Underwater volcanoes would end up being phreatic in nature and the fall out wouldn’t be bad for the environment. None of the phreatic eruptions will cause volcanic winters or anything similar
Honestly, I’m not surprised that Vesuvius got the top spot. Vesuvius might be smaller than the other volcanoes on the list but it threatens the same region as Campi Flegrei and is far more likely to have a violent eruption in the relatively near future. Vesuvius’s history speaks for itself since when people think of volcanoes that have destroyed cities, Vesuvius is normally the first volcano that comes to mind. Vesuvius is also one of the two volcanoes on this list that I have actually been to, the other is Kilauea
Mt. Vesuvius destroyed Pompeii in 79 AD, not BC. I was just watching a History Channel documentary of it last night; imagine one volcanic eruption destroying a city with lava, ash, and gases in just 18 hours--scary indeed!!
Surprised that Mt. Fuji isn't on the list, considering it practically sits on Tokyo's doorstep. Especially as the 2011 Earthquake increased the pressure under the volcano and its predicted to erupt sometime this century.
Remember the tonga underwater volcano? that may have been a SUPER volcano as it did what the WEAKEST Super eruption type. interesting it could have been a super eruption this whole time
Funny how there's no Sakurajima, Santorini or even Pinatubo or Popocatépetl, since they mention St Helens. And this list is about more dangerous to people who lives around it, not to the world. Taupo itself would probably cause a volcanic winter just like Yellowstone and Taipo. But it's a nice list overall :D
@@dipperq yes, it's a biggie too. There is also an active one in Colima, Mexico, which has been very active in recent years. We have beach houses on the Pacific coast very close to that volcano so we watch it closely. You can see it from the backyard of our houses.
Oops it was 79AD not BC. Roman Empire was at its height then. 79BC was before Julius Caesar tried to conquer Britannia, 79AD after Cladius did and Augustus took Egypt.
No, Claudius was the Stepfather of Nero, after Neros fall in one year reigned 3 emperors, Otho, Gaöba and a third, Then came the revolt of the Jews against Rome and Vespasianus became Emperor, 70 AD his son Titus conquered Jerusalem. 79 AD this Titus was Emperor.
You missed the point. We are talking about potential current risk. It’s extremely unlikely Yellowstone will erupt for thousands and thousands of years. By that logic, many other volcanoes on earth pose a greater immediate risk.
@@Underworld5s yeah immediate Risk but in the long run of things Yellowstone is definitely the most destructible volcano on this Earth I mean come on it's got like a 40 mile wide crater.......
Super volcanos can have eruptions that are not just massive explosions. In fact they can have all kinds of eruptions, Yellowstone has had many different smaller eruptions since it’s last major caldera forming super eruption 600,000 years ago.
And it's difficult to read because it's a nested caldera system. "New" mapping indicates it's moving. Yellowstone lake being pushed to the east. recent seismic data indicate magma chamber far larger than previously modeled. And is filling at an estimated rate of a billion m3 per year.
I'm a bit curious why Krakatoa which destroyed 70% of the island it's located on and la gerita caldera which formed a 35×75 km crater and drastically changed the climate of the earth
If your question is why they aren't on the list, it's probably because for both, a new major eruption is unlikely any time soon. EDIT: Then again, Kilauea is one of the least explosive and most predictable volcanoes that only causes minor property damage in comparison to other volcanoes, and there are several volcanoes in Latin America or Indonesia more dangerous than Mount St. Helens, and then there is Iwo Jima, so the list is not the best.
@@jamesgage1831 Same thing. AD stands for anno Domini, or "Year of Our Lord;" CE is just Common Era or, if you prefer, Christian Era. This is the updated way of notating time; Julius Caesar was killed in 44 BCE, Vesuvius went *BOOM* in 79 CE.
