Chapter 65

Gas, Plume, and Thermal Monitoring

Simon A. Carn
Department of Geological and Mining Engineering and Sciences, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI, USA

Chapter Outline 2.4.1. Ultraviolet Measurements of Volcanic

1. Introduction 1126 Gases 1135
2. Gas Measurements and Monitoring 1126 2.4.2. Thermal IR and Microwave Measurements
2.1. Principles 1126 of Volcanic Gases 1135
2.2. Direct/In situ Sampling of Volcanic Gases 1128 2.4.3. Ash and Aerosol Measurements 1140
2.2.1. High-Temperature Fumarolic Discharges 2.4.4. Satellite Sensor Synergy 1142
from Active Craters 1128 3. Thermal Measurements and Monitoring 1142
2.2.2. In situ Measurements of Volcanic Plumes 1128 3.1. Principles 1142
2.2.3. Soil Gas (CO2 Emissions) 1129 3.2. The Origin and Detection of Volcanic Thermal
2.3. Remote Sensing Measurements of Volcanic Gases 1130 Anomalies 1144
2.3.1. Ground-Based and Airborne Gas 3.3. Acquisition of IR Measurements 1145
Measurements 1130 4. Website Dissemination and Alert Systems 1146
2.3.2. UV Imaging Cameras 1132 5. Future Directions 1147
2.3.3. IR Spectroscopy 1132 Further Reading 1148
2.4. Satellite Remote Sensing of Volcanic Gases and
Aerosols 1133

GLOSSARY retrieval The derivation of the abundance (e.g., column amount) of

active remote sensing A remote sensing technique using an artificial
source of electromagnetic radiation, typically mounted on the
same platform as the detector (e.g., light detection and ranging
[LiDAR] and radio detection and ranging [radar]).
atmospheric window A region of the electromagnetic spectrum with
high atmospheric transmission, usually exploited for remote
sensing of the Earth’s surface.
electromagnetic radiation Radiation comprising orthogonal electric
and magnetic fields; its interaction with atoms and molecules in
matter is the basis of all remote sensing techniques. Travels at the
speed of light, and can be transmitted through a vacuum.
fumarole A crack or fissure in a volcanic edifice through which
volcanic gases are emitted.
hyperspectral Measurements providing contiguous coverage of a
region of the electromagnetic spectrum at high spectral resolution.
multispectral Measurements at discrete, non-contiguous channels at
specific wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum.
passive remote sensing A remote sensing technique that exploits
natural sources of electromagnetic radiation (e.g., the Sun, ther-
mal emission from the Earth or the atmosphere).
remote sensing The measurement of some property of an object, by
an instrument that is not in physical contact with that object.
an atmospheric constituent (gas or particles) from spectra of
electromagnetic radiation intensity.
spatial resolution The ability of a remote sensing system to resolve
objects or phenomena of a given spatial dimension.
spectral resolution The ability of a remote sensing system to
discriminate wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation.
spectroscopy The measurement of electromagnetic radiation in-
tensity as a function of wavelength.
stratosphere The layer of Earth’s atmosphere directly above the
troposphere, extending up to w50 km above sea level (ASL),
characterized by stability (due to a temperature inversion above
the tropopause) and the ozone layer.
thermal infrared The region of the EM spectrum corresponding
to peak thermal emission from objects at terrestrial tempera-
tures, extending from w4 to 15 mm wavelength, used for
remote sensing of several volcanic gases and volcanic
ash/aerosols.
troposphere The lowest, most dynamic layer of Earth’s atmosphere,
containing 99% of its water vapor and extending to altitudes of up
to 20 km ASL in the tropics, or 7 km ASL in polar regions. The
top of the troposphere is the tropopause.
ultraviolet The region of the EM spectrum whose major source is
solar radiation, extending from w10 to 400 nm wavelength, the

The Encyclopedia of Volcanoes. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-385938-9.00065-1 1125

Copyright Ó 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
1126
300e400 nm band of which is used for remote sensing of sulfur
dioxide (SO2), ozone, and reactive halogens.
volcanic cloud A discrete body of volcanic gases and particles
drifting in the atmosphere.
volcanic degassing The separation or release of volcanic gases from
their magma source, preceded by exsolution of volatile species to
form bubbles. Often classified as passive (quiescent) or eruptive/
explosive.
volcanic plume A cloud of gases and particles entrained by the
prevailing wind but still attached to the volcanic vent at its source.
1. INTRODUCTION
Eruptions are relatively rare in the life cycle of most vol-
canoes. At any given time, most subaerial volcanic activity
occurring on Earth consists of persistent, passive emissions
of gases and aerosols, either in the form of focused gas
plumes from summit vents (e.g., Mt Etna, Italy) or as
diffuse emissions from fumaroles and volcano flanks
(e.g., Vulcano, Italy), and thermal features associated with
the heat transported to the surface from depth by the
emitted gases. The ultimate origin of many volatile species
in volcanic gas emissions, and surface geothermal mani-
festations, is magma stored at depth beneath volcanoes, and
volcanic emissions provide the only direct chemical link to
subsurface magma that could fuel eruptions. Volcanic gas,
plume, and thermal monitoring is therefore one of the
linchpins of the tripartite approach to volcano surveillance
that typically also includes seismic and geodetic moni-
toring, with the overarching goal of forecasting volcanic
eruptions. Furthermore, significant amounts of current
volcanological research are devoted to measuring, inter-
preting, and understanding the origins of temporal trends in
volcanic gas and heat emissions, and to developing new
tools to quantify volcanic gas and heat fluxes (e.g., Kern
et al., 2010a; Harris, 2013).
In addition to the relatively benign or “passive” releases
of volcanic gases described above, monitoring of volcanic
clouds and plumes is also crucial during eruptions
(e.g., Surono et al., 2012). The large quantities of volcanic
gases and aerosols (e.g., volcanic ash) discharged during
major explosive eruptions can have significant effects on
climate (e.g., the 1815 Tambora eruption), Earth’s atmo-
sphere, the natural and built environment, and the health of
humans and other living organisms. Airborne volcanic ash
is also a major hazard to jet aircraft, and accurate tracking
of drifting volcanic ash clouds is essential for aviation
safety (see Chapter 52). Remote sensing of volcanic gases
and ash from the synoptic perspective of Earth-orbiting
satellites plays a key role in these efforts.
This chapter summarizes the state-of-the-art in volcanic
gas, plume, and thermal monitoring, describing the sig-
nificant advances in this field that have occurred in the past
decade. We focus on remote sensing from various platforms
PART | VIII Eruption Response and Mitigation
(ground based, airborne, and space-borne), since the vast
majority of volcanic gas, plume, and thermal monitoring
employs this technique. Although the theoretical principles
of remote sensing remain essentially unchanged, the
available technology and instrumentation for volcano
remote sensing, and available computational resources for
data processing and dissemination, have advanced greatly
in recent years, permitting significant advances in mea-
surement automation and sensitivity, instrument portability
and data availability.
2. GAS MEASUREMENTS AND
MONITORING
2.1. Principles
The key role of volatiles in driving volcanic activity has
been appreciated since the early days of volcanology. At
the great depths (i.e., pressures) of basaltic magma gener-
ation in the mantle, volatile species such as water (H2O),
carbon dioxide (CO2), and sulfur species (sulfur dioxide,
SO2 and hydrogen sulfide, H2S) are completely dissolved in
the melt. As magmas ascend to lower pressures, volatile
solubility tends to decrease and volatiles begin to exsolve
from the melt and form bubbles, thus initiating the process
of magma degassing and lowering bulk magma density.
In low-viscosity basaltic magmas these bubbles, being less
dense than the surrounding melt, will typically rise relative
to the melt and may escape continuously to the surface
through fracture networks in the crust and/or the magma
column itself, or they may become trapped at some inter-
mediate depth. If the gases escape to the surface, their
detection and measurement, and variations over time, may
represent an eruption precursor and provide indications of
the quantity, composition, and storage conditions (pressure,
temperature) of magma stored at depth. Gas release in a
more sporadic, explosive manner in the form of rising gas
pockets or slugs drives the classic Strombolian activity
observed at many basaltic volcanoes (e.g., Stromboli,
Italy).
In higher viscosity, silicic magmas, exsolved bubbles
may be unable to separate from the melt, or may do so
much more slowly. In such cases there may be little or no
precursory release of gas prior to an eruption. As the bubble
population increases, magma density decreases and this
drives magma ascent toward the surface. At sufficiently
high bubble fractions, the magma may fragment into a low-
density mixture of gas and melt fragments (e.g., ash and
pumice) and accelerate rapidly upward as an explosive
volcanic eruption plume (or plinian eruption), instanta-
neously releasing large quantities of volcanic gas. Alter-
natively, if gas loss is permitted (e.g., through permeable
networks of bubbles or via collapse of bubble-rich foams),
the resulting degassed melt may erupt nonexplosively in an
Chapter | 65 Gas, Plume, and Thermal Monitoring
effusive eruption and form a lava dome or flow. Since
volatile loss (particularly dewatering) impacts magma
rheology by increasing melt viscosity (by increasing melt
polymerization and undercooling), which in turn impedes
subsequent degassing, there can be complex feedbacks
between degassing and magma ascent on various time-
scales. Monitoring volcanic gas emissions with high tem-
poral resolution (e.g., hourly and daily) can assist efforts to
recognize these processes and thus contributes to volcanic
hazard assessment.
While their relative proportions depend on tectonic
setting and magma composition, the major volatile species
comprising volcanic gases are invariably H2O, CO2, sulfur
species (SO2, H2S), and halogen species such as hydrogen
chloride (HCl) and hydrogen fluoride (HF). In addition,
volcanic gases contain many other minor and trace com-
ponents, such as hydrogen (H2), nitrogen (N2), the noble
gases helium (He) and argon (Ar), and trace metals (lead,
zinc, gold). The abundances or isotopic ratios of some of
these components (e.g., He) can be characteristic of the
volatile source region (e.g., crust vs. mantle), and therefore
of considerable diagnostic value. Although the details vary
and are beyond the scope of this chapter, CO2 is typically
the least soluble volatile species in magma, SO2 has in-
termediate solubility, and water and the halogen species
(HCl, HF) are the most soluble. Among the sulfur species,
H2S is associated with higher pressures (i.e., greater depths)
and lower temperatures than SO2, and thus the former
(recognized by its characteristic “rotten egg” odor) is the
dominant sulfurous gas in fumarolic emissions at dormant
volcanoes. SO2, on the other hand, is thermodynamically
favored in high-temperature magmatic gases at low pres-
sures, and thus predominates in eruptive gases and emis-
sions sourced from shallow magma reservoirs. For this
reason, and because it is the easiest gas to measure using
remote sensing techniques (see below), most volcanic gas
monitoring is focused on SO2.
Another important attribute of volatile species is their
reactivity; the species that form strong acids (e.g., SO2,
HCl, and HF) are more water-soluble and susceptible to
dissolution in hydrothermal fluids or groundwater
(e.g., hydrolysis), whereas other volatile species (e.g., CO2,
H2S, and noble gases) are more inert. Measurements of the
latter are particularly important at “wet” volcanoes with
extensive hydrothermal systems, ground- or surface water,
for example tropical or glaciated volcanoes, volcanoes
hosting crater lakes, or volcanic systems awakening after
an extended period of dormancy. The depletion of
magmatic volatiles prior to emission via dissolution,
gasewater or gasewatererock reactions (forming pre-
cipitates) within the volcanic edifice is generally referred to
as “scrubbing.” SO2 is particularly prone to hydrolysis and
disproportionation to sulfide (H2S), sulfur (S), or sulfate
(H2SO4), and hence SO2 degassed from magma at depth
1127
will only reach the surface if a dry pathway is established.
Prior to this, volatile species such as CO2 and H2S (along
with H2O of both magmatic and hydrothermal origin) may
dominate in volcanic emissions. Thus, monitoring of mul-
tiple volatile species (e.g., CO2, SO2, H2S, HCl, and HF)
and their ratios is deemed more useful than surveillance of
a single species for prognostic purposes, particularly at
reawakening volcanoes.
Apart from scrubbing, the other major factor that
determines whether volatiles degassed from magma will
reach the surface is permeability. Volatiles may migrate
upward through the magma column as bubbles, or through
fractures in the surrounding crust and volcanic edifice.
Broadly speaking, volcanic degassing regimes may be
characterized as open-system, where permeability is high
and most exsolved volatiles can freely escape to the
surface, or closed-system, where gas loss is impeded
(e.g., due to high melt viscosity or fracture sealing by
precipitates). In the latter case, high gas pressures may
develop, possibly triggering an explosive release of trap-
ped gas or an eruption. Transitions between open- and
closed-system degassing may be recognized by moni-
toring volcanic gas emission rates in conjunction with
other geophysical data (e.g., seismic data; Carn et al.,
2008).
Once released into the atmosphere as a volcanic
plume, the fate of volcanic gases is species-dependent.
The complex atmospheric chemistry of volcanic plumes
is a major focus of current research. Understanding the
depletion rates of volcanic gases is critical for accurate
interpretation of remote sensing data collected at varying
distances downwind of the emission source. Depletion of
volcanic gases can occur by dissolution in condensed
water (SO2 and HCl are particularly soluble) and wet
deposition, via gaseor aqueous-phase oxidation (e.g., SO2
is oxidized to sulfate) and conversion to aerosol, or via dry
deposition in grounded plumes. Reactive halogen species
(BrO, ClO) can be generated in volcanic plumes from
primary halogen species (e.g., HBr) via photochemical
halogen-catalyzed ozone depletion reactions. Conversion
of volcanic SO2 to sulfate aerosol, which has significant
effects on shortwave (UVevisible) and long-wave (IR)
radiation and hence can impact climate, is the most
important and well-understood atmospheric effect of
volcanic emissions (see Chapter 53). However, in the
current era of climate change and rising anthropogenic
CO2 emissions there is a renewed interest in the relative
magnitude of volcanic CO2 emissions, which are poorly
constrained on a global scale. As discussed below, vol-
canic CO2 is challenging to measure using remote sensing,
but CO2 does have the advantage of being relatively inert
and hence immune to the processes that can deplete other
volatile species in volcanic gases, either prior to or after
emission.
1128
2.2. Direct/In situ Sampling of Volcanic
Gases
2.2.1. High-Temperature Fumarolic Discharges
from Active Craters
Direct, in situ sampling of volcanic gases at the point of
emission remains the only technique capable of providing
the complete chemical and isotopic composition of volca-
nic gases (after laboratory analysis of the collected sam-
ples). Gases are most commonly collected by inserting a
titanium or glass tube into a fumarole and bubbling the
gases through an evacuated bottle of alkali solution
(NaOH), which absorbs the acidic gases and allows other
species to collect in the headspace (the “Giggenbach bot-
tle” technique). The value of volcanic gas samples gener-
ally correlates with gas emission temperature, since hotter
emanations will be more representative of magmatic gases
and less contaminated by air or hydrothermal system
interaction. The desire to sample the hottest and most
highly pressurized fumaroles within active craters renders
direct gas sampling inherently hazardous. Another draw-
back is the typically low temporal resolution of such
measurements, particularly at more active volcanoes or
those with less accessible craters and fumaroles. Further-
more, the most abundant volcanic gas, H2O, can be difficult
to quantify due to condensation in the collection tube. For
further information on the collection and measurement of
volcanic gases via direct sampling, the reader is referred to
Chapter 45 on “Volcanic Gases.”
2.2.2. In situ Measurements of Volcanic Plumes
Recent improvements in sensor technology have stimu-
lated the development of portable sensor packages capable
of measuring concentrations of multiple gas species in
volcanic plumes (H2O, CO2, SO2, H2S, HCl, HF, and H2),
commonly termed Multi-gas sensors (e.g., Aiuppa et al.,
2007). These can be deployed on crater rims to sample
young volcanic plumes as they begin to drift downwind,
permitting monitoring of gas ratios with high temporal
resolution. In situ measurements are advantageous since
they yield actual mixing ratios (e.g., in parts per million or
ppm) of volatile species in volcanic plumes, which are
often difficult to obtain from remote sensing data unless
the physical dimensions of the plume are known (see
below).
Multi-gas packages typically incorporate a combina-
tion of nondispersive infrared (NDIR) spectrometers (for
CO2, CO, and H2O measurement), electrochemical sensors
(for SO2, H2S, HCl, and HF), and semiconductor sensors
(for H2). Quantification of H2O is most challenging since
volcanogenic water must be distinguished from the large
background atmospheric water vapor abundance, and
it can only be measured in the vapor phase, whereas
PART | VIII Eruption Response and Mitigation
volcanic plumes invariably begin to condense immediately
upon emission. Cross-sensitivity to various gas species can
also be an issue with some detectors. The inevitable
degradation of sensors in the acidic environment of a
volcanic plume may also preclude long-term autonomous
deployments.
Figure 65.1 shows an example of real-time multi-gas
observations of H2O, CO2, and SO2 applied to the fore-
casting of eruptions at Etna volcano (Aiuppa et al., 2007).
The transition from normal, quiescent degassing behavior
to explosive activity is presaged by an increase in the CO2/
SO2 ratio, which is interpreted as the result of replenish-
ment of the volcanic plumbing system with CO2-rich
magma rising from depth.
In situ measurements of volcanic plumes can also be
made by mounting sensors on piloted aircraft, unmanned
aerial vehicles (UAVs), balloons, or kites and penetrating
the airborne gas plume aloft. In addition to gas mixing
ratios, emission rates of SO2, CO2, and H2S can also be
derived from airborne in situ measurements by flying gas
sensors in a ladder traverse across a volcanic plume. The
resulting data are interpolated to produce a gas concentra-
tion map, which is then integrated over the plume cross-
sectional area and multiplied by wind speed to yield gas
flux. Data collection typically takes at least w1 h and
therefore stable wind conditions are required in order to
avoid errors in the flux calculation, but in ideal conditions
such techniques are complementary to, and perhaps more
accurate than, flux calculations derived from remote
sensing data.
Recently, several attempts have been made at in situ
volcanic plume measurements conducted from UAVs
(e.g., McGonigle et al., 2008), and this is likely to
become more widespread in the future. The use of UAVs
for volcano monitoring is becoming more attractive due
to the significantly reduced cost and risk, as well as
increased accessibility with lightweight, portable, low-
cost UAVs now available, including relatively stable
heli-, quad, or octo-copters. However, UAVs often require
experienced pilots, can be difficult to control in windy
conditions, and although becoming more affordable are
not yet truly expendable. Furthermore, widespread
adoption of UAVs (or unmanned aircraft systems, UAS)
for volcano surveillance is likely to depend on regula-
tions for their integration into national airspace shared
with manned aircraft, which will vary between nations.
At the extreme end of the UAV spectrum are platforms
such as NASA’s Global Hawk, which has a range of
11,000 nautical miles, a 32 h flight time, and can carry a
1500-pound payload, and could potentially be used to
intercept and sample drifting volcanic clouds in remote
regions. Such in situ airborne measurements are valuable
for validation of satellite remote sensing retrievals of
volcanic gases.
Chapter | 65 Gas, Plume, and Thermal Monitoring 1129

