Toward a revised hazard assessment at Merapi volcano, Central Java

Abstract Of 1.1 million people living on the flanks of the active Merapi volcano, 440,000 are at relatively high risk in areas prone to pyroclastic flows, surges, and lahars. For the last two centuries, the activity of Merapi has alternated regularly between long periods of viscous lava dome extrusion, and brief explosive episodes at 8–15 year intervals, which generated dome-collapse pyroclastic flows and destroyed part of the pre-existing domes. Violent explosive episodes on an average recurrence of 26–54 years have generated pyroclastic flows, surges, tephra-falls, and subsequent lahars. The 61 reported eruptions since the mid-1500s killed about 7000 people. The current hazard-zone map of Merapi (Pardyanto et al., 1978) portrays three areas, termed ‘forbidden zone’, ‘first danger zone’ and ‘second danger zone’, based on successively declining hazards. Revision of the hazard map is desirable, because it lacks details necessary to outline hazard zones with accuracy, in particular the valleys likely to be swept by lahars, and excludes some areas likely to be devastated by pyroclastic gravity-currents such as the 22 November 1994 surge. In addition, risk maps should be developed to incorporate social, technical, and economic factors of vulnerability. Eruptive hazard assessment at Merapi is based on reconstructed eruptive history, on eruptive behavior and scenarios, and on existing models and preliminary numerical modeling. Firstly, the reconstructed eruptive activity, in particular for the past 7000 years and from historical accounts of eruptions, helps to define the extent and recurrence frequency of the most hazardous phenomena (Newhall et al., 2000; Camus et al., 2000). Pyroclastic flows traveled as far as 9–15 km from the source, pyroclastic surges swept the flanks as far as 9–20 km away from the vent, thick tephra fall buried temples in the vicinity of Yogyakarta 25 km to the south, and subsequent lahars spilled down the radial valleys as far as 30 km to the west and south. At least one large edifice collapse has occurred in the past 7000 years (Newhall et al., 2000; Camus et al., 2000). Secondly, four eruption scenarios are portrayed as hazardous zones on two maps and derived from the past eruptive behavior of Merapi and from the most affected areas in the past. Thirdly, simple numerical simulation, based on a Digital Elevation Model, a stereo-pair of SPOT satellite images, and one 2D-orthoimage helps to simulate pyroclastic and lahar flowage on the flanks and in radial valley channels, and to outline areas likely to be devastated. Three major threats are identified: (1) a collapse of the summit dome in the short-to mid-term, that can release large-volume pyroclastic flows and high-energy surges towards the south–southwest sector of the volcano; (2) an explosive eruption, much larger than any since 1930, may sweep all the flanks of Merapi at least once every century; (3) a potential collapse of the summit area, involving the fumarolic field of Gendol and part of the southern flank, which can contribute to moderate-scale debris avalanches and debris flows.