I would replace Kilauea with Taal.. Taal is also a small supervolcano in a highly populated area...ares... VEI 6(the size of the one that made the big crater on volcano island)and the pyroclasic flows reach the suburbs of Manila with ease (the thing that wiped out Pompeii) VEI 7(it's had at least 3 )and Manilla is wiped out
I live in Susono City in Shizuoka Prefecture, Japan, just at the foot of Mt. Fuji. Officials and geologists say that there is a high chance that Mt. Fuji is going to erupt in the next 30-40 years, so we are thinking of moving, but my mom doesn't wanna move... :'(
Kilauea’s eruption and lava type make it far less threatening than stratovolcanoes that are covered in glaciers or those known for huge, explosive eruptions. The people of Hawaii also have a much different outlook on volcanoes than most other places. Kilauea is exceptionally well-studied and well-monitored, and its fallout is limited. Ditto for St. Helens. Less so for Rainier, but infrastructure for evacuations do exist. If you live near a volcano, you just learn to accept that you might live to see an eruption, and if you’re smart, you prepare for it.
Kilauea is a extremely small version of a flood basalt, which is the most dangerous type of eruption. Believed to be the cause of the worst extinction evert in world history
@@protipskiptoendofvideoandr286and it’s similar to flood basaltic eruptions, but the Hawaiian island chain isn’t linked to any of the large igneous provinces. They’re similar, but on a way smaller scale. @@protipskiptoendofvideoandr286
You appear to be scientists but flank /rift collapse is the problem. The Iki, Kilauea Loihi and Mauna Loa complexes will grind away but flank collapse, rift failure is the largest danger. East Rift of Kilauea has sped up. Go to HVO and look at seismic cluster on southwest hinge. It's kinda scary. The most heavily instrumented volcanic complex in the world. There's even really neato(sorry not a scientific term) live cams of the active lava lake
And I haven't seen, let me say , it's cool to yell at people who appear to know what they're talking about, Katmai. And Aniakchak. Are both moving. Katmai more dangerous in my opinion.. Katmai capable of another VE5.
@@protipskiptoendofvideoandr286 I respectfully disagree that it's extremely small but I see your point. I haven't seen an explanation for the Siberian Traps nor the Columdia Flood basalt complex that satisfies me and I consider myself to be a pretty fucking good scientist. However I'm remiss because I was too busy trying to figure out disseminated gold deposits in Northern Nevada. Shame on me
Since I'm not doing a review of your videos on my channel due to the video lagging badly whenever I try to film (which is annoying), I will comment here. I think there should've been other volcanoes on that list that are far dangerous than others mentioned. While St. Helen's was destructive in 1980 (although volcanologists do say there was a far massive eruption that happened over 500 years ago as ash from the eruption was found in Canada), St. Helen's was destructive that day mainly because of the lateral blast that the volcanologists weren't anticipating as a lateral blast had never been witnessed by volcanologists prior to 1980 (however, because of their experience with St. Helen's, they were able to save more people when the volcano at Monserrat erupted in the mid 1990s because that eruption was a lateral blast too). The lateral blast happened as a result of a deformation that occurred on the side of the volcano. And Mount St. Helen's has erupted since 1980 in the early 2000s that didn't have a very powerful eruption because what makes an eruption powerful and dangerous is the kind of magma in the magma chamber. Since most of the gas was released in the 1980 eruption, there wasn't much gas in the chamber when it erupted in the early 2000s. I think Toba should've been on there. It's a super volcano like Yellowstone, but it has a history of putting a nice dent in the human population. I think Tambora should've been put on there as it's eruption in 1815 was a VEI 7...just below the super eruption level of VEI 8. It caused a massive death toll due to starvation as the eruption caused snow to fall in the summer of 1816...hence the year without a summer. Krakotoa should've been on the list too. I agree with Vesuvius being on the list as not only we have information from the past of what it's capable of, but there is a massive magma chamber beneath it. I'm clueless which volcano should be the fifth, but it's not Kilauea. I don't neccessarily disagree that a volcano like that can't be dangerous in it's own right. 250 million years ago, it is believed that the massive extinction on the planet (like 95% of the life on the planet became extinct) was caused by a massive volcano eruption that came out of Siberia. Particularly, where the Siberian traps are. Of course, the reason why that eruption was long and massive is that a hot spot developed underneath what had originally been a swamp. It also burned through a layer of coal, and coal burns for a long time (just look at Centralia in PA). Not only does coal burn for a long time, it gives off dangerous gases like carbon monoxide and methane. However, since the hot spot underneath that disappeared or move onto another location...that location is irrelevant these days. However, that eruption was the type that Kilauea produces. So, an eruption like that going on for a long time can do some damage. But I still wouldn't think Kilauea is dangerous. Not yet at least. If the eruption continues until 2083, I may consider it such. This is pretty long as it is, so I will stop here.
