13.3 GROUP 1 To what extent is the impact of a volcanic eruption related to the type of eruption? (33 marks) by Miss Stewart

Finn Paragraph - marked by Duncan

2023-11-16 14:15:04 UTC

The impact of a volcanic eruption is due to the type of eruption. In order to look at the impacts on a smaller, less developed level we can look at the eruption of the Soufriere Hills Volcano eruption in Montserrat, a small island in the Caribbean. This eruption was a highly explosive, composite volcano in 2003 on a destructive plate boundary. As a result of this explosion, there was a vast amount of ash and pyroclastic flows targeting the southern parts of the island, including the capital Plymouth. The eruption destroyed the two main industries that the island relied on; tourism and farming. Economically, the entire island was damaged as people lost possessions, including cars, businesses and homes.Tourism crashed for years with the only visitors coming from cruise ships to look at the volcano. Furthermore, the pyroclastic flows from the composite volcano lead to ash-covered fields, which killed crops and meant a year of failed harvest and no income for the many families who rely on it. Therefore, socially, the people of Montserrat struggled to eat and provide for their families for months after the eruption. As a result of the constant struggles faced from the volcano, more than half of Montserrat's population left the island making it even more difficult for the island to recover as the population decreased from 11,000 to 4,000. This shows that the disastrous impacts are caused by the eruption’s pyroclastic flows and ash coverage. This gives reason to believe that the impact of a volcanic eruption is heavily linked to the type of eruption, as a different eruption would have led to different problems and impacts to Montersatt. The impacts faced by this country were predominantly a result of the pyroclastic flows and ash, an important feature of a composite volcanic eruption.

WWW: Excellent use of theory and place-specific detail (AO1) throughout. Good use of AO2 as well to emphasise your argument.

EBI: Be more selective with your use of place-specific detail to increase AO2.

Plan

2023-11-16 14:16:01 UTC

Fraser Paragraph - Marked by Henry

2023-11-17 11:17:46 UTC

Arguably, the impacts of a volcanic eruption is not wholly related to the type of eruption, as demonstrated by the Icelandic eruption of Eyjafjallajokull in 2010. This was an effusive eruption, between a level 3 and 4 on the VEI scale. While the eruption was not particularly explosive, it had intense global impacts, over an extended period of time, between April to September 2010. These impacts were so catastrophic due to the area that the volcano was situated in, as it had an ice cap over the top of the volcano, which resulted in a phreatomagmatic eruption. When the magma was expelled from the volcano, it immediately solidified when it made contact with the ice, and shattered, forming huge volumes of ash. The ash cloud from this eruption reached over 10km high. The ash cloud resulted in huge numbers of flight cancellations globally, due to the ash cloud being blown over continental Europe; airlines like British Airways were particularly affected, as they had to cancel European and trans-Atlantic flights. The impacts of this eruption therefore imply that the extent of impacts of an eruption are not due to the type of eruption, but more so to do with other aspects around the eruption, such as the local landscape to the volcano. As, in this eruption, the global and regional impacts that resulted, were mainly to do with the fact that an ice cap was situated above the volcano, rather than the type of eruption. It was a relatively non-explosive eruption, yet resulted in large volumes of ash, which is uncharacteristic of effusive eruptions, due to the ice cap solidifying and shattering the magma. Consequentially, the eruption of Eyjafjallajokull suggests that the type of the volcano is not fully indicative of the impacts, as the location of the volcano also has a huge impact.

WWW = Lots of AO1 which is relatively consistent throughout, also good that you’ve used some AO2 in the middle on the paragraph not just at the end

EBI = Use the AO1 within the explanation of your point rather than leading with it, if possible integrate some more AO2 into the bulk on answer.

Really good on a whole

1 Intro - James

2023-11-19 15:31:28 UTC

Volcanic eruptions appear in many different ways which means they can be classified into different types of eruptions. Because volcanic eruptions vary in factors such as lava viscosity, explosiveness and whether or not pyroclastic flow is involved, I believe that the type of eruption is largely responsible for the impacts.

Conclusion - James

2023-11-19 15:31:34 UTC

In conclusion, some volcanoes release pyroclastic flows that are capable of killing thousands of people over large distances and others only release slow moving viscous lava which is too slow moving to be dangerous. The overall risk factor from the impacts completely changes depending on what type of volcano is present and despite economic and location impacts, the type of eruption remains to be more important since it directly determines the potential outcomes.