FIGURE 65.1 (A) Time evolution of CO2/SO2 molar ratios in Etna’s central crater plume, measured by in situ multi-gas sensors. Right axis shows
estimated pressures (in MPa) evaluated by combining volcanic gas data with model results. Timing of 2004e2005 and 2006 eruptions are also shown.
(B) Detail of JuneeJuly 2006 period. Gray dots refer to composition of plume released at eruptive vent (right scale). LTdlocal time. (C) Detail of the
OctobereNovember 2006 period. Dark gray bars indicate timing of Strombolian events 2e9 that occurred at southeast summit crater (SEC). Reprinted
from Aiuppa, A., Moretti, R., Federico, C., Giudice, G., Gurrieri, S., Liuzzo, M., Papale, P., Shinohara, H. and Valenza, M., 2007. Forecasting Etna
eruptions by real-time observation of volcanic gas composition. Geology. 35 1115e1118, doi:10.1130/G24149A.1. Copyright 2007, with permission from
Geological Society of America.

immunity to assumptions about soil characteristics or the

2.2.3. Soil Gas (CO2 Emissions)
In addition to the conspicuous, focused volcanic emissions
from summit crater plumes and fumaroles, volcanoes also
release significant amounts of gas (particularly CO2)
through their flanks in the form of diffuse or soil gas
emissions. Since soil gases must traverse considerable
thicknesses of crust after release from magma reservoirs at
depth, they are dominated by inert gases that are not
scrubbed by groundwater, such as CO2 and noble gases
(He, Rn). The global volcanic flux of diffuse CO2 is poorly
constrained but believed to be quite significant: perhaps
w25% of the total global subaerial volcanic CO2 flux from
passive crater degassing, diffuse degassing, and volcanic
lakes (Burton et al., 2013).
Several techniques have been used to quantify diffuse
CO2 emissions. Direct methods include the accumulation
chamber (or closed-chamber) method and eddy covariance
or alternately eddy correlation (EC). The static accumula-
tion chamber method, originally used in agriculture to
determine soil respiration, was adapted to measure volca-
nogenic soil CO2 emissions. An open-bottomed chamber of
known volume is inverted on the surface and the increase in
CO2 concentration is measured; the initial rate of change of
the concentration is proportional to the CO2 flux. Advan-
tages of the accumulation chamber method include
flux regime (e.g., advective/diffusive). The main challenge
with such localized measurements is extrapolation to an
entire volcanic edifice, with the usual approach involving
multiple measurements to achieve a representative map-
ping of CO2 flux, followed by estimation of the total CO2
release using interpolation algorithms. Floating accumu-
lation chambers have also been deployed on volcanic lakes
to determine CO2 fluxes.
More recently, the micrometeorological eddy covari-
ance technique has been tested as a method to monitor
diffuse volcanic CO2 emissions. EC derives the CO2 flux at
the surface from the covariance between fluctuations of the
vertical component of the wind and the fluctuations of the
atmospheric CO2 concentration. The EC provides advan-
tage of being an automated, time-averaged, and area-
integrated technique with a spatial scale significantly
larger (square meter to square kilometer) than that of the
accumulation chamber method. However, volcanic envi-
ronments may be too heterogeneous for EC application in
terms of the spatial and temporal variability of surface
fluxes and surface morphology.
Diffuse CO2 degassing measurements require careful
interpretation since CO2 fluxes are influenced by surface
soil permeability and atmospheric pressure changes that
can mask signals from deeper magma reservoir or conduit
1130
degassing. Soil gas permeability is dependent on soil
moisture content; hence, tropical volcanoes are particularly
susceptible.
2.3. Remote Sensing Measurements
of Volcanic Gases
The use of remote sensing to measure volcanic emissions
offers several advantages over direct sampling and in situ
measurements. Remote sensing is less hazardous, as data
can be collected from relatively safe distances, and data
can also be collected more rapidly, more frequently, and
over larger areas (e.g., an entire volcanic plume) than is
achievable with direct sampling. The principal drawbacks
of remote sensing are the limited range of volcanic vol-
atile species that can be reliably quantified, and that the
technique yields integrated (or “column”) amounts of
gases along the optical path between the sensor and the
source of EM radiation (i.e., gas mixing ratios cannot be
determined unless the plume thickness is known). To be
measurable by passive remote sensing, utilizing a nat-
ural source of electromagnetic (EM) radiation (e.g., the
Sun, skylight, or heat from an active volcanic vent), a
volatile species must satisfy several criteria: it must
absorb EM radiation in a waveband that provides
adequate signal at the Earth’s surface (usually in an
atmospheric window with high transmittance), it must
be present in significant concentrations in the volcanic
plume (i.e., above detection limits), and its abundance in
the ambient atmosphere surrounding the plume must be
low (or ideally, zero). The two most commonly exploited
wavebands for passive remote sensing of volcanic gases
are the ultraviolet (UV) band (wavelengths of w0.3e0.4
mm; Figure 65.2) and the infrared (IR) band (wavelengths
of w2e10 mm; Figure 65.2).
The only major component of volcanic plumes that
usually satisfies the above criteria is SO2, which has strong
absorption bands in the UV (at w310e340 nm;
Figure 65.2) and IR (at w4, w7.3 and w8.6 mm;
Figure 65.2), and low ambient concentrations away from
pollution sources (e.g., power plants and metal smelters).
Minor volatiles quantifiable by passive remote sensing
include CO, HCl, HF, halogen oxides (bromine monoxide
(BrO), chlorine monoxide [ClO], and chlorine dioxide
(OClO)), carbonyl sulfide (OCS), and nitrogen dioxide
(NO2). Notably, the most abundant volcanic gases (H2O
and CO2) are notoriously difficult to measure by remote
sensing due to their high atmospheric abundance
(w1e4 vol% and w400 ppmv (parts per million by vol-
ume), respectively), although this problem can be sur-
mounted by maximizing concentrations of volcanic gases
in the optical path, or via active remote sensing using an
artificial source of EM radiation. The latter technique has
also been used to measure volcanic H2S emissions, using a
PART | VIII Eruption Response and Mitigation
deuterium UV lamp to supply a source of the short-
wavelength UV radiation (0.2e0.25 mm) where H2S ab-
sorbs. Active sensing techniques can be used to artificially
extend the optical path and detect volatile species present in
very low concentrations (e.g., OClO).
Passive UV remote sensing typically uses scattered
sunlight as the source of EM radiation, restricting the
technique to daylight hours, ideally under relatively cloud-
free conditions and low solar zenith angles (around local
noon). It is often assumed that the solar UV radiation, after
scattering by air molecules, follows a direct (i.e., straight)
path through the volcanic plume. However, determination
of the actual UV optical path can be highly complex when
using a scattered light source due to multiple scattering of
UV radiation by air molecules and aerosols (e.g., clouds)
either outside or within the volcanic plume. This can be a
major source of error in UV remotely sensed measurements
of volcanic gases. Direct sun measurements, made by
pointing the sensor at the Sun, are also possible in the UV
and circumvent the optical path problem since the path can
be deduced straightforwardly from geometric principles.
Path-length issues are generally negligible in IR remote
sensing of volcanic gases due to less significant scattering
at the longer IR wavelengths.
2.3.1. Ground-Based and Airborne Gas
Measurements
There have been significant advances in remote sensing
technology since the adoption of the UV correlation spec-
trometer (COSPEC) for ground-based SO2 measurements
in the late 1960s. The COSPEC is a bulky, analog “black
box” instrument that provides accurate SO2 measurements
under certain conditions but provides scant opportunity for
data reprocessing or evaluation of radiative transfer effects
on the measurements. In the past decade, the COSPEC has
been largely superseded by compact fiber-optic UV spec-
trometers that record continuous spectra at high spectral
resolution in the UV wavelength range (Galle et al., 2003).
These spectrometers can be deployed in exactly the same
configurations as the COSPEC: by traversing beneath a
volcanic plume by road, sea, or air to obtain a plume cross-
section, or by scanning the sensor field of view (FOV)
through a plume horizontally or vertically from a stationary
position. However, the significant reduction in physical
size, cost, and power consumption of miniature UV spec-
trometers relative to a COSPEC has also permitted novel
applications such as walking traverses (using a helmet-
mounted spectrometer), UAV deployment, and automated
scanning spectrometer networks (e.g., to ensure that vol-
canic plumes can be measured autonomously under mul-
tiple wind direction regimes). Dual-beam and dual-FOV
spectrometer configurations have also been developed in
a bid to reduce the largest source of error in SO2 flux
Chapter | 65 Gas, Plume, and Thermal Monitoring 1131