Very accurate your comment. The video is non scientific at all, just barelly reasonable. Toba, Yellowstone, and so on - much, much more distructive then some of the video list. Dissapointing video. Cordially your.
79 AD, not BC. It was in the first century of ‘anno domini’ Just… gonna put that out there. Excellent video as always. Just one blooper this time. I rather like that.
You're not listening to the right people. The whole flank, East Rift of Kilauea could let go ....today. tomorrow. 5vyears 100 years. 1000 years. But it will. It has before. It will again. And Kilauea also has a history of violent Plinian eruptions. Luckily not many people live there. No one talks about the biggest monster there, Mauna Loa. The largest volcano on our planet. From base level, 12,ooo feet , to summit it is 5000 feet taller than Everest. Only 10000 feet is above sea level. And it's only 15 million. Years old.
Ms Pele entered a new eruptive phase after being quiet for about 12 years starting in 1983. The Kilauea summit complex was in constant eruption until 2017. An average of 2 million cubic meters per day. Ask the people of Royal Gardens Kalapana was wiped out. Flows went all the way to Hilo 30 miles away. . Then all was quiet. Then the summit suddenly began to collapse, and a monstrous flow started overnight, people were YTube getting fissures in their backyard in minutes. And you say it's benign. An estimate of 4 million tons per 8 hours, these numbers are unreal. Kalipan had already been destroyed so instead of going northeast towards Hiloit turned southwest and devastated that entire reach of coast. The summit, collapsed to a depth of 3000 feet. A hole so big you could fit eight Oakland coliseum in it. In two weeks. Benign. No. Now a new lava lake has formed.
I've been to the ski resort on Rainer, you would think someone would think about where they would put one, but then I've also been to the Mount Hood ski resort right on the mountain. Imagine working at both of those places if the mountain goes boom.
@@elizabethroberts6215 If that were tru they would always erupt together ..... they don't. I did say the do not share a magma chamber, that means THEY ARE NOT LINKED UNDERGROUND
@@who9387 ……typing in capitals’ is akin to shouting. I don’t appreciate a complete stranger to me, shouting at me. I’ll keep my own counsel in my original answer, thank you!
Did you know in Louisiana there is a EXTINCT volcano named door point by st benard parish? Also I'm kind of scared of volcanoes because of the global impacts of volcanic winters
I live in the Pacific NW, within a couple hours drive of both the "most dangerous" Washington state volcanoes, but they have barely even cleared their throats in over twenty years, so we're not exactly getting our knickers in a twist. I would have thought that the more dangerous volcanoes (considering population density) would be in the area of the mid-western Pacific ocean especially in the areas of Indonesia and the Philippines. These are third-world countries who have millions of people near to hand of some of these big smokers; and considering the lack of money, infrastructure and the sheer dearth of resources with which to rapidly move the millions of people out of the danger zones, ground zero could be a considerably wider area than anyone thought possible. Anyone remember Katrina? Try that in an area ten times bigger on islands, add lava and pumice, subtract fresh water, plus a total grid-lock of all rescue vehicles for a thousand miles around...
Humanitarian crises resulting from major volcanic eruptions in Java or Luzon, to name the most populous islands of Indonesia and the Philippines respectively, would most likely be every bit as bad as what's going on now with the war in Ukraine...probably even worse, given the even greater population figures and densities than in Ukraine.
I'm actually a bit worry because the Pacific Northwest is gonna possibly get hit by a big earthquake, and I'm actually worried that it might reach Yellowstone
Actually, Yellowstone is constantly active. Geysers release superheated water (duh) and relieve pressure from underground. Geysers keep Yellowstone stable.
……they were too close. They of all people should’ve known speed, & distance covered by a pyroclastic flow………maybe a case of familiarity breeds contempt, & it killed them………
The reason the Yellowstone Caldera is not that dangerous is because it is self regulating. All the water around the system regulates the temperature and pressure so that an explosive eruption is highly unlikely, at this time.
