Changes in Atmospheric, Meteorological, and Ocean Parameters Associated with the 12 January 2020 Taal Volcanic Eruption
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Review of “Changes in Atmospheric, Meteorological and Ocean Parameters Associated with the 12 January 2020 Taal Volcanic Eruption” by Jing et al.
The manuscript examines the changes of diverse variables in atmosphere and ocean after the eruption of a volcano using satellite remote sensing data and in-situ. It is interesting to read the manuscript with the consequences from the eruption of a volcano. The manuscript is well written and clearly states the changes after the event.
What I am concerned is if such changes are solely due to the event, which needs to be addressed with reasonable arguments. Some changes, as I doubt, are caused by the event, for example, the T/S vertical profiles cannot respond to the eruption so rapidly given the oceanic time scale is much longer than atmospheric
The discussion part should be separated from the results.
I recommend the manuscript be accepted after a minor revision.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments to the paper from Jing et al
This paper is very nice and presents a large amount of data testifying the changes in the atmosphere and seawater caused by an eruption of Taal volcano on 12 January 2020.
I liked very much the paper and I would love to see it published in Remote Sensing, provided that a few minor issues are taken into account by the authors.
Here below I suggest a number of small corrections that can help increasing clarity. A few initial issues pertain volcanology.
L. 28: use "combining" instead than "combined"
At L. 37-38 you should add some more references, also at L. 45-48
L. 49-51: This statement is not correct. It is not the Earth system that responds to volcanic eruptions with a general cooling (which may seem that the Earth cools down because of heat emission during volcanic eruptions). The 1991 Pinatubo eruption was a Plinian eruption, which produced a huge amount of ash and aerosol in the atmosphere, and it is this ash and aerosol cloud that caused a barrier effect to sun light thus causing a global cooling. See for example (among many others): "Mechanism of stratospheric decadal abrupt cooling in the Early 1990s as influenced by the Pinatubo eruption By: Xiao Dong; Li JianPing, CHINESE SCIENCE BULLETIN Volume: 56Issue: 8 Pages: 772-780 Published: MAR 2011.
L. 52-65: Also Del Negro et al (2015: Quantifying lava flow hazards in response to effusive eruption, GSA Bulletin; May/June 2016; v. 128; no. 5/6; p. 752–763; doi:10.1130/B31364.1; and 2019: Living at the edge of an active volcano: Risk from lava flows on Mt. Etna, GSA Bulletin https://doi.org/10.1130/B35290.1) provide an interesting use of satellite high-spatial-resolution multispectral satellite data to complement field observations for monitoring active lava flows
L. 66: proposed that deposition
L. 78: even if it has
L. 80: mapping SO2 (delete "of")
L. 95: the statements "ejection of lava" and "rock fragments" are not appropriate. Lava is flowing on the surface and rock fragments means anything. I suggest you to use "an explosive eruption produced a giant plume of volcanic ash up to..." (I understand that you took the sentence from reference 34, but this article was not written by a volcanologist).
L. 102: please give the size of the volcano. And I would not say that "Taal is the smallest active volcano", Stromboli (in Italy) for example is smaller, but rather: "Taal is among the smallest active volcanoes in the world"
Figure 1: Please add scale and North direction, also in Figure 2b
L. 187-193: In these sentences, there are a few verbs missing, please improve
L. 203: Please specify which parameters
L. 208: delete "Details about the"
Figures 3a and 3b: I suggest you enlarge both the figures and names of the stations to improve readability
L. 280: please state in brackets the distance between Manila and Taal volcano
L. 286: higher SSA when compared
L. 307: instead of saying that "Figures are not shown here", please put in brackets the average values obtained in 2018 and 2019
L. 318-319: "emissions of gases were taking intermittently, not continuous emissions so changes in SO2 concentrations are obvious" - I do not understand this sentence, can you please explain it better?
Figure 6b: Please indicate clearly the dates of the three figures in the figure caption and text of the paper, I imagine they are of the 13, 14 and 15 January 2020 from the upper label, correct?
L. 327: over the three areas (boxes of Figure 3a),
Figure 7 b: Please make more visible the red triangle to locate the position of Taal volcano, as in Figure 6b, and possibly consider increasing the size of this figure and the readability of the dates. It may be useful here to know the time when these images have been acquired.
L. 362: mixing ratio
You should explain in the captions of Figure 7b, 8a, 8b, 9, 11a, and 11b that the numbers 20200110 means date expressed as YYYYMMDD.
Figure 10a: the dates should be increased in size because it's hard to read (also in Figure 10b). In this figure it is not clear how to find the depth 0 - 20 m mentioned at L. 370 because the scale is in decibar, could you use meters instead or use both scales? Okay, it becomes clear at L. 382, but you should state this earlier and especially in the above-mentioned figure captions
L. 376: You should add a reference for the ash deposition on the roof of the houses
L. 408: visual seismic observations? Better delete "seismic"
L. 410: 800 m
Figure 10d: Please improve making the ground outline darker, using the red triangle for showing the position of Taal volcano, and add dates of images in Figure caption.
