 miles of coastline, the Great Lakes are major summertime recreation and tourist destinations in the U.S. Unfortunately, sewage and fecal matter can contaminate Great Lakes beaches with pathogens, or disease-causing microorganisms. Fecal indicator bacteria, such as E. coli, are not necessarily pathogenic but indicate the possible presence of pathogens that can threaten visitors’ health. Pathogens, including Shigella and Cryptosporidium, can be transmitted to people by handling sand and coming into contact with contaminated water.

The economies of Great Lakes coastal areas depend on public confidence in the water quality at the shoreline. When beach managers need reliable science-based information to make safe beach closure and beach management decisions, they often turn to the USGS.

How does USGS science help managers protect beach-goers from illness without needlessly closing Great Lakes beaches?

Coastal processes, like those that created these sand waves in Lake Michigan, can affect the concentrations of harmful bacteria in the Great Lakes

Quicker water-quality tests

Typical tests for waterborne pathogens involve culturing, or growing, fecal-indicator bacteria, which help detect the presence of contaminated sewage. However, it can take 18-24 hours for results to become available, causing beaches to be closed too late or closed unnecessarily.

USGS researchers are working to develop, test, and expand rapid and real-time assessments that will provide fast information about water-quality conditions. For example, water-quality prediction tests, like the USGS multiple linear regression models that have been used at Lake Erie beaches, measure key environmental variables, such as amounts of rainfall, wave height, and wind speed, to help estimate current water conditions. Models developed by the USGS for Chicago’s beaches provide readily available data so that beachgoers can check conditions before heading to the beach.

Other analytical methods, such as quantitative polymerase chain reaction, can provide bacteria concentration measurements in two-to-three hours.

Identifying sources of contamination

Without knowing the source and therefore the extent of fecal contamination, managers have trouble determining the appropriate solution or control strategies.

USGS researchers are using microbial source tracking (MST)—methods to examine the genetic characteristics of microorganisms found in the environment to determine their possible animal or human sources—in and near Great Lakes beaches. MST markers have already been used to link fecal contamination to human and animal sources throughout the U.S., and are being used by USGS scientists to determine the sources and fluctuations of E. coli concentrations at many beaches throughout the Great Lakes.

Understanding coastal processes

Processes such as currents and sediment transport, surface-water contributions, wave action, and changes in lake and groundwater water levels may affect the concentrations of harmful bacteria. For example, past studies indicated that shallow groundwater and waves influence the storage and accumulation of E. coli in sands at one Lake Erie beach in Cleveland, Ohio. However, these coastal processes and their impacts on individual beaches are not well understood on a regional level.

USGS researchers are working to characterize the transfer of bacterial indicators, pathogens, and MST markers to the nearshore waters, sediments, groundwater, and lake water throughout the Great Lakes region.

Compiling consistent water-quality data

Currently, data are compiled by numerous agencies and in a wide variety of formats, creating inconsistent records across different beaches and making it difficult for researchers and managers to understand trends.

USGS researchers are compiling recreational water-quality data on Great Lakes beaches into comprehensive databases to enhance the communication of this information to beach managers and the public. For example, a publicly accessible, Web-based, interactive Geographic Information System (GIS) database is being developed to allow visualization of water-quality and environmental data for Great Lakes beaches at a regional scale.

Similar to weather forecasts, the Ohio Nowcast system uses near real-time information to estimate water-quality conditions and E. coli concentrations at specific beaches in Ohio

Is Your Local Beach Safe?

The USGS and its partners have already developed the following tools to help provide the public with updated beach health information in some Great Lakes states.

Ohio Nowcast

Similar to weather forecasts, the Ohio Nowcast system, operated by the USGS in cooperation with local agencies,  uses near real-time information to estimate water-quality conditions and E. coli concentrations at specific beaches in Ohio. It uses mathematical models that are developed from several years of measurements taken at particular sites.

Nowcasts are currently provided for the Huntington Reservation, Edgewater Park, Maumee Bay State Park, and Villa Angela beaches, and are being tested at six other Ohio beaches.

