Dear "MyManao" and your other socks,
I have some questions and points I'd like to make. Thanks for your indulgence.
"The 1984 eruption of Mauna Loa was only 3 weeks long. By that time flows had reached within about 9 miles of the outskirts of Hilo. Though the distance traveled was impressive, by that time the lava flow's advance had been reduced to a crawl. As such, any threat to Hilo proper would have still been months away."
I understand that, although if the eruption had lasted longer than three-weeks, surely the risk to Hilo would have been greater?
"As I said above, the flow that threatened Hilo in 1984 came within a few miles of town before it was slowed by the loss of heat experienced by lava flowing over that distance."
So are you claiming the lava wouldn't have reached Hilo because it would have cooled down or that the eruption only lasted three-weeks? If the eruption had continued for a longer time, wouldn't the cooling lava have been continually replenished by newer and hotter lava?
"So, using that model, and assuming the next Mauna Loa East Rift eruption is from the same area as the last, and listening to the speculation that the next eruption in that area is likely to flow towards the south side of the rift, we can imagine the flow reaching to.. maybe Eden Rock.. Fern Acres... before it runs out of steam?"
I do have a little experience in modeling systems. I can tell you now that the above is not a model, it's a mixture of assumptions, imagination, maybes, hearsay, and speculation. The "listening to speculation" bit really started to give that away as well as ending with a question. Why not just say "I don't know?".
"And do keep in mind, by the blue lines.. i.e., the paths water would take flowing from that area (the 9,000 foot elevation near Red Hill) the flows would go through the Volcano Farm Lots before glancing off of Kilauea in the Akasuka Orchids area and fanning out through Fern Forest and below.."
Whatever you say. Just a suggestion - you might post a link to a website or a map so others know what you a referring to. I've often found doing that is helpful.
"Yeah, I suspect Mauna Loa could be for more impacting to Puna than some imagine..."
Geologically or economically? Or something else? If, e.g., Hilo is overrun by lava then, of course, Puna is going to suffer or is this your final conclusion?
Oh, wait a minute, it isn't:
"And hey, if it doesn't come this side again, imagine if it goes to the West! This...
https://www.usgs.gov/volcanoes/mauna-loa...e-eruption
is an awesome read.. a real page turner."
It's not really a page-turner, is it?
I have some questions and points I'd like to make. Thanks for your indulgence.
"The 1984 eruption of Mauna Loa was only 3 weeks long. By that time flows had reached within about 9 miles of the outskirts of Hilo. Though the distance traveled was impressive, by that time the lava flow's advance had been reduced to a crawl. As such, any threat to Hilo proper would have still been months away."
I understand that, although if the eruption had lasted longer than three-weeks, surely the risk to Hilo would have been greater?
"As I said above, the flow that threatened Hilo in 1984 came within a few miles of town before it was slowed by the loss of heat experienced by lava flowing over that distance."
So are you claiming the lava wouldn't have reached Hilo because it would have cooled down or that the eruption only lasted three-weeks? If the eruption had continued for a longer time, wouldn't the cooling lava have been continually replenished by newer and hotter lava?
"So, using that model, and assuming the next Mauna Loa East Rift eruption is from the same area as the last, and listening to the speculation that the next eruption in that area is likely to flow towards the south side of the rift, we can imagine the flow reaching to.. maybe Eden Rock.. Fern Acres... before it runs out of steam?"
I do have a little experience in modeling systems. I can tell you now that the above is not a model, it's a mixture of assumptions, imagination, maybes, hearsay, and speculation. The "listening to speculation" bit really started to give that away as well as ending with a question. Why not just say "I don't know?".
"And do keep in mind, by the blue lines.. i.e., the paths water would take flowing from that area (the 9,000 foot elevation near Red Hill) the flows would go through the Volcano Farm Lots before glancing off of Kilauea in the Akasuka Orchids area and fanning out through Fern Forest and below.."
Whatever you say. Just a suggestion - you might post a link to a website or a map so others know what you a referring to. I've often found doing that is helpful.
"Yeah, I suspect Mauna Loa could be for more impacting to Puna than some imagine..."
Geologically or economically? Or something else? If, e.g., Hilo is overrun by lava then, of course, Puna is going to suffer or is this your final conclusion?
Oh, wait a minute, it isn't:
"And hey, if it doesn't come this side again, imagine if it goes to the West! This...
https://www.usgs.gov/volcanoes/mauna-loa...e-eruption
is an awesome read.. a real page turner."
It's not really a page-turner, is it?