Search USGSSearch

USGS · 70044695

Hydrothermal processes above the Yellowstone magma chamber: Large hydrothermal systems and large hydrothermal explosions

Abstract

Hydrothermal explosions are violent and dramatic events resulting in the rapid ejection of boiling water, steam, mud, and rock fragments from source craters that range from a few meters up to more than 2 km in diameter; associated breccia can be emplaced as much as 3 to 4 km from the largest craters. Hydrothermal explosions occur where shallow interconnected reservoirs of steam- and liquid-saturated fluids with temperatures at or near the boiling curve underlie thermal fields. Sudden reduction in confining pressure causes fluids to flash to steam, resulting in significant expansion, rock fragmentation, and debris ejection. In Yellowstone, hydrothermal explosions are a potentially significant hazard for visitors and facilities and can damage or even destroy thermal features. The breccia deposits and associated craters formed from hydrothermal explosions are mapped as mostly Holocene (the Mary Bay deposit is older) units throughout Yellowstone National Park (YNP) and are spatially related to within the 0.64-Ma Yellowstone caldera and along the active Norris-Mammoth tectonic corridor. In Yellowstone, at least 20 large (>100 m in diameter) hydrothermal explosion craters have been identified; the scale of the individual associated events dwarfs similar features in geothermal areas elsewhere in the world. Large hydrothermal explosions in Yellowstone have occurred over the past 16 ka averaging ~1 every 700 yr; similar events are likely in the future. Our studies of large hydrothermal explosion events indicate: (1) none are directly associated with eruptive volcanic or shallow intrusive events; (2) several historical explosions have been triggered by seismic events; (3) lithic clasts and comingled matrix material that form hydrothermal explosion deposits are extensively altered, indicating that explosions occur in areas subjected to intense hydrothermal processes; (4) many lithic clasts contained in explosion breccia deposits preserve evidence of repeated fracturing and vein-filling; and (5) areal dimensions of many large hydrothermal explosion craters in Yellowstone are similar to those of its active geyser basins and thermal areas. For Yellowstone, our knowledge of hydrothermal craters and ejecta is generally limited to after the Yellowstone Plateau emerged from beneath a late Pleistocene icecap that was roughly a kilometer thick. Large hydrothermal explosions may have occurred earlier as indicated by multiple episodes of cementation and brecciation commonly observed in hydrothermal ejecta clasts. Critical components for large, explosive hydrothermal systems include a water-saturated system at or near boiling temperatures and an interconnected system of well-developed joints and fractures along which hydrothermal fluids flow. Active deformation of the Yellowstone caldera, active faulting and moderate local seismicity, high heat flow, rapid changes in climate, and regional stresses are factors that have strong influences on the type of hydrothermal system developed. Ascending hydrothermal fluids flow along fractures that have developed in response to active caldera deformation and along edges of low-permeability rhyolitic lava flows. Alteration of the area affected, self-sealing leading to development of a caprock for the hydrothermal system, and dissolution of silica-rich rocks are additional factors that may constrain the distribution and development of hydrothermal fields. A partial low-permeability layer that acts as a cap to the hydrothermal system may produce some over-pressurization, thought to be small in most systems. Any abrupt drop in pressure initiates steam flashing and is rapidly transmitted through interconnected fractures that result in a series of multiple large-scale explosions contributing to the excavation of a larger explosion crater. Similarities between the size and dimensions of large hydrothermal explosion craters and thermal fields in Yellowstone may indicate that catastrophic events which result in large hydrothermal explosions are an end phase in geyser basin evolution. The Mary Bay hydrothermal explosion crater complex is the largest such complex in Yellowstone, and possibly in the world, with a diameter of 2.8 km in length and 2.4 km in width. It is nested in Mary Bay in the northern basin of Yellowstone Lake, an area of high heat flow and active deformation within the Yellowstone caldera. A sedimentary sequence exposed in wave-cut cliffs between Storm Point and Mary Bay gives insight into the geologic history of the Mary Bay hydrothermal explosion event. The Mary Bay explosion breccia deposits overlie sand above varved lake sediments and are separated locally into an upper and lower unit. The sand unit contains numerous small normal faults and is coextensive with the Mary Bay breccia in its northern extent. This sand may represent deposits of an earthquake-generated wave. Seismicity associated with the earthquake may have triggered the hydrothermal explosion responsible for development of the Mary Bay crater complex. Large hydrothermal explosions are rare events on a human time scale; however, the potential for additional future events of the sort in Yellowstone National Park is not insignificant. Based on the occurrence of large hydrothermal explosion events over the past 16,000 yr, an explosion large enough to create a 100-m-wide crater might be expected every 200 yr.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 44.55622782328973° to 44.698921513917945° latitude; -110.775146484375° to -110.40710449218749° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Lisa A. Morgan, Pat Shanks, Kenneth L. Pierce. 2009. Hydrothermal processes above the Yellowstone magma chamber: Large hydrothermal systems and large hydrothermal explosions. https://doi.org/10.1130/2009.2459(01)

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

The Maryland Coastal Plain Aquifer Information System: A GIS-based tool for assessing groundwater resources