Ohio Beach Monitoring Data

Ohio beach monitoring data are available online using a map interface. Most Lake Erie beaches are sampled four times each week, and some are tested daily. Users can view beach test results for areas in the Cuyahoga and Erie county health districts, and results are available from many of the inland state park beaches that are typically sampled twice each month.

Wisconsin Beach Health

Water-quality data and beach advisories from approximately 100 public beaches in Wisconsin are listed on the state’s Beach Health website. Daily and historical Wisconsin beach health data are also available on the USGS Wisconsin Water Science Center website, and can be sent to you directly by signing up for Wisconsin beach health email advisories or an RSS feed.

Chicago Beaches

Chicago has one of the most extensive advanced monitoring systems in the Great Lakes.  Developed by the USGS Great Lakes Science Center, the program includes seven real-time data monitoring buoys and several lakefront weather stations. Beach visitors have ready access to water conditions and bacteria predictions, providing health protection for millions.

Funding for USGS beach projects and research in the Great Lakes comes from the Ocean Research Priorities Plan, the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and many state and local partner agencies and organizations throughout the region.

Links:

• Great Lakes Beach Health Initiative: http://greatlakesbeaches.usgs.gov/
• USGS Great Lakes Science Center: http://www.glsc.usgs.gov/main.php?content=research_initiatives_beachhealth&title=Project%20S.A.F.E.0&menu=research_initiatives_projectSAFE
• USGS Michigan Water Science Center: http://mi.water.usgs.gov/
• USGS Wisconsin Water Science Center: http://wi.water.usgs.gov/beach-health/index.html
• USGS Ohio Water Science Center: http://oh.water.usgs.gov/
• Great Lakes Restoration Initiative: http://greatlakesrestoration.us/index.html
• Great Lakes Beach Association: http://www.great-lakes.net/glba/

USGS hydrologic technician Amy Simonson surveying a high-water mark on Liberty Island, New York. Photo credit Michael Noll, USGS.

The Department of the Interior recently announced the release of $475.25 million in emergency disaster relief funding to repair, rebuild, and restore impacted areas in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. This will also provide investments in scientific data and studies to support recovery in the region.

“The funding we are making available will help repair and rebuild facilities, reopen roads, and restore services in order to get our parks, refuges, beaches, and public lands fully operational and open to the public this summer,” said Sally Jewell, Secretary of the Interior. “We will continue to focus our efforts on rebuilding to welcome visitors, help jumpstart local economies, and make communities stronger and more resilient to help withstand potential damage sustained from future storms.”

More Support on the Way

With the funding recently released, approximately 60 percent of DOI’s Hurricane Sandy supplemental funding has been allocated, supporting 234 projects. Overall, DOI received $829.2 million in the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act of 2013, which was reduced by $42.5 million to $786.7 million due to sequestration. The remaining funding will be allocated in the coming months for mitigation projects currently being evaluated for their ability to increase coastal resilience and capacity to withstand future storm damage and to restore and rebuild public assets.

Read DOI’s press release and see the strategic plan with a full list of approved projects for all bureaus.

USGS Science

DOI has approved $18.8 million to support U.S. Geological Survey projects that will provide the scientific information necessary to inform management decisions and community assistance. USGS science will help identify coastal areas that have been made more vulnerable to storm damage and provide communities with critical information needed for recovery that will also help prepare for future storm events.

“People are still in need of help in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, and this new funding allows experts within DOI to work together to further restoration and redevelopment efforts,” said David Applegate, USGS Associate Director for Natural Hazards. “Even before the storm came ashore, USGS scientists were collecting data and helping forecast potential coastal impacts. We are dedicated to delivering science to help those in need of assistance now and ensure more resilient communities for future generations.”

With this first wave of additional funding, USGS scientists are starting new projects and building on existing work to answer questions such as the following:

• How did high-water levels during storms impact coastal bays and estuaries?
• What locations along the coast are forecasted to be the most vulnerable to future hurricanes?
• Where are persisting risks of exposure to chemical and microbial contaminants?
• What were the storm impacts to ecosystems, habitats, fish and wildlife?

