Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-g96k6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T20:27:16.748Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Snow accumulation and ice flow at Dôme du Goûter (4300 m), Mont Blanc, French Alps

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

C. Vincent
Affiliation:
Laboratoire de Glaciologie et de Géophysique de l’Environnement du CNRS, BP 96,38402 Saint-Martin-d’Hères Cedex, France
M. Vallon
Affiliation:
Laboratoire de Glaciologie et de Géophysique de l’Environnement du CNRS, BP 96,38402 Saint-Martin-d’Hères Cedex, France
J. F. Pinglot
Affiliation:
Laboratoire de Glaciologie et de Géophysique de l’Environnement du CNRS, BP 96,38402 Saint-Martin-d’Hères Cedex, France
M. Funk
Affiliation:
Versuchsanstalt für Wasserbau, Hydrologie und Glaziologie, Eidgenössiche Technische Hochschule, CH-8092 Zürich, Switzerland
L. Reynaud
Affiliation:
Laboratoire de Glaciologie et de Géophysique de l’Environnement du CNRS, BP 96,38402 Saint-Martin-d’Hères Cedex, France
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Glaciological experiments have been carried out at Dôme du Goûter (4300 m a.s.l.), Mont Blanc, in order to understand the flow of firn/ice in this high-altitude Alpine glacierized area. Accumulation measurements from stakes show a very strong spatial variability and an unusual feature of mass-balance fluctuations for the Alps, i.e. the snow accumulation does not show any seasonal patterns. Measured vertical velocities which should match with long-term mean mass balance are consistent with observed accumulations. Therefore, the measurement of vertical velocities seems a good way of quickly obtaining reliable mean accumulation values for several decades in such a region.

A simple flow model can be used to determine the main flowlines of the glacier and to propose snow/ice age of core samples from the two boreholes drilled down tο the bedrock in June 1994. These results coincide with radioactivity measurements made to identify the well-known radioactive snow layers of 1963 and 1986. We can hope to obtain ice samples 55–60 years old about 20 or 30 m above the bedrock (110 m deep). Below, the deformation of the ice layers is loo great to be dated accurately.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Glaciological Society 1997
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Location of Dôme du Goûter, Mont Blanc area.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Surface density measurements from pits and drilling core.

Figure 2

Table 1. Observed accumulations at Dône du Goûter (cm w.e.) and estimated annual mass balance (1 June– 31 May; cm water)

Figure 3

Fig. 3. Observed accumulation (cm water) at Dôme du Goûter with Chamonix precipitation (for different time lapse).

Figure 4

Fig. 4. (a) Surface topography, stakes, and annual horizontal velocities (m a−1) in italics. (b) Observed accumulation, 1993–94 (m w.e.a−1). (c) Observed accumulation, 1994–95 (m w.e.a−1). (d) Measured vertical velocities (m w.e. a−1).

Figure 5

Table 2. Horizontal and vertical velocities; stakes were observed with topographic means on 6 June 1993, 29 September 1993 and 31 May 1994. (Two or three values are some-times given for different periods observed, in order to show the scattering of the values)

Figure 6

Table 3. Depths of layers resulting from atmospheric nuclear tests (1954–55 and 1962–63) and Chernobyl (1986) in deep ice cores

Figure 7

Table 4. Mean annual accumulation and 137Cs fallout from Chernobyl. (Since the drilling holes are shallows, the thinning effect due to vertical strain rate is neglected)

Figure 8

Fig. 5. 137Cs and 210Pb activities at Col da Dôme du Goûter (ice cores 1 and 2; 1994), vs depth.

Figure 9

Fig. 6. Bed topography from radar measurements.

Figure 10

Fig. 7. Vertical transect from Dôme du Goûter to drilling site 2 with flowlines (dash) and isochrones.

Figure 11

Fig. 8. Surface horizontal velocities from the model results (divergence of 0% and 25%) and measurements.

Figure 12

Fig. 9. Snow age vs depth from model results and radioactivity measurements (1986 and 1963). Sensitivity to thickness variation (±10 m).

Figure 13

Fig. 10. Snow age vs depth from model result and radioactivity measurements (1986 and 1963). Sensitivity to mass balance variation (±3 standard deviation).

Figure 14

Fig. 11. Snow age vs depth from model results and radioactivity measurements (1986 and 1963). Sensitivity to divergence (50% and 25%).

Figure 15

Fig. 12. Snow age vs depth from model results. Sensitivity to the depth of drilling hole (±10 m).

Figure 16

Fig. 13. Snow age vs depth from model results and radioactivity measurements (1986 and 1963). Sensitivity to vertical strain rate (constant and non-constant strain rate).

Figure 17

Fig. 14. Snow age vs depth from model results and radioactivity measurements (1986 and 1963). The dashed line does not take into account the kinematic vertical velocity.

Figure 18

Fig. 15. Annual thickness layer vs depth from the model results in the drillhole, and mass balance at the origin point of the layer.