Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T19:32:51.226Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Predicted time-scales for GISP2 and GRIP boreholes at Summit, Greenland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Christine Schøtt
Affiliation:
Department of Glaciology, Geophysical Institute, University of Copenhagen, DK-2200 Copenhagen N, Denmark
E. D. Waddington
Affiliation:
Geophysics Program AK-50, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195, U.S.A.
C. F. Raymond
Affiliation:
Geophysics Program AK-50, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195, U.S.A.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Two deep-drilling projects (GISP2 and GRIP) in central Greenland will provide ice cores for paleoclimate studies. Drilling decisions and preliminary interpretations require age-depth curves (time-scales). Using a finite-element momentum-balance model, we calculate the modern ice-flow pattern on the flowline through the two drill sites. Our model appears to require relatively soft ice either throughout the ice sheet or below the Wisconsinan-Holocene transition in order to match the modern geometry and mass balance. By scaling the ice velocity to an assumed mass-balance history throughout the past 200 000 years, we estimate the time-scales at both sites. At GISP2, a flank site, we place the 10 000 years BP isochrone (representing the Wisconsinan-Holocene transition) at 1535 m ice-equivalent depth. At GRIP, on the ice divide, the corresponding depth is 1377 m. Our calculations show ice older than 200 000 years at 100 m above the bed at both coring sites. The time-scale calculation can be used for drilling decisions and preliminary interpretations. It should be refined as more regional-survey and ice-core data become available.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Glaciological Society 1992
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Location map (inset) and surface-elevation contours in the Summit region showing model flowline and GISP2 and GRIP core-hole locations. The topographic information is from Hodge and others (1990).

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Time-scales for (a) GRIP and (b) GISP2 sites. All depths are given in ice equivalent. Curves labelled (1) show the steady-state Nye—Haefeli time-scales for the two sites. Curve (2) shows a Dansgaard-Johnsen time-scale for GRIP; the parameters were derived from measurements on the 1990 ice core. Curves labelled (3) and (4) were derived from the finite-element model; dashed curves are for steady slate. Solid curves were derived using the mass-balance history in Figure 4. (3) Uniform flow-law constants, n = 3, A0 = 1..6 × 10−17 year−1 Pa−3. (4) Flow-law constants, n = 3, A0 = 0.71 × 10−17 year−1 Pa−3, and enhancement factor Ε = 3 for ice older than 10000 years. At GISP2, (4) is virtually indistinguishable from (3), and is therefore omitted.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. (a). Modern mass-balance profile along GISP2-GRIP flowline (personal communication from J. Bolzan; personal communication from H. Clausen). (b) Longitudinal finite-element representation of the flowline in Figure 1, with representative calculated ice-particle trajectories for the model with uniform rheological parameters n and A0. The GISP2-GRIP separation is 28 km. The vertical exaggeration is × 15.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. The smoothed mass-balance history during the past 115 kyear glacial cycle used to derive the time-scales.