Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Structural, geochemical, and mineralogical investigation of active hydrothermal fluid discharges at Strýtan hydrothermal chimney, Akureyri Bay, Eyjafjörður region, Iceland

Structural, geochemical, and mineralogical investigation of active hydrothermal fluid discharges... science@geowid.de GeoWiD GmbH, Morseweg A submarine hydrothermal fluid discharge structure in Akureyri Bay, Eyjafjörður region, 44, 01129 Dresden, Germany Iceland, was investigated by means of structural, geochemical, and mineralogical Full list of author information is available at the end of the methods. Thermal and chemical gradients between the hydrothermal fluid and the article subarctic seawater lead to an ongoing mineral precipitation. This process builds up hydrothermal chimneys of dozens of meters in height and they are still growing. The structural analysis reveals an internal stratification of the mineral precipitates at various scales from sub-micrometers to several decimeters. This stratification indicates random changes in the depositional system during the formation of the hydrothermal cones. Some mineral layers are characterized by a dominance of Si, Mg, and O. In contrast, others are dominated by Ca and O. However, the results of XRD analysis proved that the material consists mainly of a trioctahedral phyllosilicate of the smectite group, presumably saponite or stevensite. Additionally, aragonite and hisingerite could be present. The material is built up of numerous parallel tubes, which act as conductors in the hydrothermal chimneys. Consequently, a large amount of available pore space with pore volumes of up to 6 mm was detected in the sample by the porosity analysis. Keywords: Submarine groundwater discharge, Hydrothermal chimney, Shallow-water hydrothermal system, Scientific diving, Iceland, Strýtan Background Due to its hot spot origin and position upon the Mid-Atlantic Ridge (MAR), Iceland is a predestined example for a volcanically determined depositional environment. Besides an exceptional amount of volcanic and volcaniclastic deposits, there exist many localities with intensive hydrothermal activity. Common features in subaerial strata are sulfuric gas emissions, hot springs, and mud pots, but submarine hydrothermal discharges occur as well. In the north of Iceland, intensive hydrothermal activity is known in the Tjörnes frac- ture zone, which connects the neo-volcanic zone of Iceland to the Kolbeinsey Ridge, the northern extension of the MAR (Rögnvaldsson et al. 1998; Riedel et al. 2001). Three © The Author(s) 2017. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. Stanulla et al. Geotherm Energy (2017) 5:8 Page 2 of 11 hydrothermal localities within the Tjörnes fracture zone are known: south of Kolbeinsey Island, east of Grimsey Island and in Akureyri Bay (Fig.  1a; Stoffers et  al. 1997, 2000; Hannington et  al. 2001); the former two comprise high-temperature geothermal fields (Hannington et al. 2001; cf. Ármannsson 2016). On the Kolbeinsey Ridge, hydrothermal Fig. 1 a The hydrothermal chimney Strýtan is situated in the Eyjafjörður region in northern Iceland. The diving locality lies in the fjord north of Akureyri at a water depth of 15–60 m. Map of Iceland modified after de.wikipedia.org; map of Strýtan modified after strytan.is/E. Bogason. b Schematic sketch of the three geo - thermal cones at Strýtan. Red arrow marks the approximate situation of the sampling point (image: strytan. is). c Top of the largest hydrothermal chimney with water emanations (arrows). Due to ongoing mineral precipitation, the cones are still growing. d Diver at the largest hydrothermal chimney at Strýtan. The cone rises approximately 45 m from the seafloor. Photography by E. Bogason. e Submarine water escape structure at Strýtan. Red arrows mark the small-scale tubes. Blue arrows indicate areas of diffuse venting (c.f. f). f Active, recent water escape structure. The large amount of water released and the resulting fibrillation of the water column obliterate the sedimentary pattern, although it is clearly visible in reality (c.f. e; photography by E. Bogason) Stanulla et al. Geotherm Energy (2017) 5:8 Page 3 of 11 discharge at a water depth of 100–110 m produces precipitates of orange-reddish mud or yellow-reddish iron hydroxide (Lackschewitz et al. 2006). The Grimsey vent field comprises a large hydrothermal area with anhydrite mounds and chimneys at a water depth of about 400  m (Hannington et  al. 2001). While on the Kolbeinsey Ridge the ground is made up of highly altered basalts, the Grimsey graben is filled with