Volcanoes number 5,4,3 don’t even pale in comparison to Yellowstone. Yes there are deadly for their surrounding areas but you are talking about worldwide destruction volcanoes. Number 1 and number 2 could be argued to be more powerful then Yellowstone but not even mt St. Helens although very destructive, didn’t even come close to ending humanity, the title of the video is very misleading
According to current research, Yellowstone won't ever have a super-eruption again, because the hot spot has thinned out the crust too much and tectonic movement is taking it off from above the hot spot, which will create another supervolcano to the east, but only in about a million years. The video though makes a very poor and too US-focused choice. While Campi Flegrei does deserve first place, Kilauea should not even be on the list, and there are several volcanoes in Indonesia alone more dangerous than Mount St. Helens or Mount Rainier.
Interesting, however the two deadliest eruptions of the 20th century came from less assuming volcanos. Mount Pelée in Martinique resulted in close to 30,000 deaths in 1902 and the Nevado del Ruiz in Colombia over 20,000 in 1985.
Amazing how Mount Pelee is so overlooked since it’s practically in the backyard of those of us who live in the USA I’d never heard of it until I visited Martinique on a cruise
@@shisuiuchiha2159 it is but is not likely to have a full scale eruption for a very long time, Vesuvius is more likely to have a major eruption and definitely deserved its spot on the list
@@jakealter5504 the thing is, you need to consider that Campi Flergi doesn't need to have a full scale eruption to kill millions as well as impact neighboring states due to tsunamis as most the volcano is underwater.
@@shisuiuchiha2159 not all of the volcano is under water, it just depends on where the eruption takes place since it could either be in an underwater area or on dry land. You’re also forgetting that Vesuvius can also generate tsunamis even though they probably wouldn’t be as big
@@jakealter5504 hence why I stated most the volcano is underwater plus, there are much more people living in the danger zone of Flergi compared to Vesuvius.
Gee not a single word about how in geological time Yellowstone is far overdue for a super eruption, Yellowstone has the capacity to cause an extinction event.
No actually it doesn't it has to have 240 cubic miles to produce a supereruption and only 5-15 liquid even if it does erupt it will never be on a scale to wipe out all of mankind and will only cause risks in the park itself as it doesn't have the capacity to do so , as for Yellowstone being overdue that is quite common thing but its very wrong as Yellowstone never ran on a schedule nor will ever and its rare for a volcano , especially supervolcqnoes , to work like that. The only thing we might have a chance from getting from yellowstone is a phreatic eruption which is still pushing it, each year its a 1 in 730,000 or 0.00014 chance yellowstone will ever erupt in our lifetimes 😊
@@IMSkyePOG next bigge reruption of yellowstone will be possibly vei5-6. ust like few thousand years ago( dont know how much but its not really long ago)
I would love to see new Zealands Taupo lake to be done its also a super volcano and we have been getting lots of activity happening like earthquakes in the middle of the lake
Which volcano are you talking about? And what about the greed of private companies and developers who build there, isn't than a more likely source of government inaction than any relative difference in tax income?
I just visited Campi Flegrei and I found rocks of rhyolite dacite which means are any future eruption Campi Flegrei has could be another super volcanic eruption.
if you found that rock doesn't really mean next eruption will be an super eruption. that means this volcano has in his history big eruption. campi flegrei is an big volcano wich major eruption forms a vei6-7 eruption (not an supervolcano). But its indeed an dangerous volcano. srry bad english.
Campi flegrei got a big upliftment this year. And also smoke always gets ejected from cracks. It will surely have a caldera forming eruption in our lifetime.
I honestly do agree it may blow its top but this volcano has uplift every few years and then goes back down but it does seem it is going to do something
@@IMSkyePOG You are right about the upliftment getting down later but I had seen a person who said the smoke ejecting currently is more than average and also the mud bubbling is increasing. And such type of activity didn't increased during 2016 upliftment, only the ground got uplifted at that time.