FIGURE 65.2 The electromagnetic spectrum

showing regions where remote sensing of gases
and particles is possible, and typical levels of
atmospheric transmission (black line). Top
panel: Ultraviolet (UV), visible, and near
infrared (NIR) part of the spectrum indicating
regions where gases absorb and the locations of
the bands used by various satellite instruments
(Table 65.1). The region between 280 and
340 nm (0.28 and 0.34 mm) is used by several
satellite instruments to measure volcanic SO2.
Middle panel: The middle infrared part of the
spectrum. Water vapor and CO2 have major
absorption bands, but there are gaps where
remote sensing of the surface to detect volcanic
hot-spots is possible. Thermal alerts generated
by satellites are useful early indicators of vol-
canic unrest. Bottom panel: The TIR part of the
spectrum from w5e20 mm wavelength. There
are important absorption bands of SO2 in this
region that are routinely used to measure this
gas. This is also the principal region used to
measure ash particles in the atmosphere.
Figure courtesy of Fred Prata, NILU.
1132
measurements, which is invariably the determination of
plume speed (usually assumed to equal the wind speed at
plume altitude). In turn, these developments have stimu-
lated the deployment of autonomous spectrometer net-
works at a greater number of degassing volcanoes (e.g., the
Network for Observation of Volcanic and Atmospheric
Change or NOVAC project (Galle et al., 2010)) and are
improving our knowledge of global volcanic SO2 emission
rates.
Reduction of UV spectrometer data typically utilizes
the differential optical absorption spectroscopy (DOAS)
technique, widely used in the atmospheric science com-
munity, and capable of retrieving path amounts of SO2,
BrO, ClO, OClO, and NO2 from UVevisible spectra of
volcanic plumes. DOAS exploits the characteristic narrow-
band UVevisible absorption structures of trace gas mole-
cules, and hence requires measurements at high spectral
resolution. Retrievals can be performed in real-time
using current laptop computers, and collected spectra can
be archived and reprocessed using improved retrieval
algorithms. Corrections for radiative transfer effects
(e.g., multiple scattering) can also be implemented using
DOAS measurements, improving the accuracy of volcanic
SO2 retrievals (e.g., Kern et al., 2010b).
UV spectrometers are also deployed on aircraft to
measure SO2, although the cost of aircraft time usually
prohibits routine airborne plume surveillance, except in
remote regions where it may be the only option. Airborne
plume traverse measurements of SO2 with UV spectrom-
eters can also be combined with in situ measurements
(e.g., CO2 and H2S) to derive fluxes of other volcanic gases.
Currently, this technique is probably the most robust for
measuring volcanic CO2 fluxes (which cannot be readily
quantified using remote sensing techniques), since airborne
SO2 measurements have the advantage of proximity to the
volcanic plume, minimizing the effect of light dilution
between the plume and the instrument. Airborne mea-
surements of volcanic CO2 emissions from Kilauea have
also been achieved by measuring IR transmission through
the volcanic plume with the AVIRIS hyperspectral
radiometer.
2.3.2. UV Imaging Cameras
A more recent development in UV volcanic plume remote
sensing has been the adoption of UV imaging cameras for
SO2 measurements. Although the concept of volcanic
plume imaging was first posited some time ago, only
recently has appropriate UV imaging hardware become
readily available. Originally designed for astronomical
observations, commercially available UV cameras utilize
charge-coupled devices (CCDs) that provide sensitivity at
UV wavelengths where SO2 absorbs radiation. The
advantage over conventional UV DOAS techniques is that
PART | VIII Eruption Response and Mitigation
UV cameras provide two-dimensional images of volcanic
plumes, and when collected at high temporal resolution
(
1 Hz is typical) such imagery can be used to visualize
plume dynamics and obtain plume speed information,
which is required for SO2 emission rate calculations. Hence
SO2 emission rates can be measured at high temporal
resolution, permitting correlation with other geophysical
data such as seismic or infrasound measurements
(e.g., Figure 65.3).
Disadvantages of UV cameras are that they have low
spectral resolution, since wavelengths must be selected
using relatively broadband filters that cannot resolve the
detailed spectral variation of the SO2 absorption cross-
section. This also necessitates calibration, either using
SO2 gas cells of known concentration or using independent
spectral information from a co-aligned UV spectrometer.
Hybrid techniques such as Imaging-DOAS (I-DOAS)
circumvent the calibration issue by physically scanning one
row of a 2D CCD array across an FOV to form an image
(with one CCD dimension acquiring spectral information
while the other acquires vertical spatial information), per-
forming a DOAS trace gas retrieval for each scan incre-
ment, at the expense of temporal resolution. Despite the
disadvantages of UV cameras, the potential insights into
plume dynamics and volcanic conduit processes (such as
gas accumulation and release) provided by UV cameras,
and their increasing affordability, have stimulated major
interest in these instruments among the volcano remote
sensing community.
UV camera technology for volcanological applications
continues to improve, with more sensitive back-thinned
CCDs now available that increase the signal-to-noise in
UV camera imagery, along with systems lacking mechan-
ical shutters with higher frame rates and longer lifetimes.
Calibration using a co-aligned spectrometer is likely to
remain the best approach for SO2 retrieval from UV camera
imagery, due to the limitations on filter bandwidths and the
trade-off between spectral resolution and signal-to-noise
(narrower filter bandwidth reduces the number of photons
transmitted). These advances render UV cameras more
suitable for long-term autonomous operation, and many
volcano observatories will likely incorporate UV cameras
into their monitoring networks over the coming decade to
measure SO2 emissions.
2.3.3. IR Spectroscopy
Although UV spectroscopy is more commonly used for
remote sensing of volcanic plumes, IR spectroscopy offers
several key advantages. It can be used by day or night, and
many volcanoes inherently provide a strong, natural source
of IR radiation (e.g., a hot vent, lava lake, or lava flow) that
can be exploited for measurements. Nonvolcanic natural
sources of IR radiation, such as direct solar radiation from
Chapter | 65 Gas, Plume, and Thermal Monitoring 1133

FIGURE 65.3 (A) Ultraviolet (UV) camera imagery of variable gas emissions from two vents at Fuego volcano, Guatemala, prior to an explosion. Times
are UTC on 21 January 2009; (B) Example of an ash-rich explosion plume (w450 m in height above summit); (C) UV camera SO2 emission rates from
Fuego on 21 January 2009 (circles) and low-frequency 10 s average seismic amplitude (RSAM; black line). Note the strong correlation between these
high-frequency datasets, with a slight temporal offset between them (x-axes are offset by 32 s to compensate for overall lag). From Nadeau et al. (2011).

the Sun or reflected solar radiation from clouds or the
Moon, or artificial sources (e.g., an IR lamp), can also be
used. The Fourier-Transform IR (FTIR) spectroscopy
technique permits simultaneous measurement of several
important volcanic gas species, including H2O, CO2, SO2,
HCl, and HF, providing valuable constraints on gas ratios,
which can be diagnostic of the pressure (i.e., depth) of
origin of volcanic gases (e.g., Allard et al., 2005;
Figure 65.4). The usual requirement for FTIR measure-
ments is that the volcanic gas be at a lower temperature than
the source of background IR radiation, so that gas abun-
dance can be determined using principles of absorption
spectroscopy, which is always the case for solar occultation
FTIR measurements. Since volcanic gases cool rapidly to
sub-magmatic temperatures upon emission, these condi-
tions are also usually satisfied when observing gas emis-
sions against a background of lava lakes (e.g., Figure 65.4),
lava fountains, or hot vents. Alternatively, an artificial
source of IR radiation such as an IR lamp can be employed
in active-mode FTIR spectroscopy. Volcanic gases can also
be observed in emission, e.g., against a cloudy or clear-sky
background at a lower temperature, although in these cases
absolute radiometric calibration of the FTIR using a
blackbody radiation source is essential.
Although FTIR spectrometers may never be as compact
as fiber-optic UV spectrometers, reasonably rugged
and portable FTIR instruments are available for field
deployment at volcanoes, with thermoelectric or Stirling-
cycle detector cooling available to avoid the use of liquid
nitrogen. Most existing FTIR volcanic gas data have been
collected during short field campaigns at degassing vol-
canoes. However, in 2008 a remote-controlled FTIR in-
strument was installed at the summit of Stromboli volcano
(Italy), to permit more frequent measurements of volcanic
gas ratios (e.g., SO2/CO2 and SO2/HCl) in emissions from
individual vents on the volcano’s crater terrace. Measure-
ments have shown systematic increases in CO2/SO2 ratios
prior to major explosions at Stromboli, and are thus valu-
able for hazard assessment. Imaging FTIR instruments,
which collect both spectral and spatial information, are also
available but remain prohibitively expensive for most vol-
cano monitoring applications, although their use may in-
crease in the future.
2.4. Satellite Remote Sensing of Volcanic
Gases and Aerosols
The first satellite measurements of SO2 emitted by explo-
sive volcanic eruptions, made by the Total Ozone Mapping
Spectrometer (TOMS) instrument in the 1970s, provided a
new perspective on volcanic degassing. The large quantities
of SO2 released in some cases, such as the w20 Tg
measured after the 1991 eruption of Pinatubo (Philippines),
1134 PART | VIII Eruption Response and Mitigation