glacial sediments (Lackschewitz et  al. 2006). These volcaniclastic materi - als are altered by hydrothermal fluids, which cause the replacement by or precipitation of sulfides, sulfates, oxides, oxyhydroxides, carbonates, and phyllosilicates (Dekov et al. 2005, 2008). In Akureyri Bay, hydrothermal fluids escaping from the 6 to 12 Ma old basaltic seafloor (Björnsson 1981; Björnsson and Saemundsson 1975) show chemical properties (mete- oric origin, low mineralization, high pH values) and stable isotope ratios that are almost identical to those with similar temperature (50–100 °C) from other geothermal fields in the Eyjafjörður region (Kristmannsdottir and Johnsen 1982; Geptner et al. 2002). Quite special structures are the hydrothermal freshwater vents discovered and described by Marteinsson et al. (2001). These submarine cones, up to 45 m high (Fig.  1b, d), discharge hydrothermal fluids of pH 10.0 at a water temperature of around 70  °C. Their submarine discharge of SiO -rich, mineralized water is quenched upon contact with the cold subarctic ocean water (Mg-rich), resulting mainly in the precipitation of smectite. About 50 different species of thermophilic bacteria and archaea were found in the submarine discharge (Marteinsson et al. 2001). Two different studies were carried out on the hydrothermal chimneys at Strýtan using different approaches. Marteinsson et al. (2001) first discovered and described the cones and focused on hydrochemistry and microbiological issues of the hydrothermal fluid. Geptner et al. (2002) provide a concise description of the clay mineralogical aspects and characteristics of the material and investigated the clay mineralogical properties of the material at sub-micrometer scale. In contrast, the focus of our study is set on structural investigations and the integration of geochemical, structural, and mineralogical results to conclude on the depositional system and its processes. The largest of the three cones is in the focus of the present work (Fig.  1b). These enor - mously large chimneys are built up of small-scale discharge structures (Fig. 1c, e, f ). Per- mission was obtained to collect one rock sample of the small-scale degassing structures during dives at the major cone “Strýtan” at a water depth of 30 m (Fig. 1a, b). The aim of this study was to obtain a better understanding of the internal structure of the cones and of the forming conditions under which such silicates precipitate. This knowledge contributes to complete the knowledge inventory on the hydrothermal cones in the region and enhance a possible comparison to other sites in the future. Methods The fieldwork included mapping and photo-documentation of the hydrothermal chim - neys. All underwater investigations were carried out by specially trained scuba divers. The sample material was investigated for its structural, mineralogical, and geochemical properties using optical microscopy (thin sections), a macroscopic description of pol- ished sections, XCT, SEM (also combined with EDS), XRF, and XRD. Stanulla et al. Geotherm Energy (2017) 5:8 Page 4 of 11 Thin and polished sections as well as powder samples for chemical analysis (<63 µm) were prepared. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analysis was carried out using a JEOL JSM-7001 F Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscope. Energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) was performed with a BRUKER EDS, whereas for the XRF analysis a Spectro Xepos spectrometer was used. X-ray com- puted tomography (XCT) was performed with a ProCon X-Ray GmbH CTAlpha, a 160-kV transmission tube from Feinfocus Garbsen and a Hamamatsu Photonics K.K. C7942SK-05 detector. The operating parameters were 160 kV voltage, 180 μA amperage, and 13.1  W target power. Data processing was performed using Volex 6.0 (Fraunhofer Entwicklungszentrum Röntgentechnik Fürth) and visualization was carried out with VG Studio Max 2.1. The X-ray diffractometry analysis (XRD) was employed to identify single mineral phases in a powder sample. The analysis was carried out using a FPM/Seifert URD 6 with a cobalt tube. The statistical interpretation and illustration was realized using the program ANALYZE (Seifert-FPM). Results Hydrothermal chimneys The hydrothermal chimneys in the Eyjafjörður region show a complex architecture and a large number of potential pathways for hydrothermal waters. Their macrostructure is quite diverse ranging from several millimeters to nearly 45 m at the main cone Strýtan (Fig. 1d). Active discharge of hot water is a common feature (Fig. 1c, e, f ). It is well visible due to