# Volacanoe desgassing emissions

**URL:** <https://forum.ecmwf.int/t/volacanoe-desgassing-emissions/1569>\
**Category:** CAMS - Datasets and Usage\
**Tags:** cams, cams\_global\_forecast\
**Created:** [31 May 2023 20:00 UTC](https://forum.ecmwf.int/t/volacanoe-desgassing-emissions/1569 "2023-05-31T20:00:01Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Maria\_Velasquez](https://forum.ecmwf.int/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@Maria\_Velasquez](https://forum.ecmwf.int/u/Maria_Velasquez)\
**Post date:** [31 May 2023 20:00 UTC](https://forum.ecmwf.int/t/volacanoe-desgassing-emissions/1569/1 "2023-05-31T20:00:01Z")

</div>

Hi, I am a researcher and constantly use the reanalysis and forecast CAMS products. I am currently comparing total column emissions of the last years from the volcano Nevado del Ruíz (Colombia) with the literature, and surprisingly, using reanalysis data the magnitude of the emissions had a scale of 0.6 mg/m2 while using forecast is 20 mg/m2 (as windy shows and aligned with Sentinel). I used reanalysis data because it is more robust; however, the publication has supported the forecast without referring to the reanalysis product. I read that the Tc SO2 reanalysis may be weak because of the model resolution, but do you think I should use forecast data instead?