L. 428: Considering that the Taal volcano is surrounded by ocean
L. 460: please do state here the distance between Manila and Taal volcano
L. 461: (volcanic ash plume)
L. 469: the eruption of a volcano
L. 470: influences
L. 471: and is deposited. Within 20 km radius of the Taal volcano,
Reference #1 lacks year of publication, unless the last number comprises, erroneously attached, year and page numbers
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Review of "Changes in Atmospheric, Meteorological and Ocean Parameters Associated with the 12 January 2020 Taal Volcanic Eruption" by Feng Jing et al.
General comments
This new study of Jing et al. provides a compilation of various satellite remote sensing and ground-based observations during the eruption of Taal Volcano on 12 January 2020. I found the paper interesting to read and think it may become suitable for publication in "remote sensing" at some point, but I also think that some more analysis and discussion of the results is necessary. At present, the manuscript mostly describes and summarizes the different observational findings, but it many cases it does not become clear to me, how they are related and what are the implications, I am afraid. So, what was the motivation for this study and what can we actually learn from it? Perhaps this point could be made more clear in the introduction and the conclusions?
Specific comments
Wu, X., Griessbach, S., and Hoffmann, L.: Equatorward dispersion of a high-latitude volcanic plume and its relation to the Asian summer monsoon: a case study of the Sarychev eruption in 2009, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 13439–13455, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-13439-2017, 2017.
l168-193: In this section, some references to the different satellite instruments and data sets seem to be missing, e.g., for MODIS and OMI. It would also be good if some information regarding the vertical sensitivity of the different measurements could be added. Are they sensitive to the lower or upper troposphere?
l221-229: It was mentioned earlier in the manuscript that the Taal eruption reached altitudes of up to 15 km. Therefore, I would suggest adding trajectories for upper altitudes (e.g., 10 or 15 km) to illustrate if/how the winds change with height.
l266-268: It would be good to indicate the time of the eruption in this plot (and also in all the other time series plots shown in the paper), as in Fig. 11c.
l300-307: Total columns in the range of 1-2 DU seem to indicate that overall not a lot of SO2 was emitted by Taal?
l311-323: It seems like most of the SO2 emitted by Taal remained in the troposphere and was quickly removed by scavenging or wet deposition?
l327-329: Can you provide a few more details regarding the chemical mechanism involving atmospheric chlorine and SO2 that are affecting the total ozone concentrations?
l341-348: Can you say a few words on why CO increased during and after the eruption?
l404-406: What was actually observed or found from the high-resolution SST data?
l635-639: Update reference for Theys et al. to 2017 AMT paper.
Technical corrections
l247-248: use western/eastern instead of left/right
l337-340: labels in Fig. 7b are too small and the red triangle is hardly visible
l362: lower atmosphere -> troposphere (?)
l410: 800 -> 800 m
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 4 Report
General Comments:
In this study, a multidisciplinary approach, combining satellite and ground-based observations, is used to investigate the effects of the recent January 2020 Taal (Philippines) eruption. The paper show the usefulness of data integration in analysing volcanic aerosols, gas emissions, and changes in some ocean parameters induced by volcanic eruptions. Although this is probably the first work focusing on recent Taal eruption, and could be then of interest for a wide audience, the manuscript needs to be extended and improved. In particular, the manuscript lacks of a discussion section; authors should analyse and discuss results in a more comprehensive way. In the following, my specific comments and suggestions.
Specific comments
Line 1: Abstracts should include a brief description of the Taal 2020 eruption, and its effects on local residents.
Line 15: Please specify the period of small earthquakes.
Line 45: ..volcanic ash can impact..
Line 47: ..serious disasters; provide one or more references here.
ine 57: have been observed on.
Line 58: "Among the methods developed to detect volcanic hotspots…"
Line 78: ..despite the low spatial resolution
Line 84: ..satellite data..
Line 91:.. with the recent.
Line 101: Seismic swarms were the only signs of an impending eruption? Please, specify if other precursors occurred.
Line 155: Authors should briefly discuss main peaks in seismic activity (e.g. January 2005) providing proper references.
Line 157: Please indicate the start of Taal eruption. The same should be done for other plots shown in the paper.
Line 170: Please provide a reference for AOD MODIS data
Line 187: Main characteristics of used sensors (e.g. TROPOMI) should be summarized in a table.
Line 217: Location of Taal volcano should be marked in Figure 3a.
