| I guess if they were to actually stop monitoring, or not have that staff to go over it, they would just have to close a large area to protect people who decided to hike around the area. I assume some people might even though it looks to be very remote. (maybe they already have, I don't know) I see Anchorage is about 78 miles away. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/volcano-alaskas-largest-city-erupt-coming-weeks-months-scientists-say-rcna196174 The eruptions during the last century lasted between three and seven hours, produced ash columns that rose more than 50,000 feet above sea level and deposited ashfall in south-central Alaska communities, according to the observatory. In 1992, ashfall of about a quarter-inch in Anchorage prompted residents to stay inside or to wear masks if going outside to avoid breathing ash. The cloud drifted as far as Greenland. Volcanic ash is angular and sharp and has been used as an industrial abrasive. The powdered rock can cause a jet engine to shut down. The 1992 eruptions prompted the temporary closures of airports in Anchorage and other communities. Closing airports can be more than an inconvenience in a state where most communities aren't connected to Alaska's main road system. Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport also is among the world's busiest cargo hubs. If they had some warning potentially, due to continued monitoring, maybe they could be a little more prepared when it comes to air traffic rather than being caught off-guard. I never thought about Anchorage being a big cargo hub. But since you have to get around by plane to a lot of places, that makes sense. People, and good, have to travel by plane. So a lot of ash in the air could ground supplies for awhile depending on how long it lasted. |