Reply to Comment by I. van Zelst on “Estimates on the Frequency of Volcanic Eruptions on Venus”

In their 2022 study, Byrne and Krishnamoorthy (https://doi.org/10.1029/2021je007040) extrapolated to Venus the most comprehensive record of eruptions on Earth, to estimate the frequency of volcanic events on the second planet. The approach underlying this extrapolation is necessarily based on assumptions for which there is little supporting evidence; moreover, the eruptive record on Earth is far from complete because, for example, submarine events are considerably undercounted. Byrne and Krishnamoorthy (2022, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021je007040) discussed at length the limitations of their study, cautioning that their estimates on the frequency of volcanic eruptions on Venus are simply that—estimates, albeit amenable to testing by future missions to the planet. The comment by van Zelst on the Byrne and Krishnamoorthy (2022, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021je007040) study identified a calculation error in one specific scenario considered in that earlier study. The other points raised in the van Zelst comment are either consistent with the range of uncertainties discussed in, or focus on topics that have no bearing on, the Byrne and Krishnamoorthy (2022, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021je007040) study. The scientific conclusions of the Byrne and Krishnamoorthy study remain unchanged.