ALBERT

Description: The program "Eject!" calculates the trajectories of ballistic projectiles from volcanic eruptions (Mastin, 2001; 2011). The code was originally written in Visual Basic, which we have now translated into an editable Matlab procedure (Strehlow et al., 2017). Input parameters used here are exemplary for the case of Ruapehu volcano, but can be adapted to any specific case. Additionally, we have written a short script that compares the flight trajectory to the topography of the volcano to determine the flight distance.

Description: The program "Eject!" calculates the trajectories of ballistic projectiles from volcanic eruptions (Mastin, 2001; 2011). The code was originally written in Visual Basic, which we have now translated into an editable Matlab procedure (Strehlow et al., 2017). Input parameters used here are exemplary for the case of Ruapehu volcano, but can be adapted to any specific case. Additionally, we have written a short script that compares the flight trajectory to the topography of the volcano to determine the flight distance.

Description: Key points: • Detectable self-potential and deformation anomalies result from poroelastic responses of volcanicaquifers by subsurface pressurization • Self-potential amplitudes and their polarity are sensitive to magmatic stressing and pressure sourceorientation (dike vs. sill) • Our multi-physics approach provides new insights into pre-eruptive processe Pre‐eruptive electrical signals at active volcanoes are generally interpreted in terms of electrokinetic processes. Spatio‐temporal self‐potential (SP) signals can be caused by strain‐induced fluid flow in volcanic aquifers, however, previous studies lack the quantitative assessments of these phenomena and the underpinning poroelastic responses. Here we use Finite‐Element Analysis to study poroelastic responses induced by subsurface stressing from sill and dike sources by jointly solving for ground displacements, pore pressure and SP signals. We evaluate the influence of pressure source orientation on the poroelastic response in two different volcanic aquifers (pyroclastic and lava flow) to provide insights on emergent geodetic and SP signals and their sensitivity to governing parameters. Strain‐induced SP amplitudes deduced from a reference parameter set vary in both aquifer models and are of negative polarity (‐0.35 mV and ‐22.6 mV) for a pressurized dike and of positive polarity (+4 mV and +20 mV) for a pressurized sill. Importantly, we find uniquely different SP and ground displacement patterns from either sill or dike intrusions. Our study shows that SP signals are highly sensitive to the subsurface Young's modulus, streaming potential coupling coefficient and electrical conductivity of the poroelastic domains. For the set of parameters tested, the dike model predicts SP amplitudes of up to ‐947 mV which are broadly representative of recorded amplitudes from active volcanoes. Our study demonstrates that electrokinetic processes reflect magma‐induced stress and strain variations and highlights the potential of joint geodetic and SP studies to gain new insights on causes of volcanic unrest.

Description: Forecasting and early warning systems are important investments to protect lives, properties and livelihood. While early warning systems are frequently used to predict the magnitude, location and timing of potentially damaging events, these systems rarely provide impact estimates, such as the expected amount and distribution of physical damage, human consequences, disruption of services or financial loss. Complementing early warning systems with impact forecasts has a two‐fold advantage: it would provide decision makers with richer information to take informed decisions about emergency measures, and focus the attention of different disciplines on a common target. This would allow capitalizing on synergies between different disciplines and boosting the development of multi‐hazard early warning systems. This review discusses the state‐of‐the‐art in impact forecasting for a wide range of natural hazards. We outline the added value of impact‐based warnings compared to hazard forecasting for the emergency phase, indicate challenges and pitfalls, and synthesize the review results across hazard types most relevant for Europe. Plain language summary Forecasting and early warning systems are important investments to protect lives, properties and livelihood. While such systems are frequently used to predict the magnitude, location and timing of potentially damaging events, they rarely provide impact estimates, such as the expected physical damage, human consequences, disruption of services or financial loss. Extending hazard forecast systems to include impact estimates promises many benefits for the emergency phase, for instance, for organising evacuations. We review and compare the state‐of‐the‐art of impact forcasting across a wide range of natural hazards, and outline opportunities and key challenges for research and development of impact forecasting.