1975
DOI: 10.1029/jb080i032p04461
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Analysis of magnetic anomalies over Yellowstone National Park: Mapping of Curie point isothermal surface for geothermal reconnaissance

Abstract: The bottom of the magnetized crust determined from the spectral analysis of residual magnetic anomalies is generally interpreted as the level of the Curie point isotherm. This paper studies the spatial variation of the Curie point isotherm level in Yellowstone National Park with the help of aeromagnetic data. A very shallow isothermal surface at a depth of only 5-6 km below sea level is associated with the central part of the Yellowstone caldera. It seems to extend along a narrow corridor toward the southweste… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
101
0
4

Year Published

1980
1980
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 215 publications
(110 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
(4 reference statements)
0
101
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Correlation with magnetotelluric soundings Stanley et al (1977) have calculated the depth to the highly conductive zone from magnetotelluric soundings in the eastern Snake River Plain-Yellowstone region. They found a close correspondence of the depth of 5 to 7 km for the conductive layer to the depth of 5 to 6 km for the base of the magnetic crust in Yellowstone (Bhattacharyya and Leu, 1975). A good correlation is also found between the depth to the base of the magnetic crust and the depth to the top of the highly conductive layer in the crust in the eastern Snake River Plain.…”
mentioning
confidence: 60%
“…Correlation with magnetotelluric soundings Stanley et al (1977) have calculated the depth to the highly conductive zone from magnetotelluric soundings in the eastern Snake River Plain-Yellowstone region. They found a close correspondence of the depth of 5 to 7 km for the conductive layer to the depth of 5 to 6 km for the base of the magnetic crust in Yellowstone (Bhattacharyya and Leu, 1975). A good correlation is also found between the depth to the base of the magnetic crust and the depth to the top of the highly conductive layer in the crust in the eastern Snake River Plain.…”
mentioning
confidence: 60%
“…This data was collected in 1974-1975. In this study, the centroid depth and forward modelling of the spectral peak methods of the aeromagnetic data were used to determine CPD. Bhattacharyya and Leu (1977) presented a method for determining the centroid of rectangular parallel piped sources, which it had been used in their earlier study (Bhattacharyya and Leu 1975) to investigate the Curie depths of Yellowstone Park. This method was further developed by Okubo et al (1985) who combined and expanded the ideas of the methods to the purpose of geothermal exploration.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Bhattacharyya and Leu (1975) mapped Curie point isothermal surface for geothermal reconnaissance of the Yellowstone National Park in USA. In this area, CPD was estimated 4-8 km.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In an area where so much of the magnetic signal originates in near-surface basalts with well-characterized normal and reversed remnant magnetization, and where higher-than-usual magnetic data already exist or are being added to d , a rigorous modern magnetic analysis like that performed recently for Yellowstone by Finn and Morgan (2002) might resolve questions about the signal-to-noise content of near-surface magnetic sources in the 1964 and Geophysical Data for the Northern Rocky Mountains magnetic residual data sets and refine subsurface details in areas where dense well data is lacking. Since detailed geothermal data and modeling exist for the eastern Snake River Plain and its environs, a detailed depth-to-Curie point analysis of the INL area similar to that of Bhattacharyya and Leu (1975) for Yellowstone would also contribute to the analysis of unexpected anomalies like that of Lava Ridge. These suggested analyses will not be performed for the OU 10-08 model development project.…”
Section: C-27mentioning
confidence: 99%