Cenozoic uplift and erosion of the Norwegian Barents Shelf – A review

Lasabuda, Amando Putra Ersaid; Johansen, Nora; Laberg, Jan Sverre; Faleide, Jan Inge; Senger, Kim; Rydningen, Tom Arne; Patton, Henry; Knutsen, Stig-Morten; Hanssen, A.

doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2021.103609

Cited by 39 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 188 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…43 However, traces of hydrocarbons are frequently found in "dry" wells and surface sediments suggesting hydrocarbon loss due to widespread paleo uid leakages 32,50 . Resonating with geochemical observations, basin modeling results 34 suggest that the sealing potential of hydrocarbon reservoirs may be compromised due to regional uplift and 850 -1370 m net erosion in Paleogene and Neogene 41,51 and 940 to 1180 net glacial erosion during >40 reciprocal glaciations in Pleistocene 42 .…”

Section: Geological Settingsmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…Our datasets from the Barents Sea document extensive oil and methane leakage from hydrocarbon reservoirs that have experienced uplift and glacial erosion, constituting an important source of methane to the water column, and, possibly, atmospheric inventory. Signi cantly, there are numerous analogous geological settings (sedimentary basins with petroleum potential that have experienced uplift and glacial erosion) across North Atlantic and Arctic continental margins where we may expect abundant hydrocarbon leakage: the Timan-Pechora Basin in the Pechora Sea 31 , the Sverdrup Basin on the northern margin of North America 69 , the Eastern Basin in the Russian part of the Barents Sea 45 , the western (Norwegian) part of the Barents Sea 41 , sedimentary basins surrounding British Isles 46,70 and sedimentary basins of western and eastern Greenland 47,71,72 (Fig. 1).…”

Section: Implications For Formerly Glaciated Hydrocarbon-bearing Shelvesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Barents Sea shelf represents one such Arctic shelf, with a complex history of uplift and erosion resulting in the removal of 1.7 -2.6 km of overburden over a period from ~50 Ma BP until the end of the last glacial cycle ~20 ka BP 41,42 , combined with substantial 2,966 Sm 3 mill. o.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Widespread natural methane and oil leakage from sub-marine Arctic reservoirs

Serov

Mattingsdal²,

Winsborrow³

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Parceling the anthropogenic and natural (geological) sources of fossil methane in the atmosphere remains problematic due to a lack of distinctive chemical markers for their discrimination. In this light, understanding the distribution and contribution of potential geological methane sources is important. We present empirical observations of hitherto undocumented, widespread and extensive methane and oil release from geological reservoirs to the Arctic Ocean. Methane fluxes from >7,000 seeps significantly deplete in seawater, but nevertheless reach the sea surface and may transfer to the air. Oil slick emission spots and gas ebullition are persistent across multi-year observations and correlate to formerly glaciated geological structures, which have experienced km-scale glacial erosion that has left hydrocarbon reservoirs partially uncapped since the last deglaciation ~15,000 years ago. Such persistent, geologically controlled, natural hydrocarbon release may be characteristic of formerly glaciated hydrocarbon-bearing basins which are common across polar continental shelves, and could represent an underestimated source of natural fossil methane within the global carbon cycle.

show abstract

Section: Geological Settingsmentioning

confidence: 83%

Section: Implications For Formerly Glaciated Hydrocarbon-bearing Shelvesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Widespread natural methane and oil leakage from sub-marine Arctic reservoirs

Serov

Mattingsdal²,

Winsborrow³

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another hiatus in sedimentary record of Svalbard occurs in the Neogene (Figure 2), with major glaciations and a pre‐glacial tectonic and post‐glacial isostatic uplift (Lasabuda et al., 2021). Magmatic activity, however, occurred in north‐west Spitsbergen.…”

Section: Study Area and Geological Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stratigraphic and Spatial Extent of HALIP Magmatism in Central Spitsbergen

Senger¹,

Galland

2022

Geochem Geophys Geosyst

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The high Arctic experienced a major tectono-magmatic event, the High Arctic Large Igneous Province (HALIP; Figure 1a). The term HALIP was initially presented by Tarduno (1998) and utilized by Maher (2001) for describing the Early Cretaceous magmatic activity in Svalbard. HALIP comprises large volumes of mafic rocks emplaced across the circum-Arctic in the Early Cretaceous. Magmatic rocks related to the HALIP occur as sills, dykes, lavas and pyroclastic material in Svalbard, Franz

show abstract

“…Vorren et al 1991;Nyland et al 1992;Riis and Fjeldskaar 1992;Doré and Jensen 1996;Richardsen et al 1993;Henriksen et al 2011a;Ktenas et al 2017Ktenas et al , 2019Amantov and Fjeldskaar 2018;Doré et al 2021;Lasabuda et al 2021;. It seems that several episodes related to the opening of the Atlantic Ocean and the glacial episodes affected the platform in different ways.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Finnmark Platform Composite Tectono-Sedimentary Element, Barents Sea

Henriksen

Ktenas

Nielsen³

2021

Memoirs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Finnmark Platform Composite Tectono-Sedimentary Element (CTSE), located in the southern Barents Sea, is a northward-dipping monoclinal structural unit. It covers most of the southern Norwegian Barents Sea where it borders the Norwegian Mainland. Except for the different age of basement, the CTSE extends eastwards into the Kola Monocline on the Russian part of the Barents Sea.The general water depth varies between 200-350 m, and the sea bottom is influenced by Plio-Pleistocene glaciations. A high frequency of scour marks and deposition of moraine materials exists on the platform areas. Successively older strata sub-crop below the Upper Regional Unconformity (URU, which was) formed by several glacial periods.Basement rocks of Neoproterozoic age are heavily affected by the Caledonian Orogeny, and previously by the Timanide tectonic compression in the easternmost part of the Finnmark Platform CTSE.Depth to crystalline basement varies considerably and is estimated to be from 4-5 to 10 km. Following the Caledonian orogenesis, the Finnmark Platform was affected by Lower to Middle Carboniferous rifting, sediment input from the Uralian Orogen in the east, the Upper Jurassic / Lower Cretaceous rift phase and the Late Plio-Pleistocene isostatic uplift.A total of 8 exploration wells drilled different targets on the platform. Two minor discoveries have been made proving presence of both oil and gas and potential sandstone reservoirs of good quality identified in the Visean, Induan, Anisian and Carnian intervals. In addition, thick sequences of Perm-Carboniferous carbonates and spiculitic chert are proven in the eastern Platform area. The deep reservoirs are believed to be charged from Paleozoic sources. A western extension of the Domanik source rocks well documented in the Timan-Pechora Basin may exist towards the eastern part of the Finnmark Platform. In the westernmost part, charge from juxtaposed down-faulted basins may be possible.

show abstract

Cenozoic uplift and erosion of the Norwegian Barents Shelf – A review

Cited by 39 publications

References 188 publications

Widespread natural methane and oil leakage from sub-marine Arctic reservoirs

Widespread natural methane and oil leakage from sub-marine Arctic reservoirs

Stratigraphic and Spatial Extent of HALIP Magmatism in Central Spitsbergen

Finnmark Platform Composite Tectono-Sedimentary Element, Barents Sea

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About