The Seven Summits are well-known. In 1997, the concept of the Second Seven Summits came into the wider public domain with an article in Rock & Ice by David Keaton. This article, of course, listed the second highest mountains on each continent and also discussed their relative difficulties. So, I ask myself, what if I apply the same principles to the volcanoes – the Second Volcanic Summits?
Climbing all of the Seven Summits is now a bit of a merry-go-round. There is no definitive list of those who have completed this challenge (whether in the Bass or the Messner form) but the numbers run into several hundred. As far as I know, only one person has climbed all of the Second Seven Summits, the Austrian Christian Strangl – Kammerlander/Stangl: “Seven Second” and “Third” Facts (8000ers.com)
So, would it be possible for anyone to climb the Second Volcanic Seven Summits? Let’s see.
It is necessary first to identify the Second Volcanic Seven Summits using principles behind the Messner version of the Seven Summits. The blog then discusses variants to that list resulting from differing views on the extent of the continents of Europe and Australia/Australasia. Finally, I look at whether each of volcanoes on my lists are harder to climb than those on the Volcanic Seven Summits list – see here.
The Second Volcanic Seven Summits
Monte Pissis – South America (6793m/22287ft)
Pissis is a relatively remote peak located in northern Argentina close to the border with Chile. For a period there was a wrangle over whether it was Pissis or Ojos del Salado that was the second highest mountain in South America (and, therefore, the highest volcano in the world).
There is an interesting article about this here.
There is a video by my brother of his climb here at 35 minutes 48 seconds.
The climb is not unduly technical. The principal difficulties, other than altitude, are its remoteness and the long approach. I have the feeling that the mountain is becoming a more popular climb. But it will still not be climbed as often as Ojos del Salado, especially with many climbers now being driven to the Tejos Refuge on Ojos. That enables a one day climb, whereas that of Pissis will be three or four days.
Popocatépetl – North America (5413m/17759ft)
Popocatépetl is not only the second highest volcano in Mexico, but it also the second highest mountain in that country and the sixth highest mountain in North America. Its name derives from the Aztec language meaning ‘smoking mountain’. That seems apt.
The peak is well seen on any ascent of Iztaccihuatl.
However, Popocatépetl is currently active and has been since 1994 with only a few brief pauses in activity.
Popocatépetl is located 70 km south east of Mexico City, near the city of Amecameca, and it contains a 400 x 600m-wide summit crater. Records of activity date back to the 14th century. Climbing the mountain is currently prohibited. Indeed, any attempt to climb it would be extremely foolhardy. If explosive forces don’t kill you, gases will likely overcome you.
Before 1994, the mountain was glaciated and climbed regularly. However, the initial eruptions at that time melted all of the snow – hence its current appearance.
Popocatépetl has a prominence of 3033m (9951ft) which puts it at number 88 in the top 100 most prominent mountains in the world.
Mount Kenya – Africa (5199m/17057ft)
Mount Kenya is, technically, easily the most difficult of the Second Volcanic Summits. Whilst the trekkers summit, Point Lenana, is regularly climbed, the two principal peaks – Batian (5199m) and Nelion (5188m) require multi-pitch climbs.
The climb will take four or five days even when acclimatized. The precise route for the final part of the climb will depend on season and snow conditions. There is a good and detailed account of the climb here.
Mount Kenya has a prominence of 3825m (12549ft). This makes it the 32nd most prominent peak in the world.
Mount Ararat – Asia (5137m/16854ft)
Mount Ararat is located in eastern Turkey near its borders with Armenia and Iran. It has the typical shape of a stratovolcano, though lies on a plateau shared with its much smaller neighbour, Little Ararat (also a volcano).
Its climb is relatively straightforward with proper acclimatization. There is a rocky/scree path to the permanent snow cap, the lower level of which varies throughout the year. The climb normally takes 4 or 5 days with nights spent at two camps for acclimatisation. One can hire horses to take your kit up to top camp. It is mandatory to have a local guide and a permit.
Mount Ararat has a prominence of 3611m (11847ft) which makes it the 48th most prominent mountain in the world.
I climbed Ararat in September 2023 and my blog of the climb is here.
Mount Kazbek – Europe (5054m/16581ft)
On the basis that the spine of the Caucuses mountain chain divides Europe from Asia, then Mount Kazbek (or Gora Kazbek) will be the second highest volcano in Europe. It is located in Georgia very close to and just south of its border with Russia.
The mountain is glaciated. Once acclimatised, the climb will be a two or three day one. Various western guiding companies offer trips to make the climb.
