Dangerous
wavesThe
surface of water is very good at transferring energy, in the form of
waves, across great distances. In 1960, for example, an earthquake
near Chile created a series of waves that crossed the Pacific Ocean
and killed several hundred people 10,000 miles away in
Japan.
These waves, which are
generated from a major disturbance to the water surface, are known
as tsunami. (Most scientists don't like the popular name "tidal
wave" because tsunami have nothing to do with the tides. However,
tsunami sometimes surge ashore like a huge, fast-moving tide rather
than breaking like a classic surfing wave.)
Tsunami can
travel at around 400 mph in deep water. When they reach shallow
water they slow down, and that's when the real danger begins. The
front of the wave slows first and the effect is like a pile-up on a
freeway, with the rear of the wave catching up to the front. The
wave increases in height from this bunching effect. The final height
of the wave depends on several factors, but the shape of the sea
floor has the greatest impact. Estuaries, harbours, cliffs, reefs,
and the topography of the continental shelf all play a
role.
For a typical shoreline,
the final tsunami height is usually about three times its height in
deep water, but in some locations the ratio (known as "run-up
factor") reaches 40. In other words, a 1-foot wave in deepwater can
amplify to a 40-foot wave at a shoreline that is exceptionally
vulnerable to tsunami, as are some parts of Hawaii.
Splashdown If an asteroid
collides with the Earth there is a good chance it will hit an ocean,
simply because two-thirds of the Earth's surface is covered by
water. A gigantic explosion occurs and the asteroid is pulverised
and vaporised, along with a huge volume of water. This creates a
crater in the water surface that quickly fills. The filling process
generates a series of tsunami that radiate across the ocean. The
effect is similar to a pebble thrown into a pond, though with a
50,000-mph impact, we're not talking ripples
here.
Based on NASA estimates,
about once every 2,000 years an asteroid with a diameter of about
100 yards can be expected to hit one of Earth's oceans. Larger
asteroids collide with the Earth much less frequently -- a 500-yard
rock from space might hit an ocean once every 80,000 years and a
1,000-yard (1 k) asteroid perhaps once every 200,000
years.
Atomic bombs and
ocean impacts
The largest aboveground
H-bomb test by the United States was like a firecracker compared to
an asteroid impact. That "Bravo" explosion at Bikini Atoll in 1954
was equivalent to fifteen megatons (million tons) of TNT but was
only about one-thousandth of the energy of a 500-yard asteroid
moving at 50,000 mph.
The Bikini Atoll H-bomb
tests enabled scientists to develop computer models of the
destructive effects (on shipping) of explosions at the water
surface. In the early 1990s these models were applied to asteroid
impacts. Initial results suggested that even relatively small
impacts could pose a grave tsunami threat over large areas of
ocean.
More recent modelling
indicates that the tsunami generated by an asteroid impact tend to
dissipate, or die out, rapidly (the computer program, developed by
Sandia National Laboratories, accurately predicted the consequences
of the plummet of Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 into Jupiter in
1994).
According to this work,
a 500-yard-diameter asteroid is predicted to generate a water crater
nearly 3 miles in diameter. At a distance of 10 miles from "ground
zero" the resulting deepwater tsunami will be about 200 yards high,
but by the time the wave has travelled 100 miles it will be reduced
to a height of about 14 yards. After 1,000 miles it will have
dropped to less than 1 yard in height. Due to the amplification in
shallow water, however, this size tsunami could still become a
120-foot wave at a vulnerable shore.
Extra hazard to coastal
areasDue
to the extra hazard of tsunami, locations such as Hawaii are at much
greater risk from asteroid impacts than inland areas. Rough
calculations suggest that a coastal location with a typical tsunami
run-up factor of three has about three times the risk of devastation
from an asteroid-generated tsunami than the risk of a direct blast
to an inland location. Locations with an extreme tsunami run-up
factor of 40 have about 70 times the risk compared with an inland
location.
People in these
vulnerable locations need not lose sleep, however, because the odds
of a major asteroid-generated tsunami in any one year are about one
in 200,000. On the other hand, as astronomer Duncan Steel has
pointed out, asteroid impacts don't run to a timetable like
busses.
The estimate of impact
tsunami risk is based on the limited search for Near Earth Asteroids
carried out so far and assumes that impacts are randomly distributed
in time. There is some evidence that impacts may come in clusters
(some busses seem to do the same). If this is the case, then it is
well worth finding out if we are approaching the next barrage so
that coastal areas can be better prepared.
