Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

sirboddingtons t1_iuwlr5m wrote

I remember talking to a park ranger around the Mt. Rainier area about whether the depleting glaciers on the volcano would increase the accumulation of magma beneath it as the downward pressure of the mountain decreases, he answered that one of the USGS researchers he talked to had suggested that was entirely possible, that it could raise the risk of eruption. Many volcanoes in the world are flanked by significant glacial formations, usually these are some of the more violent erupting volcanoes. If Mt. Rainier was to blow, the resulting lava flows would reach the city of Tacoma, WA within 30 minutes.

I wonder what other secondary and tertiary effects decreasing glaciers could have not just tied to water management issues (pray for those in the Himalayas flow), decreased luminosity causing additional heating, and of course loss of habitat.

11

ImTheNewishGuy t1_iuz55uz wrote

To add to your scary. That entire area is a magma chain. Rainier is one of the youngest mountains over there. If it goes the others go with it. St Helen's is a long way away and you can see the massiveness of he crater from Camp Muir on Rainer. Imagine Rainier, Adam's, st Helen's and hood all doing that within a short geological time frame. The northwest would be absolutely decimated and it would blow east over the plains and onto the Midwest.

On alighter note St Helen's has the only growing glacier in the world. Just cause the sun doesn't hit he crater that is.

3