Implementation of electrochemical, optical and denuder-based sensors and sampling techniques on UAV for volcanic gas measurements: examples from Masaya, Turrialba and Stromboli volcanoes

Rüdiger, Julian; Tirpitz, Jan-Lukas; de Moor, J. Maarten; Bobrowski, Nicole; Gutmann, Alexandra; Liuzzo, Marco; Ibarra, Martha; Hoffmann, Thorsten

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-2441-2018

Articles | Volume 11, issue 4

https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-2441-2018

© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-2441-2018

© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 11, issue 4

Research article

|

26 Apr 2018

Research article |

| 26 Apr 2018

Implementation of electrochemical, optical and denuder-based sensors and sampling techniques on UAV for volcanic gas measurements: examples from Masaya, Turrialba and Stromboli volcanoes

Julian Rüdiger, Jan-Lukas Tirpitz, J. Maarten de Moor, Nicole Bobrowski, Alexandra Gutmann, Marco Liuzzo, Martha Ibarra, and Thorsten Hoffmann

Download

Final revised paper (published on 26 Apr 2018)
Supplement to the final revised paper
Preprint (discussion started on 28 Nov 2017)
Supplement to the preprint

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

AC1: 'Addition of a reference on the data evaluation method', Julian Rüdiger, 15 Dec 2017
RC1: 'Reviewer Comment', Christoph Kern, 21 Dec 2017
- AC2: 'Authors' response to referee and short comments', Julian Rüdiger, 20 Feb 2018
RC2: 'Minor Revisions for AMT-2017-335 Rudiger et al.', Jorge Andres Diaz, 21 Dec 2017
- AC2: 'Authors' response to referee and short comments', Julian Rüdiger, 20 Feb 2018
SC1: 'Adding a reference on the first application of UAV', Robin Campion, 09 Jan 2018
- AC2: 'Authors' response to referee and short comments', Julian Rüdiger, 20 Feb 2018

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

AR by Julian Rüdiger on behalf of the Authors (21 Feb 2018) Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (04 Mar 2018) by Kimberly Strong

RR by Christoph Kern (21 Mar 2018)

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

General Comments

Having looked over the changes to the manuscript by Rüdiger et al, I find that the authors have clarified all the relevant points that I brought up in my initial review. I hope these clarifications will help other readers better understand the contents. I only have a few minor suggestions listed below which the authors may choose to incorporate into their manuscript before a final version is published in Atmospheric Measurement Techniques. Thank you.

Minor corrections

One issue I’d like to ask the authors to double check has to do with changes that may have been intended but never implemented. In a few places in the author response document, the authors have responded to a reviewer comment, but then only the word “CHANGES” appears where normally the modified text would appear. In my estimation, these may be sections of the text that the authors intended to change but never did. For example, the authors state that ‘unstudied plume regions’ seems to miss the point they wanted to make, and they clarify that they meant ‘previously inaccessible plume regions’, but the changes were not implemented in the text. Please have a look at these passages and double check if changes were intended but not implemented.

P1L32 – ‘At Stromoboli volcano, elevated CO2/SO2 ratios WERE observed…’

P3L5 – Recommend rewording this sentence to: ‘Differential Optical Absorption Spectroscopy (DOAS) measurements revealed a variation of BrO concentration with plume age and transversal position inside the plume (Bobrowski et al, 2007)

P5L3 – ‘…, currently making this volcano one of the largest contributors to volcanic gas emissions in the…’

P5L9 – ‘The reappearance of a superficial lava lake (40x40m) at Masaya in January 2016 marked an increase in degassing activity.’

P22L39 – References run together here

Hide

ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (30 Mar 2018) by Kimberly Strong

AR by Julian Rüdiger on behalf of the Authors (05 Apr 2018) Manuscript

Short summary

Volcanic gas emission studies are important for monitoring active volcanoes, obtaining insights into subsurface processes and opening up an interesting domain for atmospheric chemistry investigations. Using an unmanned aerial vehicle, commonly called a drone, we were able to study various volcanic gases at sites which are typically too dangerous to access otherwise. The use of drones for volcano monitoring and gas measurements in harsh environments was successfully assessed.