• Site Map

    All the web pages on the conference website







My Goldschmidt

Role functions

Abstract Details

(2020) The 2019 Paroxyms at Stromboli Volcano (Italy): Timescales of Eruption Triggering

Petrone CM, Di Stefano F, Mollo S, Gertisser R, Del Bello E, Andronico D & Scarlato P


Sorry, the PDF cannot be displayed on your browser.

Download abstract

05d: Room 2, Friday 26th June 22:27 - 22:30

Listed below are questions that have been submitted by the community that the author will try and cover in their presentation. To submit a question, ensure you are signed in to the website. Authors or session conveners approve questions before they are displayed here.

Submitted by Marco Viccaro on Friday 26th June 12:22
Hi Chiara, thank you for this great presentation! Paroxysms occurred during the summer 2019 at Stromboli were really surprising for the volcanological community. My interest is toward the absence of geophysical signals in the day (or, even more, days) preceding both the events, which is contrasting with prolonged, deep replenishment by LP magmas you are proposing. Indeed, pressurization of a very shallow source occurred only a few minutes before the paroxysms. So, my questions are: 1) what is the sensitivity (i.e., error in terms of day/s) you get from cpx diffusion modeling; 2) Is the use of fast-diffusion elements maybe more suitable for constraining short-term dynamics characterizing these volcanic phenomena at Stromboli? 3) How can you reconcile lack of deep pressurization or absence of other seismo-volcanic signals with deep recharge of LP magmas occurring in the days preceding the two eruptions? See you this evening, ciao :-)
HI Marco, Thank you for your questions. These paroxysms were indeed very surprising and unusual. The error on the timescales can be up to 60%, but using the new specific thermometer for Stromboli (Scarlato et al., 2020, AGU Monograph in press), the error is reduced to 20%. So, this means that the difference between 1 day and 1 week is significant. We can resolve 1 day, but not the hours for which the fast diffusing elements would be more useful, as you suggest. However, the data clearly indicate fast and possibly almost continuous injections of the replenishing LP magma starting less than 1 month before the eruption and peaking few days before the eruption. How we reconcile this with the absence of other seismic-volcanic signals, it’s hard to say at the moment (it is still a working in progress). My feeling is that the volume of injecting magma is rather small and it is not unusual that magma movement goes undetected in open system such as Stromboli. It is clear that we need to understand this better and combine data from multiple sources, since it has marked a significant change in the behaviour of Stromboli. Happy to discuss this further :)

Sign in to ask a question.

Goldschmidt® is a registered trademark of the Geochemical Society and of the European Association of Geochemistry

Website managed and hosted by White Iron Conferences on behalf of the international geochemical community