Partnerships and Collaboration

USGS research is designed and driven by the science needs of our partners to best support coastal resilience efforts. The USGS is working with DOI bureaus, including the Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, and Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, as well as many other federal and state agencies.

“The coastal impact assessment products provided by the USGS have been a critical resource for us on the Federal team to help identify and prioritize impact-related data collection, issue identification and resource evaluation,” said Sandy Eslinger, NOAA’s Coastal Coordinator for the Inter-agency Natural and Cultural Resources Recovery Team in New York.

A number of ocean front homes were destroyed or severely damaged during Hurricane Sandy on Fire Island, NY. The photo shows what remains of houses in the community of Davis Park. Photo by Cheryl Hapke, USGS.

USGS Projects Moving Forward

This new funding will support projects that address critical gaps in response and preparedness capabilities, while also providing baseline information for reinvestment decisions.

This funding will allow the USGS to provide updated analysis and information regarding the factors that affect coastal vulnerability and how to reduce that vulnerability, and to improve information delivery to emergency responders in real-time and immediately following future storms.

Pre- and Post-Storm Analysis

The USGS will use these new resources to provide a more complete and current coverage of detailed coastal elevation data. The elevation of nearshore land surface and subsurface is a major controlling factor for the impact of coastal storms. The USGS used airborne techniques to measure pre- and post-storm coastal elevations, moving quickly immediately after Hurricane Sandy to collect data in highly impacted areas before the bulldozers moved in to begin restoration.

New Coastal Vulnerabilities after Sandy

The USGS will focus on updating coastal vulnerability forecasts considering the changes caused by Hurricane Sandy. For example, the USGS forecasts the likelihood of erosion, overwash and other impacts to beaches and dunes by looking at estimated storm-induced water levels and known coastal elevations. The coast went through significant changes from the recent storm, so these updates are essential to develop a clearer understanding of what areas are at risk.

Impacts to Ecosystems and Habitats

The USGS will work to provide maps and models of storm impacts to coastal ecosystems, habitats, and fish and wildlife, with particular focus on those within DOI lands. For example, coastal wetlands provide critical ecosystem services to humans as they protect both manmade and natural habitats from storm impacts. The sustainability of coastal wetlands is dependent on the ability of the wetland to maintain elevation during periods of storms, stable vegetation, sea-level rise, and the severity of future storms. In order to predict the fate of coastal wetlands, and ultimately protect or restore ecosystem services and values, it is essential to create a regional understanding of where and how processes controlling elevation change are affected by storms such as Sandy.

Models to Understand Storm Processes and Impacts

Oblique aerial photographs of Seaside Heights, NJ. View looking west along the New Jersey shore. Storm waves and surge destroyed the dunes and boardwalk, and deposited the sand on the island, covering roads. The red arrow points to a building that was washed off

The funding will enhance existing USGS storm surge capabilities in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic. The USGS will increase the number and mobility of water-level and water-quality sensors for rapid deployment to areas forecast to be vulnerable to storm surge, ultimately increasing the amount of real-time and near real-time storm surge data that are available to emergency responders. This effort also includes improving the data delivery and display system used to provide real-time and recovered data to emergency responders, community planners, forecasters, and modelers.

Real-Time Data on Water Levels and Storm Surge

USGS scientists collected data on water levels during Hurricane Sandy, and this new funding supports further analysis of the acquired information. This will help improve storm-surge models, understand the impacts to coastal bays and estuaries, and identify crucial locations for future monitoring and sensor deployment. As Hurricane Sandy approached, scientists quickly deployed sensors from prepositioned staging areas to measure rising storm surge levels. The data from these sensors are being used to create models of the precise time the storm-tide arrived, how ocean and inland water levels changed during the storm, the depth of the storm-tide throughout the event, and how long it took for the water to recede.