FIGURE 65.4 Top: Fourier-Transform infrared (FTIR) spectrometer measurements at Nyiragongo volcano (DR Congo) in June 2007. The active lava
lake in the central pit crater, at magmatic temperatures, acts as the source of infrared radiation for the FTIR spectrometer (white box in foreground).
Volcanic gases cool rapidly to near-ambient temperatures upon emission, permitting measurement via infrared absorption spectroscopy. Bottom: Tem-
poral evolution of volcanic gas amounts and ratios measured by FTIR during and after the 14 June 2000 lava fountain at Etna (Sicily). Upper plot shows a
time series of measured path amounts of volcanic gases (left-hand log scale), together with volcanic tremor amplitude (right-hand scale, RD indicates
reduced displacement, in cm2) as an indicator of eruption intensity. Lower plot shows the evolution of SO2/HCl and HCl/HF ratios (left-hand scale) during
and after the fountaining, and evolution of the radiating source temperature retrieved from FTIR spectra (right-hand scale). Note the higher SO2/HCl ratio
during the fountaining phase, indicative of a deeper gas source. Left and center dashed lines indicate the onset of bursts of lava overflowing the upper south
crater rim; right dashed line indicates end of explosive activity. From Allard et al. (2005).
Chapter | 65 Gas, Plume, and Thermal Monitoring
often vastly exceeded petrological estimates of degassing
and spawned new research into the origin of this “excess
sulfur.” Space-borne SO2 measurements also facilitated
more quantitative studies of the effects of volcanic emis-
sions on the Earth’s atmosphere and climate, the latter of
which are largely due to sulfate aerosol derived from SO2.
Satellite sensors remain the only viable means to detect and
monitor emissions from remote or unmonitored volcanoes,
or from volcanoes in eruption that are too hazardous for
ground-based or airborne surveillance. Over the past two
decades, satellite remote sensing has evolved from a tool
used exclusively to study large volcanic eruptions to one
that can also be used to monitor passive volcanic degassing
of SO2 and small eruptions, and thus plays a greater role in
routine volcano monitoring (e.g., Carn et al., 2013). The
increased sensitivity to volcanic SO2 is the result of im-
provements in the spectral and spatial resolution of
satellite instruments.
2.4.1. Ultraviolet Measurements of Volcanic
Gases
Like suborbital UV remote sensing, satellite UV mea-
surements use scattered sunlight as a radiation source and
are predominantly used to measure volcanic SO2, but the
reactive halogen species BrO and OClO have also been
detected in volcanic clouds after some large eruptions
(e.g., Kasatochi in 2008 and Puyehue-Cordón Caulle in
2011; Theys et al., 2014). Since solar UV radiation at
longer wavelengths (>0.31e0.32 mm) is not absorbed by
O2 and O3 in the upper atmosphere, it is transmitted to
Earth’s surface, providing sensitivity to volcanic SO2 at low
altitudes (i.e., passive degassing) in the absence of thick
overlying meteorological clouds. The increase in atmo-
spheric transmission of UV radiation with wavelength has
also been exploited to retrieve the altitude of volcanic SO2
directly from UV satellite measurements, rather than
inferring cloud height indirectly (e.g., by comparing cloud
drift with winds aloft). Constraining SO2 altitude is crucial
for climate modeling and aviation hazard mitigation.
Four UV TOMS missions provided a near-continuous,
long-term record of volcanic SO2 emissions from major
eruptions between 1978 and 2005. There are currently three
operational, polar-orbiting UV satellite sensors continuing
this long-term record: the Ozone Monitoring Instrument
(OMI) on NASA’s Aura satellite, the Global Ozone
Monitoring Experiment 2 (GOME-2) on MetOp-A/B, and
the Ozone Mapping and Profiler Suite (OMPS) aboard
Suomi-NPP (Table 65.1). OMI, GOME-2, and OMPS are
hyperspectral instruments, providing higher spectral (and
in the case of OMI, spatial) resolution than the multi-
spectral TOMS. This allows OMI, GOME-2, and OMPS to
detect lower tropospheric volcanic SO2 plumes released by
passive degassing (e.g., Figure 65.5), in addition to
1135
volcanic SO2 clouds in the upper troposphere and lower
stratosphere (UTLS; e.g., Figure 65.6; also see related
multimedia content), and hence quantify volcanic SO2
emissions on a broader scale than was previously possible.
Although reconciling ground-based and satellite measure-
ments of volcanic SO2 emissions has proved challenging
at some volcanoes (likely due to the significant spatial
averaging of volcanic plumes in satellite observations),
these measurements are providing improved constraints on
the spatial and temporal variability of volcanic degassing
(e.g., Carn et al., 2013). They can also be used in
conjunction with other geophysical datasets to gain insight
into volcanic processes, even when ground-based SO2
measurements are unavailable (e.g., Figure 65.7).
UV satellite measurements of volcanic SO2 clouds in
the UTLS are very robust, and sensitive instruments such as
OMI, OMPS, and GOME-2 can detect SO2 emissions from
a wide range of eruption magnitudes. One constraint on
eruption detection is timing: since UV measurements are
daytime only and at specific overpass times (Table 65.1),
nighttime eruptions may not be captured if SO2 discharge is
low and disperses before the following day (but IR sensors
measure at nightdsee below). Some of the largest SO2
releases measured over the past decade have been from
Kasatochi in August 2008 (w2 Tg), Sarychev Peak (Kurile
Islands) in June 2009 (w1 Tg), and Nabro (Eritrea) in June
2011 (w3e5 Tg; Figure 65.6), although the proportion of
SO2 reaching the stratosphere (where it has most impact on
climate) varies between eruptions. The Nabro eruption was
notable as the pattern of atmospheric SO2 dispersion after
the initial injection led to suggestions that the Asian
Monsoon anticyclonic circulation played a role in lofting
the gas into the stratosphere, rather than direct injection
above the volcanic vent, although the relative significance
of these processes remains unclear. However, it does
highlight other potential pathways for tropospheric volca-
nic SO2 to enter the stratosphere and impact climate. In
addition to these relatively large SO2 emissions (although
none approach the 1991 Pinatubo SO2 loading), there have
been regular injections of w0.1e0.3 Tg SO2 into the UTLS
from smaller eruptions. Recently it has been posited that
these frequent, small injections may play an important role
in maintaining the stratospheric sulfate aerosol layer at
above-background levels, partly offsetting the warming
effects of tropospheric greenhouse gases.
2.4.2. Thermal IR and Microwave Measurements
of Volcanic Gases
Numerous thermal IR (TIR) satellite sensors also have the
capability to measure volcanic SO2 (Table 65.1;
Figure 65.2), including multispectral instruments
(e.g., MODIS, ASTER, SEVIRI, HIRS, and VIIRS) and
hyperspectral sounders (e.g., AIRS, IASI, and CrIS). The
 1136
TABLE 65.1 Currently Operational (June 2014) and Near-Future Satellite Missions with Volcanic Plume/Thermal Monitoring Capabilities

Resolution
Volcanic Features Overpass
Satellite1 Sensor(s)1 Launch Date Monitored2 Time (Local)3 Spatial (nadir)4 Temporal5 Websites6

Polar-orbiting (LEO)
NOAA-15 AVHRR/3 13 May 1998 Hot spots, ash 7:30 am 1 km Daily USGS: http://volcview.wr.usgs.gov/
HIRS/3 UTLS SO2 18 km Daily
Landsat 7 ETMþ 15 Apr 1999 Hot spots 9:45 am 15e60 m 16 days Landsat science: http://landsat.gsfc.nasa.
gov/
NASA Terra MODIS 18 Dec 1999 Hot spots, SO2, 10:30 am 250 me1 km 2  daily MODVOLC: http://modis.higp.hawaii.
ASTER ash, aerosols 15e90 m 16 days edu/
MISR Hot spots, SO2, 250e275 m 9 days AVA: http://ava.jpl.nasa.gov/
MOPITT ash, aerosols 22 km MISR at JPL: http://www-misr.jpl.nasa.gov/
Ash/gas plumes NCAR: https://www2.acd.ucar.edu/mopitt
(altitude)
CO
NASA EO-1 ALI 21 Nov 2000 Hot spots 10:00 am 10e30 m 16 days USGS: http://eo1.usgs.gov/
Hyperion Hot spots 30 m 16 days
NASA Aqua MODIS 4 May 2002 Hot spots, SO2, 1:30 pm 250 me1 km 2  daily MODVOLC: http://modis.higp.hawaii.
AIRS ash, aerosols 13.5 km 2 days edu/
UTLS SO2, ash, SACS: http://sacs.aeronomie.be/nrt/
aerosols

NASA Aura OMI 15 Jul 2004 SO2, BrO, OClO, ash 1:45 pm 13  24 km wDaily NASA: http://so2.gsfc.nasa.gov/
MLS UTLS SO2, HCl, CH3Cl 1.5  3 16 days https://earthdata.nasa.gov/labs/worldview/

PART | VIII
 300 km
NOAA-18 AVHRR/3 20 May 2005 Hot spots, ash 1:30e2:30 pm 1 km Daily USGS: http://volcview.wr.usgs.gov/
HIRS/4 UTLS SO2 10 km Daily
CALIPSO CALIOP 28 Apr 2006 Ash/aerosol cloud 1:31 pm 333 m 16 days http://www-calipso.larc.nasa.gov/
altitude (horizontal)

Eruption Response and Mitigation

CloudSat CPR 28 Apr 2006 Hydrometeors, ash 1:31 pm 1.5 km 16 days http://cloudsat.atmos.colostate.edu/
aggregates
EUMETSAT GOME-2 19 Oct 2006 SO2, BrO, OClO, ash 9:30 am 80  40 km wDaily SACS: http://sacs.aeronomie.be/nrt/
MetOp-A IASI SO2, H2S, CO, ash, 12 km 2  daily http://cpm-ws4.ulb.ac.be/Alerts/index.
AVHRR/3 aerosols 1 km Daily php
HIRS/4 Hot spots, ash 10 km Daily http://www.nsof.class.noaa.gov/
UTLS SO2
NOAA-19 AVHRR/3 6 Feb 2009 Hot spots, ash 1:30e2:30 pm 1 km Daily USGS: http://volcview.wr.usgs.gov/
HIRS/4 UTLS SO2 10 km Daily
 Chapter | 65
NASA/NOAA OMPS 29 Oct 2011 SO2, ash 1:30 pm 50 km Daily NASA: http://so2.gsfc.nasa.gov/
Suomi NPP VIIRS Hot spots, SO2, ash 375e750 m 2  daily http://viirsland.gsfc.nasa.gov/index.html
CrIS UTLS SO2, ash, 14 km Daily http://npp.gsfc.nasa.gov/cris.html
aerosols
EUMETSAT GOME-2 17 Sep 2012 SO2, BrO, OClO, ash 9:30 am 80  40 km wDaily SACS: http://sacs.aeronomie.be/nrt/
MetOp-B IASI SO2, H2S, CO, ash, 12 km 2  daily http://cpm-ws4.ulb.ac.be/Alerts/index.

