Want this question answered?
The Juan de Fuca plate, which is subducting under the North American plate. Mount Shasta is at the southern end of the same Cascade volcanic range that includes Mount St. Helens and extends northward into British Columbia, Canada.
the are all volcanos they are all inactive valcanos
Mount st Helens is in the Ring of Fire. The same processes that produce volcanoes in the Ring of Fire are active elsewhere, but they are more active around the Pacific Rim.
Mount Rainier is one of many volcanoes in the Cascade Mountain Range. It is one of the tallest mountains in North America, and it did not gain this topographic stature by frequently blowing its top as Mount St. Helens did in 1980 or Mount Mazama did around 5677 B.C. creating Crater Lake; its tall stature would seem to indicate most of its eruptions have been "mountain-building" -- creating new rock from lava flows. However, Mount St. Helens and Mount Mazama are also both part of the same Cascade volcanic mountain range as Mount Rainier, so a mountain-destroying eruption similar to the St. Helens or even Mazama blasts (the latter, obvious by means of its more complete self-destruction, much stronger) is definitely possible. Even a mountain-building eruption, however, is likely to be rife with explosive phases, especially toward the beginning as it would 'clear the pipes.' Mount Rainier erupted as many as 6 times in the 1800s, but -- aside from tremors -- was quiet throughout the 20th century and, thus far, the 21st century. European explorers and settlers documented very noticeable volcanic plumes from Rainier during the 1800s. Relative to Mount St. Helens, Rainier is an older and taller mountain (and has more glacial volume and mass than St. Helens did even prior to its 1980 eruption), and many more people live within range of Rainier and the rivers that flow from its glaciers (susceptible to lahars and pyroclastic flows) than St. Helens. It is generally not believed that an eruption from Mount Rainier -- as with any Cascade volcano -- would not be as smooth and quiet as some of Hawaii's volcanoes, but there do seem to be more mountain-building eruptions (adding lava) than mountain-destroying eruptions (destroying the cone and leaving a crater).
Convergent; the Cascade Range is a volcano/mountain, which is caused from a convergent plate boundary I had the same question for my homework...
This is true. They are both part of the Cascade Range.
The Juan de Fuca plate, which is subducting under the North American plate. Mount Shasta is at the southern end of the same Cascade volcanic range that includes Mount St. Helens and extends northward into British Columbia, Canada.
the are all volcanos they are all inactive valcanos
Mount Everest and K2 are both located in the same mountain range, the Himalayas.
No. Compared with other volcanoes of the same type, Mount St. Helens is not extraordinarily large and is smaller than it was prior to its 1980 eruption. The 1980 eruption was large, but nowhere near the largest.
Mount st Helens is in the Ring of Fire. The same processes that produce volcanoes in the Ring of Fire are active elsewhere, but they are more active around the Pacific Rim.
yes
Mount Rainier is one of many volcanoes in the Cascade Mountain Range. It is one of the tallest mountains in North America, and it did not gain this topographic stature by frequently blowing its top as Mount St. Helens did in 1980 or Mount Mazama did around 5677 B.C. creating Crater Lake; its tall stature would seem to indicate most of its eruptions have been "mountain-building" -- creating new rock from lava flows. However, Mount St. Helens and Mount Mazama are also both part of the same Cascade volcanic mountain range as Mount Rainier, so a mountain-destroying eruption similar to the St. Helens or even Mazama blasts (the latter, obvious by means of its more complete self-destruction, much stronger) is definitely possible. Even a mountain-building eruption, however, is likely to be rife with explosive phases, especially toward the beginning as it would 'clear the pipes.' Mount Rainier erupted as many as 6 times in the 1800s, but -- aside from tremors -- was quiet throughout the 20th century and, thus far, the 21st century. European explorers and settlers documented very noticeable volcanic plumes from Rainier during the 1800s. Relative to Mount St. Helens, Rainier is an older and taller mountain (and has more glacial volume and mass than St. Helens did even prior to its 1980 eruption), and many more people live within range of Rainier and the rivers that flow from its glaciers (susceptible to lahars and pyroclastic flows) than St. Helens. It is generally not believed that an eruption from Mount Rainier -- as with any Cascade volcano -- would not be as smooth and quiet as some of Hawaii's volcanoes, but there do seem to be more mountain-building eruptions (adding lava) than mountain-destroying eruptions (destroying the cone and leaving a crater).
No both of the two mountains are different ones and not the same ones.
Convergent; the Cascade Range is a volcano/mountain, which is caused from a convergent plate boundary I had the same question for my homework...
A "hot spot" stays in the same place while the Earth's crust moves above it.
In the same way that the other mountains of the Cascade Range were formed. The Juan de Fuca Plate subducted under the North American Plate. The water that subducted with the Juan de Fuca Plate lowered the melting temperature of the rock above it, causing magma to form. The magma built up and rose, causing the formation of all the mountains in the Cascade Range.