Groundwater is the source of drinking water for ∼1.4 million people in the Coastal Plain Province of Maryland (USA). In addition, groundwater is essential for commercial, industrial, and agricultural uses. Approximately 0.757 × 109 L d –1 (200 million gallons/d) were withdrawn in 2010. As a result of decades of withdrawals from the coastal plain confined aquifers, groundwater levels have declined by as much as 70 m (230 ft) from estimated prepumping levels. Other issues posing challenges to long-term groundwater sustainability include degraded water quality from both man-made and natural sources, reduced stream base flow, land subsidence, and changing recharge patterns (drought) caused by climate change. In Maryland, groundwater supply is managed primarily by the Maryland Department of the Environment, which seeks to balance reasonable use of the resource with long-term sustainability. The chief goal of groundwater management in Maryland is to ensure safe and adequate supplies for all current and future users through the implementation of appropriate usage, planning, and conservation policies. To assist in that effort, the geographic information system (GIS)–based Maryland Coastal Plain Aquifer Information System was developed as a tool to help water managers access and visualize groundwater data for use in the evaluation of groundwater allocation and use permits. The system, contained within an ESRI ArcMap desktop environment, includes both interpreted and basic data for 16 aquifers and 14 confining units. Data map layers include aquifer and ­confining unit layer surfaces, aquifer extents, borehole information, hydraulic properties, time-series groundwater-level data, well records, and geophysical and lithologic logs. The aquifer and confining unit layer surfaces were generated specifically for the GIS system. The system also contains select groundwater-quality data and map layers that quantify groundwater and surface-water withdrawals. The aquifer information system can serve as a pre- and postprocessing environment for groundwater-flow models for use in water-supply planning, development, and management. The system also can be expanded to include features that evaluate constraints to groundwater development, such as insufficient available drawdown, degraded groundwater quality, insufficient aquifer yields, and well-field interference. Ultimately, the aquifer information system is intended to function as an interactive Web-based utility that provides a broad array of information related to groundwater resources in Maryland’s coastal plain to a wide-ranging audience, including well drillers, consultants, academia, and the general public.

Special Paper of the Geological Society of America

The 2011 Mineral, Virginia, earthquake and its significance for seismic hazards in eastern North America: overview and synthesis

The 23 August 2011 M w (moment magnitude) 5.7 ± 0.1, Mineral, Virginia, earthquake was the largest and most damaging in the central and eastern United States since the 1886 M w 6.8–7.0, Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake. Seismic data indicate that the earthquake rupture occurred on a southeast-dipping reverse fault and consisted of three subevents that progressed northeastward and updip. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) "Did You Feel It?" intensity reports from across the eastern United States and southeastern Canada, rockfalls triggered at distances to 245 km, and regional groundwater-level changes are all consistent with efficient propagation of high-frequency seismic waves (∼1 Hz and higher) in eastern North America due to low attenuation. Reported damage included cracked or shifted foundations and broken walls or chimneys, notably in unreinforced masonry, and indicated intensities up to VIII in the epicentral area based on USGS "Did You Feel It?" reports. The earthquake triggered the first automatic shutdown of a U.S. nuclear power plant, located ∼23 km northeast of the main shock epicenter. Although shaking exceeded the plant's design basis earthquake, the actual damage to safety-related structures, systems, and components was superficial. Damage to relatively tall masonry structures 130 km to the northeast in Washington, D.C., was consistent with source directivity, soft-soil ground-motion amplification, and anisotropic wave propagation with lower attenuation parallel to the northeast-trending Appalachian tectonic fabric. The earthquake and aftershocks occurred in crystalline rocks within Paleozoic thrust sheets of the Chopawamsic terrane. The main shock and majority of aftershocks delineated the newly named Quail fault zone in the subsurface, and shallow aftershocks defined outlying faults. The earthquake induced minor liquefaction sand boils, but notably there was no evidence of a surface fault rupture. Recurrence intervals, and evidence for larger earthquakes in the Quaternary in this area, remain important unknowns. This event, along with similar events during historical time, is a reminder that earthquakes of similar or larger magnitude pose a real hazard in eastern North America.

Virginia

Aftershocks illuminate the 2011 Mineral, Virginia, earthquake causative fault zone and nearby active faults

Deployment of temporary seismic stations after the 2011 Mineral, Virginia (USA), earthquake produced a well-recorded aftershock sequence. The majority of aftershocks are in a tabular cluster that delineates the previously unknown Quail fault zone. Quail fault zone aftershocks range from ~3 to 8 km in depth and are in a 1-km-thick zone striking ~036&deg; and dipping ~50&deg;SE, consistent with a 028&deg;, 50&deg;SE main-shock nodal plane having mostly reverse slip. This cluster extends ~10 km along strike. The Quail fault zone projects to the surface in gneiss of the Ordovician Chopawamsic Formation just southeast of the Ordovician&ndash;Silurian Ellisville Granodiorite pluton tail. The following three clusters of shallow (<3 km) aftershocks illuminate other faults. (1) An elongate cluster of early aftershocks, ~10 km east of the Quail fault zone, extends 8 km from Fredericks Hall, strikes ~035&deg;&ndash;039&deg;, and appears to be roughly vertical. The Fredericks Hall fault may be a strand or splay of the older Lakeside fault zone, which to the south spans a width of several kilometers. (2) A cluster of later aftershocks ~3 km northeast of Cuckoo delineates a fault near the eastern contact of the Ordovician Quantico Formation. (3) An elongate cluster of late aftershocks ~1 km northwest of the Quail fault zone aftershock cluster delineates the northwest fault (described herein), which is temporally distinct, dips more steeply, and has a more northeastward strike. Some aftershock-illuminated faults coincide with preexisting units or structures evident from radiometric anomalies, suggesting tectonic inheritance or reactivation.

Virginia