Gas, Plume, and Thermal Monitoring

AVHRR/3 aerosols 1 km Daily php
HIRS/4 Hot spots, ash 10 km Daily http://www.nsof.class.noaa.gov/
UTLS SO2
Landsat 8 OLI, TIRS 11 Feb 2013 Hot spots, ash 10:00 am 15e100 m 16 days USGS: http://landsat.usgs.gov/landsat8.
php
NASA OCO-2 2 Jul 2014 CO2 1:15 pm 1.3  2.3 km 16 days http://oco.jpl.nasa.gov/
OCO-2
ESA Sentinel-2 MSI 2014 Hot spots 10:30 am 10e60 m 5 days
ESA Sentinel-5 TROPOMI 2015 SO2, BrO, 1:35 pm 7  7 km Daily http://www.tropomi.eu/TROPOMI/Home.
precursor OClO, ash html
Geostationary (GEO)
EUMETSAT MVIRI 9 Feb 1997 Hot spots n/a 2.5e5 km; 30 min
Meteosat-7 57 E
CMA FY-2E S-VISSR 19 Oct 2004 Hot spots, ash n/a 1.25e5 km; 30 min http://www.ssec.wisc.edu/data/geo/
105 E
EUMETSAT SEVIRI 22 Dec 2005 Hot spots, n/a 1e3 km; 9.5 E 5 min http://volcano.ssec.wisc.edu/
Meteosat-9 ash, SO2 http://fred.nilu.no/sat/
HotVolc: http://www.obs.univ-
bpclermont.fr/SO/televolc/hotvolc/HVOS/
JMA MTSAT-2 Himawari-7 18 Feb 2006 Hot spots, ash n/a 1.25e5 km; 30 min http://volcano.ssec.wisc.edu/
145 E
CMA FY-2D S-VISSR 15 Nov 2006 Hot spots, ash n/a 1.25e5 km; 30 min http://www.ssec.wisc.edu/data/geo/
87 E
GOES-14 (E) Imager 27 Jun 2009 Hot spots, ash n/a 1e4 km; 1 min http://volcano.ssec.wisc.edu/
75 W
GOES-15 (W) Imager 4 Mar 2010 Hot spots, ash n/a 1e4 km; 1 min http://volcano.ssec.wisc.edu/
135 W
KMA MI 26 Jun 2010 Hot spots, ash n/a 1e4 km; 10 min http://www.ssec.wisc.edu/data/geo/
COMS-1 128 E

(Continued)

1137
 1138
TABLE 65.1 Currently Operational (June 2014) and Near-Future Satellite Missions with Volcanic Plume/Thermal Monitoring Capabilitiesdcont’d
Resolution
Volcanic Features Overpass
Satellite1 Sensor(s)1 Launch Date Monitored2 Time (Local)3 Spatial (nadir)4 Temporal5 Websites6

CMA FY-2F S-VISSR 13 Jan 2012 Hot spots, ash n/a 1.25e5 km; 30 min
113 E
EUMETSAT SEVIRI 5 Jul 2012 Hot spots, ash, SO2 n/a 1e3 km; 0 15 min http://volcano.ssec.wisc.edu/
Meteosat-10 http://fred.nilu.no/sat/
JMA MTSAT Himawari-8 2014 Hot spots, ash, SO2 n/a 0.5e2 km; 2.5 min http://mscweb.kishou.go.jp/himawari89/
145 E
GOES-R ABI Early 2016 Hot spots, ash, SO2 n/a 0.5e2 km; 30 s http://www.goes-r.gov/
75 /137 W
L1 Lagrange libration point
NOAA DSCOVR EPIC 2015 SO2, ash n/a 8 km; sunlit 90 min http://www.osd.noaa.gov/DSCOVR/
Earth disk dscovr.html
1
Satellite and sensor acronyms: NOAA: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; NASA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration; EO: Earth Observing; CALIPSO: Cloud-Aerosol Lidar and Infrared
Pathfinder Satellite Observations; EUMETSAT: European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites; NPP: National Polar-orbiting Partnership; ESA: European Space Agency; CMA: China Meteorological
Administration; FY: Feng-Yun; JMA: Japan Meteorological Agency; MTSAT: Multi-functional Transport SATellite; GOES: Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite; KMA: Korean Meteorological Administration;
COMS: Communication, Ocean, and Meteorological Satellite; DSCOVR: Deep Space Climate ObserVatoRy; AVHRR: Advanced Very High-Resolution Radiometer; HIRS: High-resolution Infrared Radiation Sounder; ETM:
Enhanced Thematic Mapper; MODIS: MODerate resolution Imaging SpectroRadiometer; ASTER: Advanced Space-borne Thermal Emission and Reflection radiometer; MISR: Multi-angle Imaging SpectroRadiometer;
MOPITT: Measurements Of Pollution In The Troposphere; ALI: Advanced Land Imager; AIRS: Atmospheric InfraRed Sounder; OMI: Ozone Monitoring Instrument; MLS: Microwave Limb Sounder; CALIOP: Cloud-Aerosol
LIdar with Orthogonal Polarization; CPR: Cloud Profiling Radar; GOME: Global Ozone Monitoring Experiment; IASI: Infrared Atmospheric Sounding Interferometer; OMPS: Ozone Mapping and Profiler Suite; VIIRS:
Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite; CrIS: Cross-track Infrared Sounder; OLI: Operational Land Imager; TIRS: Thermal Infrared Sensor; OCO: Orbiting Carbon Observatory; MSI: Multispectral Imager; TROPOMI:
TROPOspheric Monitoring Instrument; MVIRI: Meteosat Visible and Infrared Imager; S-VISSR: Stretched Visible and Infrared Spin Scan Radiometer; SEVIRI: Spinning Enhanced Visible and InfraRed Imager; MI: Mete-
orological Imager; ABI: Advanced Baseline Imager; EPIC: Earth Polychromatic Imaging Camera.
2
Only those phenomena that can be monitored quantitatively are listed (i.e., visible imaging of volcanic plumes is excluded).

PART | VIII
3
Only the daytime overpass of each satellite is given. Infrared sensors also collect data at night.
4
Spatial resolution typically varies between spectral bands.
5
The maximum temporal resolution is listed. Some LEO spacecraft/sensors are pointable (e.g., NASA’s EO-1, Terra/ASTER), which can increase temporal resolution. Note that geostationary imagers typically have a nominal
temporal resolution of 15e30 min, but higher resolution is possible in special observation modes (e.g., GOES Super Rapid Scan).
6
URLs provided are single examples of sites where instrumental datasets (if available) can be viewed or accessed. Note that website URLs are subject to change but were active at the time of writing.

Eruption Response and Mitigation

Chapter | 65 Gas, Plume, and Thermal Monitoring
FIGURE 65.5 Composite OMI SO2 and reflectivity image of the
southwest Pacific region on April 23, 2006. In this single image, tropo-
spheric SO2 plumes can be discerned issuing from seven volcanoes (from
north to south): Anatahan (CNMI), Manam (PNG), Ulawun (PNG),
Bagana (PNG), Tinakula (Solomon Islands), Aoba (Vanuatu), and
Ambrym (Vanuatu). From Carn et al. (2013).
FIGURE 65.6 Cumulative SO2 column amount (note logarithmic color scale) measured by OMI in the Nabro volcanic cloud from June 10 to
July 15, 2011.
1139
latter provide higher sensitivity to SO2, though spatial
resolution is also a factor. The TIR sensors complement UV
instruments by measuring at night and by offering different
sensitivity to SO2. Unlike in the UV, the main factor gov-
erning detection of SO2 in the IR is the temperature dif-
ference, or thermal contrast, between the SO2 layer and the
background (which could be the ground surface or a layer
of meteorological clouds). All other factors being equal, IR
sensitivity to SO2 increases with thermal contrast, thus it
tends to peak for volcanic clouds located at the cold-point
(or thermal) tropopausedusually the coldest level of the
atmosphere. Detection of SO2 at high altitudes can be
compromised when it is viewed against a cold background
(e.g., polar regions; strong temperature inversions; and so
on) due to the lack of thermal contrast. The other major
constraint on IR SO2 measurements is water vapor abun-
dance, particularly when the 7.3 mm absorption band of
SO2 is exploited, due to reduced atmospheric transmission
in this region of the EM spectrum (Figure 65.2). However,
SO2 can be quantified using this waveband if the gas is
located in the UTLS, above the lower tropospheric peak in
water vapor concentration. Combined use of the three IR
SO2 absorption bands (n1 at w8.6 mm, n3 at w7.3 mm,
and n1þn3 at w4 mm) can provide constraints on SO2
altitude owing to their distinctive vertical sensitivity.
Detection of passive volcanic degassing in the IR is
1140
10 300
Seismic event counts
250
8 200
OMI SO2 mass [kilotons]
150
100
6 50
0 smaller footprint (1.3  2.3 km). Although neither
OMI SO2 mass
4 LP
VT
HB
EXP
2 HT
SP
0 EM spectrum is also used to measure volcanic gases. The
May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
Month of 2005
FIGURE 65.7 OMI SO2 burdens (lower panel) and seismic event counts
(upper panel; courtesy of the Instituto Geofı́sicoeEscuela Politécnica
Nacional (IGeEPN), Ecuador) for Reventador volcano, Ecuador in
MayeSeptember 2005. Seismic events shown are long-period (LP),
volcano-tectonic (VT), hybrid (HB), explosion signals (EXP), harmonic
tremor (HT), and spasmodic tremor (SP). Note the anticorrelation between
OMI SO2 and seismicity, indicating alternation between open- (elevated
SO2; low seismicity) and closed-system (low SO2; elevated seismicity)
degassing at Reventador. From Carn et al. (2008).
possible using 8.6 mm data, but requires high spatial reso-
lution (e.g., MODIS or ASTER; Table 65.1).
An advantage of the TIR is that several other volcanic
gas species exhibit absorption features in this spectral band,
in addition to SO2 (Figure 65.2). Although more chal-
lenging, and hence less common than SO2 retrievals, such
measurements provide unique constraints on the budgets of
other volcanic volatile species. Recently, H2S has been
detected and quantified in volcanic plumes from Kasatochi
and Grimsvötn (Iceland) using the IASI instrument
(Clarisse et al., 2011), providing the first direct observa-
tions of the abundance of this important sulfur species in
explosive eruption clouds. IASI and MOPITT (Table 65.1)
also detected volcanic CO in the emissions from Grimsvötn
(in 2011) and Eyjafjallajökull (in 2010); the first time CO
of volcanic origin has been detected from space (Martinez
et al., 2012).
Arguably the most useful volatile species to measure,
from the standpoint of eruption forecasting, would be
CO2, but volcanic CO2 is among the most challenging
gases to detect using satellite remote sensing due to the
high atmospheric background (w400 ppmv), which
dominates the signal. Even at the strongest volcanic CO2
sources, such as Etna, the volcanic CO2 anomaly may be
<10 ppm above the background close to the crater,
imparting stringent demands on the precision and
accuracy of satellite CO2 measurements. The Japanese
Greenhouse Gases Observing Satellite (GOSAT) mission,
launched in 2009, carries one of the first satellite sensors
with the capability to detect CO2 from point sources such
PART | VIII Eruption Response and Mitigation
as volcanoes and power plants. This can be achieved by
pointing the sensor at the emission source, with the goal
of filling the w10 km diameter FOV with emitted CO2 to
maximize the signal. NASA’s recently launched Orbiting
Carbon Observatory 2 (OCO-2; Table 65.1) offers even
greater potential for volcanic CO2 detection due to its
GOSAT nor OCO-2 provide adequate temporal resolution
or spatial coverage to be effective volcano monitoring
tools, such measurements will certainly improve con-
straints on the sources and sinks of CO2.
Beyond the TIR region, the microwave region of the
Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) on NASA’s Aura satellite
detects thermal microwave emission from Earth’s limb
(looking horizontally through the atmosphere instead of
downward in the nadir direction) by scanning vertically
from the surface to w90 km altitude. MLS can measure
vertical profiles of volcanic SO2 and HCl (and potentially
other species such as CH3Cl) after volcanic eruptions,
provided that the gases reach the UTLS or above
(e.g., Figure 65.8).
2.4.3. Ash and Aerosol Measurements
The eruption of the relatively obscure (at the time)
Eyjafjallajökull volcano in southeast Iceland in April
2010 was a landmark event in volcanology. The eruption,
although modest in magnitude, produced ash-rich vol-
canic plumes that had a major impact on aviation in
Europe and subsidiary effects worldwide. Although the
volcanic ash hazard to aviation was recognized by the
scientific community prior to 2010, the economic impact
of the Eyjafjallajökull eruption arguably brought the
issue to worldwide public attention for the first time,
and also gave renewed impetus to studies involving
volcanic ash measurements and monitoring. Ash is usu-
ally a minor component of tropospheric volcanic
plumes and effusive eruption clouds, but ash concentra-
tions can be very high in fresh explosive eruption
clouds, especially in the first few hours after emission.
For a detailed discussion of volcanic ash hazards to
aviation, and current remote sensing techniques used to
detect volcanic ash in the atmosphere, the reader is
referred to Chapter 52 on “Volcanic Ash Hazards to
Aviation.”
Aerosols such as volcanic ash, desert dust, and smoke
absorb UV radiation (the principal UV-absorbing com-
ponents in ash and dust are iron oxides), while sulfate
aerosol, sea salt, and ice crystals are only weakly
absorbing; thus UV satellite measurements can be used to
detect, quantify, and characterize atmospheric aerosols.
However, satellite-based ash detection more commonly
utilizes TIR wavelengths at w11 and 12 mm in the
Chapter | 65 Gas, Plume, and Thermal Monitoring 1141

FIGURE 65.8 Vertical profile through the stratospheric volcanic cloud produced by the eruption of Kelud (Java) in February 2014, observed by sensors
in NASA’s A-Train satellite constellation at 18:13 UTC on February 13, just w2 h after the eruption. The central image shows a vertical profile of aerosols
observed by the CALIOP lidar on CALIPSO (532 nm total attenuated lidar backscatter); the volcanic umbrella cloud (at w18e19 km) and two levels of
overshooting top (at 22e26 km) are clearly apparent. The horizontal white line is the tropopause. Red stars indicate AIRS SO2 brightness temperature
differences (BTDs; restricted here due to cloud opacity preventing SO2 detection in the TIR over much of the cloud). White crosses denote an atmospheric
temperature profile from the Surabaya-Juanda rawinsonde sounding at 00Z on February 14. Above the CALIOP image are collocated stratospheric SO2,
HCl, and IWC (ice water content) retrievals from Aura/MLS at several pressure levels (in hPa, indicated top left). The MLS data show clear signs of
stratospheric injection of SO2 and HCl, with SO2 detected as high as 31 mb (equivalent to an altitude of w23e24 km, which is consistent with the
CALIOP data).

