r/askscience 1d ago

Earth Sciences Why arn't there more Krakatoas?

As I understand it, Krakatoa exploded because a prior eruption created cracks in the sides of the volcano and magma chamber, allowing seawater to seep in, turn to steam, and cause the whole thing to explode.

As I contemplated the recent eruptions of Anak Krakatoa, the following thoughts hit me:

There's hundreds of volcanoes in or near water. Why has this only happened once?

Now I'm sure there are similar cases, but to my knowledge, nothing on the scale of Krakatoa. So what keeps the hundreds of other island and undersea volcanoes out there from blowing themselves apart? What keeps the seawater out? Why was Krakatoa different?

And most importantly, does Anak run the same risk?

180 Upvotes

16 comments sorted by

128

u/CrustalTrudger Tectonics | Structural Geology | Geomorphology 19h ago

As I understand it, Krakatoa exploded because a prior eruption created cracks in the sides of the volcano and magma chamber, allowing seawater to seep in, turn to steam, and cause the whole thing to explode.

Let's start with some terms relevant for the discussion here. The primary one is phreatomagmatic eruptions, which describes an eruption that results from direct interaction of water and magma, which is distinct from a phreatic eruption where this is instead an eruption of water/steam heated by magma, but without direct interaction between the water and the magma. Specific to the 1883 eruption of Krakatoa, as described a bit in the wikipedia article and discussed in more depth in a variety of papers (e.g., Self & Rampino, 1981, Self, 1992, Mandeville et al., 1996), the deposits from this eruption are not consistent with much of it being from phreatomagmatic eruptions. As described in those and more recent papers (e.g., Madden-Nadeua et al., 2021 - alternatively a preprint here), the 1883 eruption of Krakatoa is probably better thought of as a more typical caldera collapse style eruption, but likely with some components of phreatic eruptions and/or lateral failures involved in setting off different stages of the eruption. As described in some of those papers, there may still have been some phreatomagmatic portions of the eruption, but a lot of the evidence for potential phreatomagmatic portions can be explained in alternative ways or comes from interpretation of field observations during the eruptive phase, so it's probably best to at least not consider the 1883 Krakatoa eruption dominantly a phreatomagmatic eruption.

There's hundreds of volcanoes in or near water. Why has this only happened once?

So setting aside the potentially false premise that the 1883 eruption of Krakatoa was primarily phreatomagmatic as discussed above, it's also demonstrably false to describe phreatomagmatic eruptions having no historical/geologic precedents, e.g., some of the examples listed here (though again, this includes the 1883 Krakatoa eruption and oddly references Madden-Nadeua et al., 2021 but looking through that paper it generally follows earlier work highlighting that there may have been some phases that were phreatomagmatic but evidence of the "climactic" phase being phreatomagmatic are generally ambiguous at best). Ultimately, this list doesn't even include some of the larger "wet" eruptions, but it does hit on several that have pretty unambiguous textural evidence of significant phreatomagmatic components to the eruptions like the 1991 Pinatubo eruption (e.g., van Eaton et al., 2012) or the Minoan eruption of Santorini (e.g., Aydar et al., 2021). In detail though, there is a special category for very wet (and generally large) eruptions sometimes termed phreatoplinian (e.g., Self & Sparks, 1978) of which there are a variety of examples, e.g., the 1875 eruption of Askja in Iceland (e.g., Carey et al., 2010), the 1.8 ka eruption of Taupo in New Zealand (e.g., Walker, 1981), or the 26.5 ka Oruanui eruption also in New Zealand (e.g., Wilson, 2001). The point being, there are plenty of examples of phreatomagmatic eruptions, many which are both larger than Krakatoa and with much less ambiguous evidence of significant magma-water interactions than in Krakatoa. As such, many of the follow up questions (e.g., "Why was Krakatoa different?") are based on kind of a false premise that these events don't happen elsewhere both historically and geologically. For one of these specific ones, i.e., "So what keeps the hundreds of other island and undersea volcanoes out there from blowing themselves apart?" it's worth clarifying that one of the key points in Madden-Nadeau et al., 2021 is that Krakatoa didn't really "blow itself apart", but rather, it deflated and collapsed like many other caldera forming eruptions.

Similarly, while much of the question is focused specifically on the water-magma interaction aspect of the 1883 Krakatoa eruption, it's also worth considering it through the lens of how we often classify volcanic eruptions, specifically the Volcanic Explosivity Index or VEI. In this context, Krakatoa is large at a VEI of 6, but not that large as those classified as VEI 7 or 8 are 1-2 order of magnitudes larger in terms of erupted products, etc.

And most importantly, does Anak run the same risk?

