Did steam boost the height and growth rate of the giant Hunga eruption plume?

Abstract

The eruption of Hunga volcano on 15 January 2022 produced a higher plume and faster-growing umbrella cloud than has ever been previously recorded. The plume height exceeded 58 km, and the umbrella grew to 450 km in diameter within 50 min. Assuming an umbrella thickness of 10 km, this growth rate implied an average volume injection rate into the umbrella of 330–500 km3 s−1. Conventional relationships between plume height, umbrella-growth rate, and mass eruption rate suggest that this period of activity should have injected a few to several cubic kilometers of rock particles (tephra) into the plume. Yet tephra fall deposits on neighboring islands are only a few centimeters thick and can be reproduced using ash transport simulations with only 0.1–0.2 km3 erupted volume (dense-rock equivalent). How could such a powerful eruption contain so little tephra? Here, we propose that seawater mixing at the vent boosted the plume height and umbrella growth rate. Using the one-dimensional (1-D) steady plume model Plumeria, we find that a plume fed by ~90% water vapor at a temperature of 100 °C (referred to here as steam) could have exceeded 50 km height while keeping the injection rate of solids low enough to be consistent with Hunga’s modest tephra-fall deposit volume. Steam is envisaged to rise from intense phreatomagmatic jets or pyroclastic density currents entering the ocean. Overall, the height and expansion rate of Hunga’s giant plume is consistent with the total mass of fall deposits plus underwater density current deposits, even though most of the erupted mass decoupled from the high plume. This example represents a class of high (> 10 km), ash-poor, steam-driven plumes, that also includes Kīlauea (2020) and Fukutoku-oka-no-ba (2021). Their height is driven by heat flux following well-established relations; however, most of the heat is contained in steam rather than particles. As a result, the heights of these water-rich plumes do not follow well-known relations with the mass eruption rate of tephra.