“split-window” technique, based on the inverse wave-
length dependence of ash and water/ice cloud absorption
in the TIR. Numerous operational, polar-orbiting, and
geostationary multispectral IR satellite sensors possess
the TIR window channels required to detect volcanic ash
(e.g., AVHRR, GOES, SEVIRI, MTSAT, and MODIS;
Table 65.1), and these data can also be used to quantify
ash column abundance and determine ash concentrations
if cloud thickness is known. Hyperspectral IR sensors
such as IASI and AIRS can be used to identify the
characteristic spectral signatures of ash and other aerosol
particles (e.g., sulfate) and determine the composition of
airborne particles. This was demonstrated after the
rhyolitic eruption of Chaitén volcano (Chile) in 2008
(Gangale et al., 2010).
The most critical factor determining the impact of a
volcanic eruption on climate or aviation is plume alti-
tude. Direct measurements of ash or gas altitude using
passive UV/IR remote sensing techniques are possible
but inherently imprecise, whereas active sensing
techniques (e.g., LiDAR and radar) provide very accurate
altitude information. The 2006 launch of the Cloud-
Aerosol Lidar with Orthogonal Polarization (CALIOP)
aboard the CALIPSO satellite, and the Cloud Profiling
Radar (CPR) aboard CloudSat (Table 65.1), into NASA’s
polar-orbiting A-Train spacecraft constellation was a
major boon to volcanological remote sensing. CALIOP
can provide vertical profiles of particles (including ash,
sulfate, and hydrometeors) in volcanic clouds
(e.g., Figure 65.8), although the chances of sampling
fresh volcanic clouds are slim owing to LiDAR’s poor
spatial coverage. CPR is a millimeter-wavelength radar
that is sensitive to water/ice particles in clouds and pre-
cipitation, and also coarser volcanic particles such as
ash aggregates. Working in concert, CALIOP and CPR
can yield information on particle abundance, phase
(e.g., liquid or solid) and size in volcanic clouds, in
addition to cloud altitude and thickness. The latter can be
used to calculate concentrations of SO2 and ash in vol-
canic clouds.
1142
2.4.4. Satellite Sensor Synergy
Since a single satellite has a limited payload of sensors,
obtaining coincident measurements at multiple wave-
lengths and/or using multiple techniques requires coordi-
nated observations from a group (or constellation) of
spacecraft flying in close formation along the same orbital
track. NASA’s A-Train (http://atrain.nasa.gov/), which
currently contains the OCO-2, GCOM-W1, Aqua, CALI-
PSO, CloudSat, and Aura satellites (Table 65.1), is the
largest such constellation in operation. Several A-Train
sensors make near-coincident (within w15 min) observa-
tions of volcanic cloud constituents, including OMI, MLS,
AIRS, MODIS, CALIOP, and CPR (Table 65.1).
Combining data from these sensors has yielded new insight
into the composition and vertical distribution of gases and
particles in volcanic clouds. A spectacular example of
A-Train observations following the February 2014 eruption
of Kelud (Java, Indonesia) is shown in Figure 65.8. Satellite
constellations such as the A-Train represent a new para-
digm for remote sensing of dynamic phenomena such as
volcanic eruptions, and will likely be replicated in the
future.
Other potential satellite sensor synergies exist between
geostationary and polar-orbiting (or Low Earth Orbit; LEO)
satellites. Most current satellite measurements of SO2 are
made from LEO spacecraft (Table 65.1). The only geo-
stationary sensor currently capable of measuring volcanic
SO2 is the IR SEVIRI on the Meteosat satellites observing
Europe and Africa, whereas most geostationary in-
struments can detect volcanic ash (Table 65.1). Future
IR SO2 measurements from geostationary platforms
(e.g., Himawari-8, GOES-R ABI; Table 65.1) will offer
greater temporal resolution (w15 min) than current LEO
data, and cover East Asia and the Americas, both regions
with significant volcanic activity. The availability of mul-
tiple sources of satellite SO2 measurements is useful for
sensor intercomparisons and validation. For volcanic SO2,
the total mass measured using different LEO sensors has
been observed to differ by more than a factor of two, owing
to different instrument characteristics, sampling, and
algorithms.
3. THERMAL MEASUREMENTS AND
MONITORING
3.1. Principles
Volcanoes can be prodigious sources of heat, and remote
thermal surveillance from the ground, air, or space using
the shortwave IR (SWIR), mid-IR, and TIR regions of the
EM spectrum is one of the most effective and widely used
volcano monitoring techniques, largely superseding in situ
temperature measurements using thermocouples. Remote
PART | VIII Eruption Response and Mitigation
sensing measurements in the TIR rely on the detection of
electromagnetic radiation emitted by the target, and the
theoretical bases of all such measurements are the radiation
laws (Planck, StefaneBoltzmann, and Wien). Planck’s law
defines the relationship between the absolute temperature
(T) of a body and the emitted spectral radiance (with units
of power per unit area per unit solid angle per unit
wavelength, e.g., W m2 sr1 mm1; Figure 65.9), which is
the fundamental quantity measured by IR sensors, though it
is usually converted to an equivalent brightness tempera-
ture (by inverting Planck’s law). Integrating Planck’s law
with respect to wavelength yields the StefaneBoltzmann
(or Stefan’s) law (F ¼ sT4; where s is the Stefane
Boltzmann constant), which defines the total power per unit
area (F; W m2) emitted by a blackbody at temperature, T,
and stresses the very strong temperature dependence of the
emitted energy. Differentiating Planck’s law once with
respect to wavelength yields Wien’s law (lmaxT ¼ 2898),
which defines the important inverse relationship between
temperature and the peak wavelength (lmax) of thermal
emission. Planck’s law curves (Figure 65.9) have a char-
acteristic shape, with a sharp decline in spectral radiance at
shorter wavelengths, a peak (defined by Wien’s law) and a
slower decline toward longer wavelengths. Planck’s and
Wien’s law tell us that active lava at magmatic temperatures
(w700e1300  C or 1300e2400  F; e.g., uncrusted lava
lakes, or flows) can emit significant amounts of radiation at
SWIR MIR TIR
105 1200 K
600 K
300 K
104 Mixed pixel
Spectral radiance (W m−2 sr−1 µm−1)
Reflected solar
Wien’s law
103
102
101
100
10−1
0.1 0.3 1 2 3 4 10 20 100
Wavelength (µm)
FIGURE 65.9 Spectral radiance (W m-2 sr-1 mm-1) from blackbodies at
a range of temperatures (300, 600, and 1200 K) as a function of wave-
length (mm), calculated using Planck’s law. Mixed pixel represents the
radiance from a sub-pixel sized area of active lava (0.03% of the pixel at
1100  C) within a background at ambient temperatures (15  C). The
Reflected solar curve shows the reflected solar radiance for a surface
reflectivity of 10%. Spectral radiance maxima from blackbody radiators lie
along the Wien’s law curve. Gray bands indicate commonly exploited
atmospheric windows in the SWIR (w1.6 mm, 2e2.5 mm), mid-IR (MIR,
3e4 mm), and TIR (8e13 mm) spectral bands.
Chapter | 65 Gas, Plume, and Thermal Monitoring 1143

visible wavelengths, thus explaining the red-orange glow of
freshly erupted lava.
Wien’s law also indicates that, in order to achieve
maximum sensitivity to the full range of ambient to
magmatic surface temperatures, sensor channels in a range
of TIR wavebands are preferable. Since water vapor and
clouds strongly attenuate TIR radiation, sensor channel
placement is largely dictated by the presence of atmo-
spheric windows where transmission of radiation is highest.
Some of the most commonly exploited SWIR, mid-IR, and
TIR windows are at wavelengths of w1.6 mm, 2e2.5 mm,
3e4 mm, and 8e13 mm (Figure 65.2, Figure 65.9) and most
IR satellite instruments have channels in at least one of
these spectral regions. Due to its proximity to the peak
emission from high-temperature targets, and sensitivity to
rising temperatures relative to longer wavelength channels,
the mid-IR channel at w3.5e4 mm (e.g., on the AVHRR
and GOES Imager) is among the most useful wavebands for
volcano monitoring (e.g., Figure 65.10), particularly at
nighttime when reflected solar radiation (which can be
significant at wavelengths of
4 mm; Figure 65.9) is absent
(e.g., Harris, 2013).
An important consideration in IR remote sensing,
particularly from satellite platforms, is the “mixed pixel”
effect. In volcanic observations, the instrument’s Instanta-
neous Field of View (IFOV) will typically contain surfaces
at a range of temperatures, and the emitted spectral
radiance will be an area-weighted sum of the radiance from
each thermal component. This effect depends on the spatial
resolution of the sensor (w10 me1 km; Table 65.1), sat-
ellite viewing geometry (which varies from day-to-day) and
the nature of the target. Typically, with the exception of
major effusive eruptions, features at magmatic tempera-
tures occupy very small fractions of the instrument IFOV,
although the profuse spectral radiance from such bodies
permits their detection even for very small fractional areas
(e.g., Figure 65.9). A further advantage of 3.7 mm mid-IR
data is its sensitivity to high-temperature features of sub-
pixel extent, even in a 1 km AVHRR pixel, due to the
strong thermal emission in this waveband (Figure 65.9,
Figure 65.10; e.g., Steffke and Harris, 2011). For example,
Figure 65.9 shows the significant increase in spectral
radiance at 3.7 mm due to a sub-pixel sized area of active
lava covering only 0.03% of the pixel. Combining mid-IR
data with TIR measurements less sensitive to high tem-
peratures (e.g., at 11 mm) in “dual-band” techniques per-
mits quantitative analysis of the spatial extent of hot
volcanic features, though the solution becomes better
constrained when data at multiple wavebands are available.
However, since satellite sensors are not optimized for the
exceptional temperatures encountered in active volcanic
contexts, sensor saturation is a common problem and this
prohibits quantitative analysis. The AVHRR 3.8 mm chan-
nel saturates at pixel-integrated temperatures of w325 K,