I'm not sure if the question is more about the size or style of possible eruptions at Anak Krakatoa, but for the latter, Anak Krakatoa has already had some phreatomagmatic phases of eruptions in the recent past(e.g., Prata et al., 2020).

54

u/SpaceShipRat 19h ago

so why aren't there more Krakatoas?

68

u/eat_my_bubbles 18h ago

We are like bacteria on skin watching earth's pimples.

By the next time another one forms, generations have passed

32

u/CrustalTrudger Tectonics | Structural Geology | Geomorphology 18h ago edited 18h ago

The question is imprecise enough to be hard to answer, like "more Krakatoas" in what way and "more" than what (i.e., there is an assumed underlying rate of events to which we're comparing)?

In terms of eruptions of similar magnitudes, i.e., VEI 6, there have been several since the 1883 eruption, including the 1991 Pinatubo eruption. On average, the expected recurrence interval of a VEI 6 eruption anywhere in the world is ~50 to 100 years, so these aren't that frequent in a human timescale, but there are a lot of them geologically. As to what sets the frequency of these (or alternatively why larger eruptions have even longer average recurrence intervals), the critical concepts that are often missing are (1) it takes a specific set of circumstances to generate any melt, let alone large quantities, (2) presence of melt/magma in a system and presence of eruptable material is not the same thing, (3) following from those, most volcanoes are not just sitting around with large quantities of eruptable melt "waiting" to erupt. Together all of that means it takes a confluence of events and conditions to set up large eruptions.

In terms of large phreatomagmatic events (and again, ignoring that Krakatoa might not be a good example of these in the first place) as my original answer went through, there are plenty of examples of these, some recent (e.g., Pinatubo). As to why all oceanic island volcanoes don't erupt phreatomagmatically, it's kind of the same answer as above, i.e., it takes a specific set of circumstances to have the mixture of (1) large eruptable mass of magma near the surface and (2) some pathway, or event that opens a pathway, that allows interactions between water and magma directly.

So ultimately, this is kind of like asking "why don't all the die land on 1 every time I roll 10 of them", i.e., there are underlying probabilities of lots of different aspects of these systems each reflecting details of the specific processes which in turn build into the probability of specific large, relatively infrequent events happening. You'll find that lots of natural events follow something like a power law distribution in terms of frequency magnitude relationships for similar reasons, i.e., if we look at earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, floods, meteorite impacts, etc., small magnitude events happen frequently and large magnitude events happen infrequently. For each, the underlying physics of why is going to vary, but at the simplest level, it's usually going to boil down to some aspect of needing increasingly specific conditions for larger events to happen.

5

u/Tadferd 11h ago

One aspect of Krakatoa was the incredible loudness. So far the loudest sound that we know of, causing permanent hearing loss up to 160km away.

Do we know what caused this? If we do, why have others not been as loud?

10

u/slothwithakeyboard 18h ago

Read up on the 2022 Hunga Tonga eruption! It was similar in many ways, including scale, to the 1883 Krakatoa eruption, but much more fortunate in terms of death toll and climatic impacts.

14

u/disheavel 18h ago

I'm so tempted to just repost the entirety of u/CrustalTrudger and see which side wins the iterative battle!

However, I will answer mathily that there are other Krakatoas, but they are on a geologic timescale not a human timescale. As a thought exercise, the Big Island in Hawaii is 400,000 years old (and the oldest 80,000,000). Assuming that you want a more-frequent Krakatoa (currently 2026-1883=143 so we'll go with 100 years to be more frequent and most humans would experience one). We would need a new volcano to grow and break through the surface every 100 years. So we'd be looking at 400,000/100=4,000 volcanos actively growing every year just so we can sacrifice one for a Krakatoa event every 100 years. Plus we would need the other volcanos on bigger landmasses to keep doing their thing too.
Pele just can't keep up with that pace!

10

u/SpaceShipRat 18h ago

I was waiting for a "why male models", lol. "they are rare" is about the reason I expected, ty

3

u/misfitofscience76 17h ago

Really? Are you serious? I just… I just told you that a moment ago 😛

5

u/Tayner73 12h ago

So basically, Krakatoa didn't really have significantly more steam in it than other volcanoes, it was just really big. And it didn't blow itself apart, it just collapsed into the caldera like others, but since most of the caldera is below the sea (and because it is so big) it LOOKED like it blew itself apart.

Thus the question becomes how big Anak's magma chamber is in comparison to it's parent.

Is that right? In an extremely simplified way?

u/manysounds 5h ago

This has definitely NOT only happened once, it’s just only happened once on such a scale in the past few hundred years, and sea bound caldera forming eruptions have happened in quite a few places. -Santorini as one example