The next eruption will likely be 'small' (VEI2/3/4/)even then thousands of people will be in danger and hundreds will be killed if not evacuated properly. If it decides to go caldera... well .... fuck
I go with the feeling that , one can take some actions to lessen the events impact on yourself, but to worry endlessly about said concern is nothing less than wasted time and energy. Not looking to sound arrogant but one can do all a human can do in case of an eruption, Stock food and supplies, medical needs, reinforce the place you will stay until worsening conditions calls for bugging out to a safer area or leaving the area sooner than later. We as mortal can only do so much,, worrying about things will do nothing for a person safety, ringing your hands and pacing endlessly will not fix anything but understandably it is a way for nervous energy to be expelled ones mind. My example of how I came to learn this mind set isn't anywhere near a volcanic eruption level but rather when I was a young man I was a radio hobbyist. I put up a tower and antenna for part of the hobby. When the spring time storms came I was crazy worried about lightening hitting my tower and thoughts of the current traveling into the home by traveling along the wiring. I took precautions against this but still I paced the floors until a family member told me,, If the lighting is going to hit , your worrying will not do anything to stop it from happening. From that day on I realized that I have very little control in what happens. I can take personal precautions in things more likely to happen living in a certain area. I try to be prepared for certain things in life but the really big things I am useless in changing the outcome or event from happening.
I live like 50 miles away of mt Rainer and the side im facing rn could collapse just like 5,600 years ago when the 7 cubic miles of the summit came off and its now 14,411 ft tall
I live in New Zealand. This shit is pretty scary lmfao. NZ is a baby compared to other countries. If a super-volcano where to erupt in/near NZ, I swear the whole country would be affected. I wish natural disasters where not a thing haha
Yeah same I'm also from new Zealand and it has always been on my mind when or if this volcano will erupt again😱 well now i know that us new Zealanders are safe for now. 😳
……the biggest eruption was Mt Toba, Indonesia, 74,000 years’ ago………reading book on that now……… Reading books’ currently, on effects of Mt Tambora 1815 eruption. Absolutely fascinating………
to be fair, most volcano are more dangerous than yellowstone. Despite being a supervolcano, he's a heavy sleeper so unless the ring of fire wake up all at once.. he will remain asleep
But, if Yellowstone does erupt, life as we know it will end. It'll kill almost every living thing on the planet. Not immediately but as a result of the aftermath. I don't buy that any of these valcanoes are more dangerous than Yellowstone.
@@aron1332 humanity wasn't as crowded nor dependent on intercontinental/global trading of resources. Humanity as it is today is a lot more reliant on the community than 75,000 years ago when we were still fairly young as a communal species. And also, right place, right time kind of thing. Just an eruption alone won't kill, but you add global warming/global volcanic winters, lack of tradable resources, lack of medicine, etc into the mix, you get a bigger problem.
Sorry, didn't see your comment. the Toba incident you are referring to was a super eruption, but Toba is only about 60% the size of Yellowstone> Toba is also located between the Eurasian plates and the Indo-Australian plates, which are much less active than the Pacific and N American plates. A Yellowstone eruption would, according to geologists, affect the stability of the entire eastern half of the ring of fire. This would result in massive eruptions along the line from Alaska and as far south as S America. The release of this amount of energy at once could likely cause a major shift in the tectonic plates. The resulting ash release would blanket the planet lowering temperatures an estimated 10 to 15 deg. As this would affect the majority of the agricultural areas around the world, most if not all crops would fail causing a world wide starvation. It goes on from there. Any more questions?
I believe people say that Yellowstone is more dangerous because it may indeed not erupt for another few thousand years, but if it erupted at a full scale, it could be catastrophic.
Tree active volcanoes in Guatemala, Pacaya, Fuego, and Santa Maria are most dangerous volcanoes. Pacaya and Fuego are located very closely to the capital of the country, Guatemala City, with a population of almost one million, which is same as it of Naples. Comparing economic situation of Italy and Guatemala, the damage of eruption would be more critical in Guatemala. Volcano Santa Maria is also close to the densely populated area of the country.
Campi Flegrei is very danger supervolcano .. Caldera is very large approximately 10km .All the Europe could be affect by explosion. 6 milions people live close to Supervolcano.
Jellystone, the home of everyones favoirite bear (Yogi) and Booboo is constantly releasing farts so wont do a shart anytime soon-so just carry on leaving those picnic hampers for Yogi and Booboo!