FIGURE 65.10 Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) digital elevation model (DEM) mosaic of the Kamchatka Peninsula and selected TIR
(3.55e3.93 mm) Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) data. All images are north oriented to top, scale bar is in  C, and satellite image
numbers are noted at bottom. (A) Google Earth image showing Klyuchevskaya group. (B) Thermally elevated pixels at summit of Bezymianny.
(C) Thermally elevated pixels at Kliuchevskoi. (D) Contemporaneous thermal activity at both volcanoes. From van Manen and Dehn (2009).
1144
FIGURE 65.11 Heat flux (due to radiational and convective heat loss)
from an ‘a‘a lava flow erupted from Nyamuragira volcano, Democratic
Republic of Congo, observed by NASA’s EO-1 Hyperion sensor on 21
May 2004. North is down. The height of each colored column is propor-
tional to the heat flux and a logarithmic color scale has been applied. From
Wright et al. (2010).
although some sensors (e.g., MODIS) mitigate the impact
of saturation by including channels with larger dynamic
ranges to record higher temperatures. At shorter wave-
lengths, a 1.6 mm channel (e.g., available on AVHRR,
ASTER, MODIS, Landsat ETMþ, and OLI) can provide
FIGURE 65.12 Landsat 8 satellite imagery showing thermal anomalies due to lava in the summit crater of Shishaldin volcano, Alaska, on March 18 and
27, 2014. Image courtesy of Alaska Volcano Observatory/US. Geological Survey (created by David Schneider). URL: http://www.avo.alaska.edu/images/
image.php?id¼57861.
PART | VIII Eruption Response and Mitigation
unsaturated data over a wider range of high-temperature
targets than 3e4 mm channels. However, the strong re-
flected solar radiation contribution can easily mask any
volcanic signal in daytime 1.6 mm data (Figure 65.9), so
observations at this wavelength are best made at night.
A further advantage of nighttime data is that any spectral
radiance recorded at 1.6 mm can be attributed entirely to
volcanic phenomena since, in contrast to the 3e4 mm
waveband, thermal emission from surfaces at ambient
temperatures is negligible at 1.6 mm (Figure 65.9). Hyper-
spectral imagers providing 100s of contiguous channels
(e.g., NASA’s EO-1 Hyperion; Table 65.1) provide the best
opportunity for unsaturated data and detailed thermal
characterization of volcanic surfaces (e.g., lava flow cool-
ing; Figure 65.11), though saturation can still be an issue.
3.2. The Origin and Detection of Volcanic
Thermal Anomalies
The range of thermal features present on a volcanic
edifice can include fumarole fields with temperatures
slightly above background, warm crater lakes, hot vents
heated by emitted gases, and active lava lakes, flows, or
domes (e.g., Figure 65.10, Figure 65.11, Figure 65.12,
Figure 65.13). TIR monitoring techniques are employed to
detect surface manifestations of volcanic unrest, such as
increased fumarole or vent temperatures due to magma
ascent from depth. They are also used in a more
Chapter | 65 Gas, Plume, and Thermal Monitoring
FIGURE 65.13 The photograph shows the surface of the active lava lake at Erta’Ale (Ethiopia) in November 2006. The inserts are thermal camera
images of the lava lake collected in February 2001, March 2003, December 2005, and November 2006. The thermal images reveal details of the lake
surface such as incandescent cracks, crustal plates, and bursts of hot gas bubbles at hot spots. U and D mark the locations of the upwelling and
downwelling margins, respectively. From Spampinato et al. (2011).
quantitative way to determine the spatial extent of active
lava flows or lakes, or to estimate lava effusion rates during
effusive eruptions (e.g., Harris et al., 2007).
The principal goal of thermal surveillance is the
detection of volcanic thermal anomalies (e.g., Steffke and
Harris, 2011), though quantitative analysis is also desirable.
Effective space-based monitoring systems should permit
detection of active volcanism on kilometer scales or
smaller, and provide repetitive, frequent observations
(requiring use of low spatial, high temporal resolution data)
with low noise and at low cost. As described above,
detection of small volcanic heat sources can be very
effective and timely using night-time mid-IR
(e.g., 3e4 mm) band data from high temporal, and low-to-
moderate spatial resolution sensors such as AVHRR,
GOES, or MODIS (Figure 65.10; e.g., Harris, 2013). The
use of operational meteorological satellites (e.g., NOAA’s
Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites
(GOES) and Polar-Orbiting Environmental Satellites
(POES)) offers the additional benefits associated with as-
sets designed to monitor weather conditions, that is, 24/7
operations and near real-time (NRT) data availability.
However, temporal variations in spectral radiance (or
derived pixel brightness temperatures) can rarely be
unambiguously attributed to volcanic processes, due to the
modulating effects of variable IFOV size, viewing geom-
etry, meteorological cloud cover, solar radiation, surface
1145
emissivity, atmospheric attenuation, and other factors; thus
interpretation of trends can be challenging. High spatial
resolution sensors (e.g., Landsat ETMþ, OLI, and TIRS;
ASTER; Table 65.1) provide more detailed characteriza-
tion of volcanic thermal features (e.g., Figure 65.12), but
less frequently (and sometimes at significant cost), hence
integration of these observations with high temporal reso-
lution data is the best approach. Identification of long-term
trends in heat flux is generally more valuable than mea-
surements of absolute temperature and thermal distribu-
tions at any given time (e.g., van Manen and Dehn, 2009).
3.3. Acquisition of IR Measurements
Remotely sensed IR data can be collected from the ground,
air, or space. Airborne IR surveys of active volcanoes using
aircraft-mounted sensors are uncommon and not discussed
further here. Ground-based and airborne IR measurements
are now predominantly made using thermal cameras, which
capture a 2D image rather than the single spot measurement
collected by an IR radiometer. Detector technology for
thermal cameras has greatly improved in recent years, with
most devices using either a focal plane array (FPA) of
IR-sensitive pixels or microbolometers (whose resistance
depends on the intensity of incident radiation). FPAs can
operate at cryogenic or ambient temperatures, and micro-
bolometers are uncooled, but cooled detectors are more
1146
sensitive due to lower noise levels (e.g., IR emission from
the detector itself). However, uncooled sensors are more
compact, less expensive and require less power, and are
usually adequate for monitoring high-temperature volcanic
targets. Currently available portable thermal cameras
operate in either the 3e5 mm or 7.5e13 mm wavebands
(Figure 65.9), and offer variable image resolution
(640  480 or 1024  1024 pixels) and sampling rates
(60e132 Hz). Temperatures of up to 2000  C can be
measured, thus avoiding saturation when imaging active
lava and permitting quantitative analysis, although surface
emissivity is often unknown (but can usually be assumed to
be close to unity). As for satellite instruments, the use of the
3e5 mm and 7.5e13 mm wavebands is primarily due to the
high atmospheric transmission in these spectral regions
(although volcanic gases such as SO2 and water vapor do
absorb some radiation at these wavelengths) and their
proximity to radiance maxima from bodies at magmatic
and ambient temperatures, respectively (Figure 65.9).
While most thermal cameras used for volcano monitoring
are broadband instruments, it is also possible to equip TIR
imaging cameras with multiple narrow band (0.5e1.0 mm)
spectral filters, rotated sequentially into the camera FOV
with a filter wheel, to select specific wavelengths for
measurements of SO2 and volcanic ash.
Owing to their portability, low power requirements and
relatively low-cost, thermal cameras and analogous in-
struments have been employed in a broad range of volcano
monitoring applications (e.g., Ramsey and Harris, 2013).
These include thermal mapping of hydrothermal areas and
fumarole fields, imaging active lava flows and domes,
visualizing convective motion on the surface of lava lakes
(e.g., Figure 65.13), analyzing the dynamics of Strombolian
eruptions, measuring lava effusion rates, lava flow velocity
and cooling rates, and deriving plume rise speeds. Regular
thermal surveys can be used to detect changes in temper-
ature related to subsurface magma migration. Lava effusion
rates are a critical parameter for lava flow hazard mitiga-
tion. Remote measurement of effusion rates requires
several assumptions, resulting in significant errors, but
results comparable to field data have been obtained.
Numerous space-borne sensors collect TIR data at
varying spatial, spectral, and temporal resolution and at
different overpass times (e.g., AVHRR, Landsat ETMþ,
MODIS, ASTER, SEVIRI, GOES, EO-1 ALI, Hyperion,
and VIIRS; Table 65.1; Figure 65.10, Figure 65.11,
Figure 65.12). TIR sensor channel locations are dictated by
the presence of atmospheric windows (Figure 65.2), hence
channels at 3e4, 11 and 12 mm are ubiquitous, permitting
detection of volcanic hot-spots. The large number of space-
borne TIR datasets provides useful redundancy for opera-
tional volcano monitoring, and high temporal resolution
even from LEO satellites, especially in high-latitude vol-
canic regions such as Alaska, the Aleutian Islands, and
PART | VIII Eruption Response and Mitigation
Kamchatka. Useful synergies can be exploited between
high spatial, low temporal resolution data (e.g., from AS-
TER or Landsat), which permit detailed thermal charac-
terization of volcanic features, and more frequent
overpasses by low-to-moderate spatial resolution assets
(e.g., AVHRR and MODIS) for timely hot-spot detection.
This synergy is also exploited in autonomous spacecraft
observing systems such as NASA’s Volcano Sensor Web
(VSW), which monitors volcanic activity alerts from
diverse sources (e.g., satellite-based hot-spot detection,
volcanic ash advisories, and in situ monitoring networks)
and uses them to trigger data acquisition by the ALI and
Hyperion sensors aboard the EO-1 spacecraft (Table 65.1).
The VSW has been successfully implemented in several
volcanic crises (e.g., Nyamulagira in 2006 and Eyjafjalla-
jökull in 2010), often pre-empting manual triggering, and
collecting valuable observations that would not otherwise
be made (e.g., Davies et al., 2013).
4. WEBSITE DISSEMINATION AND ALERT
SYSTEMS
A major advance over the past decade has been the
increasing dissemination of remote sensing data via the
Internet, particularly satellite measurements. There are now
numerous websites providing publicly available satellite
measurements of SO2, volcanic ash, and TIR hot-spots
(e.g., MODVOLC, SACS, and HotVolc; Table 65.1). In
addition to the worldwide expansion of the Internet, mobile
devices, and increased computational power, a major driver
for the development of these services has been the need to
issue timely warnings of drifting volcanic clouds to avia-
tion. Rapid growth, and interest, in web-based volcanic SO2
and ash services has occurred since the volcanic ash crisis
caused by the April 2010 eruption of Eyjafjallajökull
(Iceland), although many existed beforehand and the vol-
canic ash hazard to aviation (see Chapter 52) has been
recognized for several decades. TIR hot-spot monitoring
websites have also been operational for some time, the
most widely used of which is the MODVOLC system
driven by MODIS data (http://modis.higp.hawaii.edu;
Wright et al., 2004).
The time latency of the data presented on these websites
(i.e., the delay between data acquisition on the spacecraft
and display on the website) varies, and although many
services aim to provide data in “‘near real-time” (NRT), the
delay can be a few hours for a polar-orbiter. Many satellites
offer direct broadcast (DB) capabilities, where satellite data
can be received directly at a ground receiving station as the
spacecraft flies overhead, rapidly processed and displayed
within w5e30 min, and a few systems exploit this capa-
bility (e.g., the OMI/OMPS Satellite Measurements from
Polar Orbit (SAMPO) service: http://sampo.fmi.fi/volcanic.
Chapter | 65 Gas, Plume, and Thermal Monitoring
html; NASA’s Direct Readout Laboratory: https://
directreadout.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/). Receiving stations are
mostly located at high latitudes to maximize the “visibility”
of polar-orbiting satellites. Even these low latencies are
arguably not rapid enough to enable a jet aircraft traveling
at cruising speed to divert around a fresh volcanic eruption
cloud, but capabilities are improving.
Several websites also offer eruption “alerts,” based on
TIR, SO2, or volcanic ash measurements. Typically, an alert
is issued if the detected radiance, or SO2 or ash abundance
exceeds a predefined threshold, although the latter are often
set at low levels in order to capture both small and large
eruptions. Alerts based on SO2 data may also be triggered
by periods of vigorous volcanic degassing, in the absence
of an eruption. The provision of timely, accurate eruption
alerts, with no false alarms, is a desirable but challenging
goal (e.g., Steffke and Harris, 2011), and more accurate
alert thresholds could perhaps be derived from data mining
and analysis of prior satellite measurements of eruptions.
In addition to satellite measurements, real-time or NRT