It is relatively accessible within Georgia and the normal route is not a technical climb – perhaps equivalent to Orizaba – so it does receive a lot of ascents. It is possible to climb the mountain from Russia.
There is a double-topped summit. The normal route takes you to a saddle between the two tops. From there, a narrow couloir forms the most technical section to the main summit. Depending on conditions, this may need to be pitched.
Mount Kazbek has a prominence of around 2373m (7785ft).
Mount Hagen – Australasia (3800m/12467ft)
The second highest volcano in Australasia is Mount Hagen. For the reasons set out below, I do not consider the area of ‘Oceania’ to be a part of Australasia.
This peak is a relatively near neighbour to Mount Giluwe, being around 35kms distant and is readily accessed from the city of the same name. It is formed of three coalescing, heavily stratovolcanoes that once had glaciers on them.
I used Mount Hagen for acclimatisation in preparation for Mount Giluwe. Here is my blog on this climb. I did not reach the true summit. But the climb is the usual jungle bash until above the tree line. The route I took placed me on a subsidiary summit, perhaps an hour away from the main summit. Mount Hagen has a few summits all within about 30m to 50m of elevation of each other including the one that I reached. Above the tree line you are into grasslands and relatively easy terrain.
Mount Hagen has a prominence of 1074m (3524ft).
Mount Erebus – Antarctica (3790m/12434ft)
Mount Erebus was first seen by humans in 1841 by James Clark Ross’ expedition. The mountain was erupting then, and it has never stopped doing so since. This mountain is high on my wish-list.
It is located on Ross Island about 35kms from New Zealand and US research stations. However, unless you are a member of the scientific community and its support, access is likely to be very difficult as neither country permits commercial flights to use the airstrips they have created. It might be possible to reach the mountain by boat. Any climb is likely to be very costly if not a part of that scientific community.
Geologically, the volcano is interesting being a shield volcano which has been penetrated by a later stratovolcano – a polygenetic stratovolcano. It also has a lava lake within the caldera at its summit. It is probably one of the most studied volcanoes in the world.
A climb should not be too technically difficult. But without support and/or snow mobiles, it will be necessary to scale almost the entire height of the peak. So it without motorised assistance it would probably be a four day climb.
Being the high point of an island, Mount Erebus’ prominence is 3790m (12434ft).
The continental debate – Australasia/Oceania/Australia
Here, the first issue is whether it is Australasia or Australia that is the continent. Or indeed whether the continent is Oceania.
My personal view is that there is little logic in considering Oceania as a continent. The Pacific islands make it too disparate and most of the area is on a separate tectonic plate from the volcanoes in Papua New Guinea and the landmass of Australia. So I dismiss the Hawaiian volcanoes form consideration.
So the second highest volcano is either Mount Hagen or the second highest volcano in Australia depending upon whether one considers Australia to be the continent.
I have blogged about the highest volcano on the Australian land mass here. My current view is that the second highest volcano in Australia is Mount Kaputar (1509m; 4951ft) in northern New South Wales.
Mount Kaputar is the highest point of the heavily eroded Nandewar shield volcano. I climbed this volcano in September 2019. It is straightforward to reach the top. In fact you can drive to the top.
The continental debate – Europe
In another blog, I looked at various candidates for the Volcanic Seven Summits depending on certain geographical and political conditions. That blog is here.
If one takes the view that one should assess the highest mountains by reference to their location on tectonic plates, then there are no such continents as Europe or Asia. Both ‘continents’ sit on the Eurasian plate. Eurasia is the continent, so the two highest volcanic peaks would be Elbrus and Damavand.
On the other hand, if the dividing point between Europe and Asia is the Kuma–Manych Depression, Elbrus and Damavand become the two Asian volcanic summits with Etna and Beerenberg the two European summits. Mounts Ararat and Kazbek would then lose their status as a part of the Second Volcanic Summits.
But, for the moment, I will keep to the Bass and Messner principles. Therefore the seven (or eight) Second Volcanic Summits are:
- Monte Pissis (South America)
- Popocatépetl(North America)
- Mount Kenya (Africa)
- Mount Ararat (Asia)
- Mount Kazbek (Europe)
- Erebus (Antarctica) and
- Mount Hagen (Australasia) or
- Mount Kaputar (Australia) depending on your preference.
Which is harder, the Volcanic Seven Summits or the Second Volcanic Summits?
I will look at the “battles” separately.