Jake Paragraph - marked by freya

2023-11-19 18:15:53 UTC

The impact of a volcanic eruption is not related to the type of eruption, but the coping capacity of a country is. The coping capacity of a country refers to its ability to effectively respond to and manage the impacts of various disasters, including volcanic eruptions. This capacity is influenced by factors such as economic resources, infrastructure, governance, emergency practice and awareness. The impacts vary from ACs to LIDCs because of this. Iceland, an AC, had the Eyjafjallajökull Eruption in 2010. The eruption of Eyjafjallajökull had significant effects on air travel due to the dispersion of volcanic ash. Due to Iceland's coping capacity and its advanced monitoring systems and evacuation measures they managed the situation. Furthermore, the country communicated with neighbouring nations to help mitigate the situation which proved successful as air travel was opened after just 8 days. The ongoing eruption of the Soufrière Hills volcano since 1995 shows that coping capacity is extremely important. With the lack of preparation, the population decreased from 11,000 to 4,000. If the country was more prepared, the safer parts of the island could have become more developed and have the ability to house the population that had to be evacuated. This significance shows that the coping capacity of a country is the biggest impact as evident with the difference between ACs and LIDCs which have different levels of preparation.

WWW: good levels of AO2, clear outline of other factors, good, comprehensive knowledge of what coping capacity is.

clear argument.

EBI: could have used more examples, and gone into more detail about how if actually affects a place if they have low coping capacity, for example, include more examples of LIDCs which would be more negatively effected by the eruption.

Ed Paragraph

2023-11-19 21:51:50 UTC

It can be argued that the impact of a volcanic eruption is less related to the type of eruption but rather the economic development of the country in which the eruption takes place. The economic development of a country will affect its ability to afford and prioritise the production of mitigation and preparation strategies. As a result, there is a large discrepancy between the impact of volcanic eruptions in ACs compared with LIDCs. An example of this can be seen in 2010 in Iceland with the eruption of Eyjafjallajokull. Iceland has one of the highest levels of development in the world, and as an AC (with a GDP per capita of $69,000) the nation was able to invest in equipment to detect signs of a potential eruption. Therefore when the volcano first showed signs of eruption, scientists had sufficient warning and were able to evacuate those in the danger zone, preventing any loss of human life. Furthermore, mitigation strategies, such as the destruction of a road by a river in order to prevent the flooding of a more crucial bridge further downstream, were able to be implemented in order to preserve Iceland’s infrastructure. Direct comparisons can be drawn with the 1997 eruption of Soufriere Hills in Montserrat, an LIDC with a GDP per capita of only $16,000. The lack of investment in detection equipment and mitigation strategies contributed to the widespread destruction of infrastructure in Montserrat, with the capital and site of many essential national facilities, Plymouth, being completely destroyed, and over ⅔ of the island being left permanently uninhabitable. This has continued to have long term impacts, with the population of the island falling to just 4,000 from 11,000 prior to the eruption, whereas Iceland was able to make a swift and full recovery within weeks and months of the Eyjafjallajokull eruption. The contrasts in impact felt in more economically developed countries, such as Iceland, compared with those less so, such as Montserrat, is why it can be argued that the impact of a volcanic eruption is less related to the type of eruption but rather the economic development of the country in which the eruption takes place.

Tom paragraph - Marked by Remi

2023-11-20 07:35:59 UTC

The impact of an eruption is related to the type of eruption as demonstrated by super volcanoes. A super volcano is a volcano that has had an eruption with a Volcanic Explosivity Index (VEI) of 8, the largest recorded value on the index. This means the volume of ash and other materials displaced by such an eruption is greater than 1,000 cubic kilometers. This size difference between other eruptions has a huge influence on overall impacts as a large volume of ash and volcanic gases (SO2) can lead to short term climate cooling. For example when Pinatubo erupted in 1991, it cooled the planet by 1°C for a 6 years, compared to a more regular sized eruption such as Eyjafyjallajokull which had insignificant impact on the global temperature. This clearly shows that the impact of the eruption is dependant on the type of eruption, because Mt. Pinatubo had a huge climatological impact on the planet due to the size of the super volcano eruption which produced 1,000 km3 of ash compared to the E15 eruption which only produced 0.01 km3 as it was a VEI 3 eruption. In the modern day Pinatubo would have a much greater impact upon airline travel as the most recent Eyjafjyallajokull eruption only stopped 6 days of travel in the Northern Hemisphere however in comparison the Pinatubo eruption could potentially ground planes for years all over the planet due to the prolonged time period of a huge volume of particulates in the air, showing that the Pinatubo eruption would have an even greater effect on humans in particular in contemporary times. Pinatubo being 5 orders of magnitude higher than E15 clearly had a much more significant impact on the planet evidenced by the amount of cooling on the planet and for how long the cooling lasted, showing that the type of eruption clearly has a big influence over the impact of an eruption especially in the case of an eruption this big, as the global scale means everywhere is affected and there is no way to mitigate such a powerful eruption.

WWW: Good use of A02 throughout the entire paragraph & Place specific detail to back up points.

EBI: A word instead of 'big' at the end to clearly show how the extent of impact is predominantly caused by the type of eruption