Line 247: Selected boxes are spatially close. To assess the impact of Taal eruption, authors could investigate also areas located at a higher distance from the source
Line 258: The plot indicates that after 21 January the AOD over box 3 increased, whereas the peak in AOD was reached after 30 January over boxes 1 and 2. These differences should be mentioned and briefly discussed by the authors.
Line 264: Ash maps (e.g. ash RGB product from Himawari 8 data) could be used to map areas affected by ash, integrating other observations.
Line 271: Which was the source of coarse particles observed on 7 January 2020?
Line 301-302: See comment at line 187.
Line 432: Please provide a reference here.
Line 434: By looking at Figure 11a, a significant increase of analysed parameter occurred NE of the Taal volcano (same for Figure 11b; maps of 12 January at 12:00 UTC and 18:00 UTC). Authors should discuss this evidence in the text.
Line 438: ...of Taal Volcano (red box)...
Line 442: ...12 January 2020, six hours after the start of eruption.
Line 448: see previous comment
Line 453: see general comments on discussion section.
Line 454: In the conclusions, authors should better emphasize the originality of their work, specifying if the used approach may be exported to other areas.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
My earlier comments have been properly addressed, thank you!
Author Response
Many thanks to the Referee that the Referee is satisfied with our reply.
Reviewer 4 Report
The paper has been improved and extended by including a discussion section, as suggested. I have still some comments reported below.
Line 62: “The method, renamed Robust Satellite Techniques (RST), was used to monitor thermal volcanic activity and track volcanic plumes by means of polar and geostationary satellite data”
Line 66: please, revise the sentence
Line 69: proposed?
Line 80: provided
Line 84: see comment al line 66
Line 95-99: this sentence should be moved in the conclusions.
Line 102-105: ..and extending up to about 67 km…. of the Taal volcano.
Line 109: ..is an active volcano located..
Line 188: “We used the MODIS AOD products (collection 6.1) from…”
Line 315: were observed..
Line 389: Figure 7 shows that the TCO decreased on 25 January. Authors should comment this evidence in the text.
Line 399: product?
Line 400: please, specify the eruption;
Line 467: It seems that the strongest decrease of SST occurred from the end of January 2020. May explain why?
Line 514-515: please, check the sentence.
Line 520: ..were also observed.
Line 523: increased..
Line 541:
Line 545:.. indicated.
Author Response
Please see attached response and also we are appending our response here
REPLY TO THE COMMENTS/SUGGESTIONS MADE BY REFEREE #4
The paper has been improved and extended by including a discussion section, as suggested. I have still some comments reported below.
Authors: Many thanks to the Referee for sparing his/her valuable time. we have taken care of all the minor points and suggestions in the revised manuscript. We hope that our revised manuscript will be acceptable to the Referee.
Line 62: “The method, renamed Robust Satellite Techniques (RST), was used to monitor thermal volcanic activity and track volcanic plumes by means of polar and geostationary satellite data”
Authors: We have taken care of this, thanks to the Referee.
Line 66: please, revise the sentence
Authors: We have taken care of this, thanks to the Referee.
Line 69: proposed?
Authors: We have taken care of this, thanks to the Referee.
Line 80: provided
Authors: We have taken care of this, thanks to the Referee.
Line 84: see comment al line 66
Authors: We have taken care of this, thanks to the Referee.
Line 95-99: this sentence should be moved in the conclusions.
Authors: Thanks to the Referee. Now we have moved this sentence to the conclusion part.
Line 102-105: ..and extending up to about 67 km…. of the Taal volcano.
Authors: We have taken care of this, thanks to the Referee.
Line 109: ..is an active volcano located..
Authors: We have taken care of this, thanks to the Referee.
Line 188: “We used the MODIS AOD products (collection 6.1) from…”
Authors: We have taken care of this, thanks to the Referee.
Line 315: were observed..
Authors: We have taken care of this, thanks to the Referee.
Line 389: Figure 7 shows that the TCO decreased on 25 January. Authors should comment this evidence in the text.
Authors: Thanks to the Referee, we have taken care of this and also included one additional figure 7c..
Line 399: product?
Authors: Thanks to the Referee, we have taken care of this,.
Line 400: please, specify the eruption;
Authors: We have specified the eruption event.
Line 467: It seems that the strongest decrease of SST occurred from the end of January 2020. May explain why?
Authors: We have taken care of this, decline in SST is related to the spread of volcanic ash from Taal over the ocean surface.
Line 514-515: please, check the sentence.
Authors: Thanks to the Referee. We have rewritten this sentence.
Line 520: ..were also observed.
Authors: We have taken care of this, thanks to the Referee.
Line 523: increased..
Authors: We have taken care of this, thanks to the Referee.
Line 541:
Authors: Thanks to the Referee. We have now rewritten this sentence.
Line 545:.. indicated.
Authors: We have taken care of this, thanks to the Referee.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