web-camera (webcam) imagery from many volcanoes can
now be accessed online, usually via volcano observatories.
Webcams typically operate at visible wavelengths,
providing qualitative monitoring of volcanic gas and ash
plumes and weather conditions. Visible wavelength cam-
eras are ineffective at night unless very high-temperature
phenomena are present, but near-IR or TIR webcams
(e.g., the thermal cameras described above) are also in use
by some observatories (e.g., at Etna, Italy; http://www.ct.
ingv.it/en/webcam-etna-en.html), providing nighttime
surveillance.
5. FUTURE DIRECTIONS
Although funding for costly satellite missions is ultimately
subject to the vagaries of federal budgets, capabilities
for space-borne monitoring of volcanic plumes and hot-
spots are likely to remain uninterrupted over the next
decade (e.g., Table 65.1). Several instruments capable of
measuring volcanic SO2 emissions are currently in orbit
(e.g., OMI, OMPS, and IASI) or planned for launch in the
near future (e.g., TROPOMI). MODIS-like TIR measure-
ments will be continued by VIIRS on the Suomi NPP and
JPSS satellites. Improved iterations of high spatial resolu-
tion assets are also being launched (e.g., Landsat-8), but
high temporal and low spatial resolution data are likely to
remain the mainstay of operational volcanic gas, plume,
and thermal monitoring from space (e.g., Ramsey and
Harris, 2013). However, although there is usually a trade-
off between spatial and temporal resolution, advanced
sensors such as TROPOMI (daily or better temporal reso-
lution and 7 km spatial resolution) attempt to optimize
both. NASA’s Hyperspectral Infrared Imager (HyspIRI)
sensor, one of the several missions recommended by the
1147
last National Research Council’s Earth Science Decadal
Survey for launch in the 2020 timeframe, will provide 60 m
spatial resolution and 5 days revisit time in the TIR. In the
nearer term, the NASA/NOAA DSCOVR mission (Table
65.1) will offer the prospect of volcanic SO2 measurements
from the unique perspective of the L1 EartheSun Lagrange
(or libration) point at 1.5 million kilometers from Earth,
where the gravitational forces of the Sun and Earth are
balanced. Positioning a satellite at L1 permits a continuous
view of the sunlit hemisphere of the Earth.
The next decade is also likely to see an increased focus
on quantifying CO2 emissions from space, including the
volcanic contribution. Motivation for this includes the need
to better quantify the global volcanic budget of deep car-
bon, and understand the role of volcanic degassing of
greenhouse gases in climate change. Several imminent or
planned satellite missions, such as NASA’s OCO-2, JAXA’s
GOSAT-2, and ESA’s CarbonSat, will offer the potential to
measure volcanic CO2 emissions from space, although this
is never likely to become as routine as volcanic SO2 mea-
surements due to the challenges of detecting the volcanic
CO2 signal (a few ppmv) against the atmospheric back-
ground (w400 ppmv). It will likely be restricted to the
strongest volcanic CO2 degassing sources, such as Mt.
Etna, major eruptions notwithstanding. High spatial reso-
lution (w1e2 km) is essential in order to maximize the
volcanic signal in the sensor’s IFOV, hence the temporal
resolution of satellite CO2 measurements is low
(e.g., 16 days for OCO-2; Table 65.1).
To assess the feasibility of space-borne volcanic CO2
detection, we can consider the situation at a strong CO2
source such as Etna, which emits CO2 at an average rate of
w190 kg s1. If Etna’s plume was aligned along the full
2.3 km length of an OCO-2 IFOV, thus maximizing the
amount of volcanic CO2 in the scene, then for a wind speed
of 5 m s1 the total volcanic CO2 loading in the IFOV
would be w87,000 kg. Converting to molecules of CO2
and averaging over the 1.3  2.3 km OCO-2 nadir IFOV
yields a CO2 column amount of w3.5  1019 molecules
cm2, which is w0.6% of the atmospheric background
CO2 column at Etna (w6  1021 molecules cm2). The
volcanic CO2 contribution would be higher if the wind
speed were lower, and vice versa. The required accuracy for
OCO-2 is 0.2% or better, in which case detection of strong
volcanic CO2 sources would be feasible under optimal
conditions (although note that the significant impacts of
meteorological clouds are ignored here).
Major developments in ground-based observations are
likely to arise in the field of infrared laser absorption
spectroscopy, using techniques such as Differential Ab-
sorption LiDAR (DIAL) and cavity ring-down spectros-
copy (CDRS) to analyze volcanic gases such as H2O and
CO2. The advantage of laser spectroscopy is that it allows
very precise wavelength selection, which can be tuned to
1148
the absorption lines of individual isotopes in volcanic gases
(e.g., 12CO2 and 13CO2). Isotopic ratios can yield unique
information on the origin of volatile species (e.g., Chiodini
et al., 2011); e.g., they could be used to distinguish between
CO2 derived from magmatic and non-magmatic sources
(e.g., biogenic, thermal decomposition of carbonates) and
identify potential eruption precursors. The main barriers to
volcanological application of these techniques are the very
high precision required on isotopic ratios and the size,
robustness, and power consumption of the instrumentation.
Ramsey and Harris (2013) review the potential de-
velopments in thermal remote sensing between 2010 and
2020. They suggest a somewhat pessimistic outlook for
space-borne thermal monitoring, due to the lack of dedi-
cated volcano remote sensing missions relative to the pre-
vious decade, and launch delays for key assets such as
HyspIRI. Data gaps, particularly in high spatial resolution
TIR observations (e.g., as currently provided by ASTER),
are likely. However, Ramsey and Harris (2013) propose
that the impending satellite data gaps may invigorate
research into ground-based thermal monitoring techniques,
such as applications of TIR cameras, and result in increased
integration of such data into monitoring networks. This will
be assisted by the ever-decreasing cost and increasing
portability of thermal imaging devices. Data processing
algorithms will also have to adapt to ingest expanding
volumes of input data as the spatial and temporal resolution
of sensors increase.
Other probable areas of future development include
exploitation of the considerable potential of UAVs for low-
risk volcano surveillance. Given the strengths and limita-
tions of each observing platform (satellite, ground-based,
suborbital, manned, and unmanned) and remote sensing
technique, the most effective approach will be to combine
gas, plume, and thermal monitoring synergistically in an
integrated, remote volcano monitoring system.
FURTHER READING
Aiuppa, A., Moretti, R., Federico, C., Giudice, G., Gurrieri, S.,
Liuzzo, M., Papale, P., Shinohara, H., Valenza, M., 2007. Forecasting
Etna eruptions by real-time observation of volcanic gas composition.
Geology 35, 1115e1118.
Allard, P., Burton, M.R., Mure, F., 2005. Spectroscopic evidence for a
lava fountain driven by previously accumulated magmatic gas. Na-
ture 433 (7024), 407e410. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature03246.
Burton, M.R., Sawyer, G.M., Granieri, D., 2013. Deep carbon emissions
from volcanoes. Rev. Mineral. Geochem. 75, 323e354.
Carn, S.A., Krueger, A.J., Krotkov, N.A., Arellano, S., Yang, K., 2008.
Daily monitoring of Ecuadorian volcanic degassing from space.
J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 176 (1), 141e150. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2008.01.029.
Carn, S.A., Krotkov, N.A., Yang, K., Krueger, A.J., 2013. Measuring
global volcanic degassing with the Ozone Monitoring Instrument
(OMI). In: Pyle, D.M., Mather, T.A., Biggs, J. (Eds.), Remote
PART | VIII Eruption Response and Mitigation
Sensing of Volcanoes and Volcanic Processes: Integrating Observa-
tion and Modelling, 380. Geological Society, London, Special Pub-
lications. http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/SP380.12.
Chiodini, G., Caliro, S., Aiuppa, A., Avino, R., Granieri, D., Moretti, R.,
Parello, F., 2011. First 13C/12C isotopic characterisation of volcanic
plume CO2. Bull. Volcanol. 73 (5), 531e542.
Clarisse, L., Coheur, P.F., Chefdeville, S., Lacour, J.L., Hurtmans, D.,
Clerbaux, C., 2011. Infrared satellite observations of hydrogen sulfide
in the volcanic plume of the August 2008 Kasatochi eruption.
Geophys. Res. Lett. 38, L10804. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/
2011GL047402.
Davies, A.G., Chien, S., Doubleday, J., Tran, D., Thordarson, T.,
Gudmundsson, M.T., Höskuldsson, Á., Jakobsdóttir, S.S., Wright, R.,
Mandl, D., 2013. Observing Iceland’s Eyjafjallajökull 2010 Eruptions
with the Autonomous NASA Volcano Sensor Web. J. Geophys. Res.
118, 1936e1956. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jgrb.50141.
Galle, B., Oppenheimer, C., Geyer, A., McGonigle, A.J.S., Edmonds, M.,
Horrocks, L., 2002. A miniaturized ultraviolet spectrometer for
remote sensing of SO2 fluxes: a new tool for volcano surveillance.
J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 119, 241e254.
Galle, B., Johansson, M., Rivera, C., Zhang, Y., Kihlman, M., Kern, C.,
Lehmann, T., Platt, U., Arellano, S., Hidalgo, S., 2010. Network for
Observation of Volcanic and Atmospheric Change (NOVAC)d
A global network for volcanic gas monitoring: Network layout and
instrument description. J. Geophys. Res. 115, D05304. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1029/2009JD011823.
Gangale, G., Prata, A.J., Clarisse, L., 2010. The infrared spectral signa-
ture of volcanic ash determined from high-spectral resolution satellite
measurements. Remote Sens. Environ. 114, 414e425.
Harris, A.J.L., 2013. Thermal Remote Sensing of Active Volcanoes:
A User’s Manual. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Harris, A.J.L., Dehn, J., Calvari, S., 2007. Lava effusion rate definition
and measurement: a review. Bull. Volcanol. 70, 1e22.
Kern, C., Kick, F., Lübcke, P., Vogel, L., Wöhrbach, M., Platt, U.,
2010a. Theoretical description of functionality, applications, and
limitations of SO2 cameras for the remote sensing of volcanic
plumes. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 3, 733e749. http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/
amt-3-733-2010.
Kern, C., Deutschmann, T., Vogel, L., Wöhrbach, M., Wagner, T.,
Platt, U., 2010b. Radiative transfer corrections for accurate spectro-
scopic measurements of volcanic gas emissions. Bull. Volcanol. 72,
233e247. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00445-009-0313-7.
Martı́nez-Alonso, S., Deeter, M.N., Worden, H.M., Clerbaux, C., Mao, D.,
Gille, J.C., 2012. First satellite identification of volcanic carbon
monoxide. Geophys. Res. Lett. 39, L21809. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1029/2012GL053275.
McGonigle, A.J.S., Aiuppa, A., Giudice, G., Tamburello, G.,
Hodson, A.J., Gurrieri, S., 2008. Unmanned aerial vehicle measure-
ments of volcanic carbon dioxide fluxes. Geophys. Res. Lett. 35,
L06303. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2007GL032508.
Nadeau, P.A., Palma, J.L., Waite, G.P., 2011. Linking volcanic tremor,
degassing, and eruption dynamics via SO2 imaging. Geophys. Res.
Lett. 38, L01304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2010GL045820.
Prata, A.J., Bernardo, C., 2007. Retrieval of volcanic SO2 column
abundance from Atmospheric Infrared Sounder data. J. Geophys.
Res. 112, D20204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007955.
Ramsey, M., Harris, A.J.L., 2013. Volcanology 2020: How will thermal
remote sensing of volcanic surface activity evolve over the next
decade? J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 249, 217e233.
Chapter | 65 Gas, Plume, and Thermal Monitoring
Spampinato, L., et al., 2011. Volcano surveillance using infrared cameras.
Earth Science Reviews 106 (1e2), 63e91.
Steffke, A.M., Harris, A.J.L., 2011. A review of algorithms for detecting
volcanic hot spots in satellite infrared data. Bull. Volcanol. 73 (9),
1109e1137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00445-011-0487-7.
Surono, Jousset, P., Pallister, J., Boichu, M., Fabrizia Buongiorno, M.,
Budisantoso, A., Costa, F., Andreastuti, S., Prata, F., Schneider, D.,
Clarisse, L., Humaida, H., Sumarti, S., Bignami, C., Griswold, J.,
Carn, S., Oppenheimer, C., Lavigne, F., 2012. The 2010 explosive
eruption of Java’s Merapi volcanodA ‘100-year’ event. J. Volcanol.
Geotherm. Res. 241-242, 121e135.
Symonds, R.B., Gerlach, T.M., Reed, M.H., 2001. Magmatic gas scrub-
bing: implications for volcano monitoring. J. Volcanol. Geotherm.
Res. 108, 303e341.
1149
Theys, N., De Smedt, I., Van Roozendael, M., Froidevaux, L., Clarisse, L.,
Hendrick, F., 2014. First satellite detection of volcanic OClO after the
eruption of Puyehue-Cordón Caulle. Geophys. Res. Lett. 41,
667e672. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/2013GL058416.
Van Manen, S., Dehn, J., 2009. Satellite remote sensing of thermal
activity at Bezymianny and Kliuchevskoi from 1993 to 1998.
Geology 37, 983e986.
Wright, R., Flynn, L.P., Garbeil, H., Harris, A.J.L., Pilger, E., 2004.
MODVOLC: near-real-time thermal monitoring of global volcanism.
J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 135, 29e49.
Wright, R., Garbeil, H., Davies, A.G., 2010. Cooling rate of some active
lavas determined using an orbital imaging spectrometer. J. Geophys.
Res. 115, B06205. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2009JB006536.