The mountain just erupted. Kinda cool. The news said that the steam went to about 30,000ft. high. I went out front to look and could see the huge cloud of steam, it's a pretty cool sight.
They keep making such a huge deal about St. Helens. They are trying to scare people into believing that another eruption like 1980 is going to happen. The truth is, there just anything left of the mountain to cause huge destruction. In 1980 it was covered in glaciers which was the biggest problem, now it's just a large, dry, dead, hump in the ground. About two days ago we had over 1000 earthquakes all over 1.0, which mirrors what happened in 1980 before the mountain erupted... but eh. They are doing that 24hr news coverage thing now... wonderful. It's really as exciting as watching the weather channel all day.
...oh, and I forgot. If there is that much steam coming out, it will actually release the pressure inside causing it not to erupt at all. Who knows.
I'd say Rainier would be a bigger worry.. i had friends that grew up in Enumclaw, right next to it....seemed weird seeing their childhood pictures on a swingset with a massive volcano in the background/
Rainier? No way... yeah it may be 14,410 feet and covered with glaciers... but no way. It hasn't erupted since 1850 or something like that. If it were to erupt however (which it is VERY unlikely to do within the next 150 years), the state will be devistated. I mean... aside from the ash and lava, people thought the mudflow from St. Helens was bad, it will be like a tiny trickle compared to what Rainier would do. And actually, Enumclaw should be fairly safe from an eruption, aside from ash (I live about 8 miles from there). We are on high ground, so we'd just get a foot or two of ash.
From Armageddon Online: Likewise, the eruption of Mt. St. Helens in 1980 was a volcanic sneeze compared to what scientists say America will experience one day. And a mysterious four-inch-high bulge in the ground of central Oregon is, so far, little more than a conversation piece. Sooner or later, geologists warn, a "super volcano" will strike. Some scientists in this field will even go so far as to say that phenomena like this one pose a greater threat than terrorism. When will one next erupt? Scientist have discovered that the ground in Yellowstone is over 70cm higher than in was in 1923 - indicating a massive swelling underneath the park. The reservoir is filling with magma at a staggering rate. The volcano erupts with a calendar-like cycle of every 600,000-650,000 years. The last eruption was more than 640,000 years ago - we could be running late. What would be the effect of an eruption? Let's use Yellowstone. Immediately before the eruption, there would be large earthquakes in the region. The ground would swell further with most of the area being uplifted. One earthquake would finally break the layer of rock that holds the magma in - and all the pressure the Earth can build up in 640,000 years would be unleashed in a cataclysmic event. Magma would be flung more than 50 kilometres into the atmosphere. Within a thousand kilometres virtually all life would be killed by falling ash, lava flows and the sheer explosive force of the eruption. Volcanic ash would cover places thousands of miles away. One thousand cubic kilometres of lava would pour out of the volcano itself, enough to coat the whole of the USA with a layer a few inches thick. The explosion would have a force 1000-2500 times that of Mount St. Helens. It would be the loudest noise heard by man for more than 75,000 years, the time of the last super volcano eruption. Within minutes of the eruption tens of thousands could be dead.
It's true. They've started serious discussion about Yellowstone. Maybe I'm a little more care-free than I should be, but the way I look at it is... we can't tell when it will happen, and knowing isn't really going to save lives. The ash will be so thick that we'll have one of those black day things (whatever they call them). I don't worry about it, if it happens, it happens.