Ojos del Salado v Monte Pissis
In my view Monte Pissis is more difficult when looking at the routes normally used. Yes, the Argentinian route to Ojos is remote and hard, but it is rare for ascents of the mountain to come from that direction. Infrastructure on the Chilean side is forever being improved.
When I climbed Ojos, the road up to Laguna Verde and beyond to the Paseo de San Franciso was unsealed. It is now sealed. Climbers often have vehicular assistance up to the Tejos Refuge from which summit attempts on the Chilean side take place. That gives a start at around 5700m.
There is none of that infrastructure for Pissis – see the video I have linked. It is far more remote. Even once at the base it is still a four or five day climb and the mountain is not that much lower than Ojos. And the consequences of an accident on Pissis are likely to be more severe.
OK, I know that there is a rock climb of low grade on Ojos near the summit but, even so, I would say Pissis is harder.
Damavand v Mount Ararat
I do not think that there is much difference between the two mountains in this case. I climbed both mountains by their southern routes, being the only ones being available to me as a non-native of each country.
Each involved two camps, though on Damavand we could drive to the first one. The route on each is up a well-worn rocky or scree path and horses are available on each mountain to carry kits up to top camp if desired.
Ararat has a permanent snow cap, but this does not really present much difficulty if the climber is competent with the use of crampons and ice axe. But Damavand is almost 500m higher and so the adverse effects of altitude are likely greater.
So I call a draw on this one.
Mount Elbrus v Mount Kazbek
I have not climbed Kazbek, so my judgement here is arguable.
Both mountains are glaciated. I judge Elbrus by reference to its southern route. The northern route is harder with a very long summit day and without the infrastructure that the southern side has. On the south, a gondola and/or chair lift system can whisk you up to around the 4000m mark. Then, if you wish, you can arrange a snowcat or snowmobile to take you to around 5000m, leaving just 600m or so of ascent.
Both mountains otherwise just involve snow plods. Kazbek has some small potentially technical ground near the summit. But Elbrus is almost 600m higher, and that is significant at those altitudes.
So, if you do not use snowcat or snowmobile, I would say that Elbrus slightly edges it even by its southern route. But it is a close call as there is more ascent on Kazbek.
Pico de Orizaba v Popocatépetl
Well, this is easy to call. Because you cannot climb Popocatépetl at the moment without the risk of being burnt to a cinder or being asphyxiated by noxious gases, it is the more difficult of the two to climb.
Perhaps if the volcanic activity ceases, I can make a further judgement. Even then, I suspect, Popocatépetl will still be harder. It is only 200m lower than Orizaba and now the glacier has gone, it will likely be a dispiriting climb up moving ash and rock – two steps up and one and a half back.
Kilimanjaro v Mount Kenya
This is another easy one to come to a view on. Thousands climb Kilimanjaro each year. Although it is 700m higher than Kenya, there are many easy routes to the top. Reaching the summit is a walk up. Generally, the only issue is to ensure proper acclimatisation and even then guides have been known (rightly or wrongly) to carry climbers to the top if the climber is suffering.
By contrast Kenya requires a significant rock (and occasionally snow/ice) climb at high altitude. There is no competition in my view. Kenya is the more difficult of the two (and indeed the most difficult of all of the Second Volcanic Summits).
Mount Sidley v Mount Erebus
Whilst I have climbed Sidley, I have no experience of Erebus. Sidley is now regularly climbed. And for a price climbers can enjoy an extremely remote experience climbing in a wonderful environment. The climb is not overly technical but it does require load carrying to a high camp and summit day is quite long.
Assuming you can get to Ross Island, an ascent of Erebus would require an ascent from sea-level unless you brought snowmobiles with you – though the height gain required on Sidley is still over 2000m. These vehicles are certainly used at lower levels and may be useful in moving gear and food from your boat to the mountain if conditions allow.
Although Erebus is continually active, this is at a much lower level than Popocatépetl. So it is my understanding that there are no material risks from volcanic activity at the crater.
So I give this an honourable draw.
Mount Gilwue v Mount Hagen v Mount Kaputar
Whether you compare Giluwe with Hagen or with Kaputar, Giluwe is the more difficult. Indeed with Kaputar you can drive to near the summit.
Hagen is more of a test, but it is still easier than Giluwe. Hagen can be climbed in a day. The climb involves slightly less of a battle through the rainforest. On the other hand, Giluwe requires at least two days, or three if you want a more leisurely ascent.
And the final result?
In my opinion, the Second Volcanic Summits, overall on the head to heads, are more difficult. Any contrary views?
Leave a Reply