Climate
disruptionThe comparison between coastal and inland locations is not
entirely fair because the biggest danger from an asteroid impact is
not from the direct blast but from the after-effects. In particular,
the temporary cooling of the Earth due to huge quantities of dust
released into the atmosphere from a land impact can disrupt crop
production and lead to global starvation.
The giant plumes from
the Jupiter impact of Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 clearly showed how a
comet or asteroid tunnels through the atmosphere and creates a
temporary chimney. This draws the impact debris into the upper
atmosphere. Scientists are only beginning to understand this effect
in the case of an impact into Earth's oceans.
An ocean impact by a
500-yard-diameter asteroid will vaporise about 20 cubic miles of
water. At first sight this appears to be insignificant since it is
less than one tenth of the total amount of water that evaporates
from the world's oceans every day (assuming 1 inch of rain over 10
percent of the Earth's surface each day).
Scientists caution,
however, that an ocean impact would send the water vapour high into
the atmosphere, compared with the lower atmosphere, or troposphere,
in the case of evaporation. The upper stratosphere is normally
extremely dry and the effects of a sudden injection of a large
quantity of water vapour are simply unknown. Other effects of
concern are greenhouse warming (water vapour is a strong greenhouse
gas) and ozone depletion. Unlike evaporation, an ocean impact would
send salt (sodium chloride) into the air. The chlorine in the salt
may affect upper atmosphere ozone levels in the same way as
chlorofluorocarbons.
The same impact on land
would pulverise an equivalent amount of rock (20 cubic miles --
about 1,000 times the volume of the asteroid) and send much of it
into the upper atmosphere, where it would circulate around the globe
and disrupt agriculture for many months.
A lesson from violent
volcanoesIn 1815 a volcano on the Indonesian island of Tambora
exploded and produced a crater similar in size to that from a
500-yard asteroid. About 20 cubic miles of ejecta was released (for
comparison, the Mount St. Helens explosion in 1980 released about a
quarter of a cubic mile of ejecta).
In the case of Tambora,
it has been estimated that 10,000 people died directly from the
explosion and 80,000 more died in the region from indirect effects,
such as starvation. In addition, the ash is thought to have caused
the "year without a summer" in 1816, when there were widespread crop
failures across North America. The final death toll was
probably in the hundreds of thousands. A similar event today might
kill millions.
Because of the chimney
effect, an asteroid impact is much more efficient at sending dust
into the upper atmosphere than a volcanic explosion, and the
climatic disruption is probably much greater with an asteroid
impact. Even so, the events of 1815 serve as a clear warning of the
global danger from land impacts by asteroids.
With much less dust
released into the atmosphere, an ocean impact will have very
different, and perhaps less damaging, effects than a land impact. If
an asteroid struck thick ice formations, such as Antarctica or the
extensive ice sheets of the last Ice Age, the result would likely be
similar to a water impact.
It's possible that our
species has been saved from extinction several times because a large
asteroid hit the ocean or ice rather than the land. Every million
years or so it can be expected that a mile-wide asteroid will hit
the Earth. A land impact would probably cause severe climatic
disruption and regional extinctions. If the global effects of
an ocean/ice impact are less severe than one on land, then the
impact by a mile-wide asteroid into the ocean might not be as
hazardous to life.
Evidence of ocean
impactsPast impacts with water or ice are very difficult to detect,
because they leave very little evidence. One such impact is known to
have occurred in the South Pacific Ocean, near Chile, about 2
million years ago. This event -- known as "Eltanin" after the ship
that discovered the deposits -- involved an asteroid between 1 and 3
miles in diameter that would have created a water crater at least 40
miles across. Tsunami would have swamped coasts around the Pacific
and would even have reached some Atlantic coastlines. Assuming a
typical run-up factor of three, the coast of Chile would have been
inundated by 250-yard-high tsunami. Likely results for other
locations: Hawaii 90-yard tsunami (probably higher due to the
greater run-up factor); California, 60 yards; Japan and Australia,
25 yards; New Zealand; 120 yards.
Despite this presumed
destruction to coastal areas, there is no evidence of global climate
change or regional extinctions around this time, when our early
ancestors, Australopithecus, were roaming Africa. We don't know
whether they would have been wiped out if the Eltanin asteroid had
struck land in South America or Africa, instead of splashing into
the ocean. To solve that puzzle, to understand which type of impact
most threatens our existence, we need a much better understanding of
the consequences of asteroid impacts.
Acknowledgements I am grateful to the following
scientists for providing comment on this article: Erik Asphaug,
University of Southern California, Elisabeth Pierazzo, University of
Arizona, David Crawford, Sandia National Laboratories. This article
does not necessarily represent their views.
-- Michael Paine
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/astronomy/asteroid_paine_september.html
|