Water Quality and Contaminants

The extensive disruption caused by Hurricane Sandy resulted in numerous circumstances where contaminants were, or could have been, released to the environment. This includes extensive failure of wastewater treatment plants, release of chemicals from destroyed structures and vehicles, and disturbance of buried contaminants. While initial responses addressed evident contamination, persisting risk of human and ecological exposure to contamination has not been fully defined. The USGS will use information on the patterns of water circulation, debris, and sediment movement to identify contaminant occurrence and potential human and ecological exposure pathways. The information will also assist in rapid response to characterization of contaminant risks that could potentially occur as a result of future storms.

USGS Support for Early Recovery Efforts

USGS scientists have been working diligently since the onset of Hurricane Sandy, providing science to support first responders and assist with early recovery efforts. Learn more about USGS pre-storm and immediate response activities.

Additional USGS Resources

• USGS Continues Response to Hurricane Sandy
• Hurricane Sandy Coastal Change Hazards
• Predicted Likelihood of Coastal Change Impacts from Hurricane Sandy
• Hurricane Sandy Storm Tide Data and Mapper
• Water-Quality Sampling Immediately After Hurricane Sandy
• Real-Time Monitoring: Rapid deployment storm tide sensors and streamgages, and permanent streamgages in Sandy impact area
• USGS Issues Landslide Alert for Hurricane Sandy
• WaterWatch: View streamflow during Hurricane Sandy (Oct 29 and subsequent days)
• Coastal Elevation Data: Access National Elevation Dataset and other coastal elevation information
• Sustainable Estuaries, Coastal, Urban, and River Environments

I found out about the USGS and the Student Career Experience Program (SCEP) by attending a State Soil and Water Conservation Society meeting. At the meeting I met a geologist who works with the USGS, asked about my interests, and gave me contact information for my current supervisor. Two months later, I started working as a Volunteer for Science, and then as a SCEP during college. After graduation I began in my current term position as a Hydrologic Technician. I now work as a team member in the data section, with the urban hydrology program.

A Day in the Life

A typical day for me revolves around collecting accurate data for our cooperators and the public. Duties that I might perform include surface water and water quality field trips; gage maintenance; peak flow data collection; bacteria sample collection and processing; working and checking records; storm and base flow sampling; laboratory cleaning; and much more.

In the Field

The most memorable experiences for me would be every storm sampling trip that I have been a part of, especially those at night. Sampling during these times always seems to make me feel like a storm chaser because the streams in our area are very quick to rise due to urbanization, and generally we aim to catch the storm event at its peak. It is always interesting participating in storm response teams because you actually get to see how a stream or river flows during the peak of the hydrograph as opposed to just seeing a line on a screen — it makes the work more realistic. To me, it is really interesting to see how much impact just a half inch of rain can have on a watershed. Our urban streams can easily go from being ankle deep at base flow to at least five feet deep in just a couple hours during major storms. Sampling is also a great opportunity to see how urbanization has truly impacted a region through water quality parameters such as turbidity, specific conductance, pH, and dissolved oxygen. We also make discharge measurements during storm events. These are very important when it comes to flood inundation mapping efforts and flood warning systems (such as WaterAlert) that are currently in place. At all times, we need to have accurate ratings and well-maintained equipment so that we can warn people who live close to streams and rivers that they may be in danger if even a minor flood event were to occur. It does not take much water to ruin property and take lives, so the work that the USGS does is vital.

As for what work I would like to do next, I would love to get more involved in water quality research and potentially write some publications.

Why the USGS?

Kerry Caslow working near a stream.

I believe that the USGS is a great place for students to work because there are many opportunities for learning and growth as a scientist. Coworkers and supervisors will continually motivate you and help to develop the skills that you already have, along with instilling new skills. There is also a great amount of training available to USGS employees at all times. In the USGS, there is a lot of pride and hard work that goes into each and every bit of data collected and published. At the end of the day, you can always be satisfied knowing that you have worked hard and gotten much accomplished, and that satisfaction is what makes USGS great.