the high thermogradients between the hot hydrothermal water and the subarc- tic low-temperature seawater. The contrast in density causes the formation of schlieren in the water column above the discharge points (Fig.  1e, f ). According to Marteinsson et  al. (2001), the chemical composition of the discharging fluids is identical with that of geothermal waters in springs and wells onshore. These are very sparsely mineralized (290 µS/cm) with a pH of 10, but contain about 90 mg/l Si. Structural analysis The rock sample from the major cone Strýtan investigated (Fig.  2A) is of the size 90  ×  50  ×  60  mm. It consists of a relatively soft mineral precipitate, which has a pale grayish, whitish to grayish beige color. It appears whitish-yellowish to brownish-grayish (II-Pol) or dark gray to black (X-Pol) under the microscope. The fine crystalline to homogenous fabrics are characterized by numerous parallel arranged, small-scale tubes (cf. Figure  2F; horizontal and vertical specimens) and show an estimated pore space of up to 25% (thin section counting). The porosity analysis (cal - culated from XCT investigations) reveals a large amount of available pore space in the sample. The pore volume ranges from approximately 2 up to 6 mm per pore. Relatively few small pores have developed in the sample, whereas predominantly large pores with volume around 6  mm prevail. The spatial distribution of the pores is relatively homo - geneous (Fig.  2B–D). The walls of the pore space are partly coated by a pale brownish (II-Pol) salvage, which appears microcrystalline to banded with pale brown interference colors. This mineral also occurs in the form of impregnations or accumulation. Stanulla et al. Geotherm Energy (2017) 5:8 Page 5 of 11 Fig. 2 A Polished section of sample IS_Strýtan_01. The sample is stabilized with an epoxy resin. An enor- mous amount of pore space is obvious (red arrows). An internal stratification reveals depositional events (dashed lines). B Porosity analysis calculated from the XCT investigation. The color bar scales the pore volume. Apparently, few small pores have developed. Generally, large pores up to 6 mm prevail, showing a relatively homogenous spatial distribution. C XCT scan of the sample IS_Strýtan_01. The enormous amount of pore space in the sample is well visible (white—smectite, black—air/pore space). The red arrows mark the major water pathways. The red square shows one main duct as shown in E. D 2D projection of the porosity analysis. A homogenous distribution of the pores is well visible. The indicated great abundance of large pores hints on the large available pore space being involved in fluid migration. The material is highly permeable. E Sample investigated by Marteinsson et al. (2001). This sketch outlines clearly the layered construction of the chimney and shows the small tubes emitting the hydrothermal fluid (red arrows; modified after Marteinsson et al. 2001). F Sample IS_Strýtan_01 macroscopically. Red arrows mark the major dewatering tubes. Sample is in native orientation Stanulla et al. Geotherm Energy (2017) 5:8 Page 6 of 11 An internal stratification of the sample is macroscopically visible (Fig.  2A). The sin - gle layers are 0.5–1.5 cm thick and represent overgrowth of mineral phases. Transitions between these growth stages are relatively sharp. The layers themselves appear smooth and gently curving. Marteinsson et  al. (2001) also reported an “inner” and an “outer zone” of the small chimneys they investigated (Fig. 2E). Obviously, these zones represent the growth stages discussed here. Optical microscopy and SEM analysis show an overgrowth of minerals on micrometer scale (Fig. 3). Chemical and mineralogical composition The results of chemical analysis (XRF, Fig.  4; Table 1) show that the sample is dominated by the elements Si, Mg, Ca, and Al. Also Fe, Cl, and K are common. All other elements only occur in minor concentrations below 0.01 wt%: Ti, S, Ga, Sr, P, Mn, La, Ta, Ba, Br, Ge, As, Zn, I. Ni. U, Cu, Zr, Sb, Te, Rb, Y, Mo, Sn, Hg, and Th. The elements V, Cs, Co, Fig. 3 SEM image of the thin section IS_Strýtan_01. The micrometer-scale layers are well visible. The different colors are the result of varying material properties (the higher the atomic number, the lighter the color). The yellow arrow marks the orientation of the profile given below. The diagram documents the chemical behavior along the profile (green arrow). This EDX line scan confirms different materials, although no mineral phase identification is possible by the use of this method. The outer parts are characterized by a dominance of Si, Mg, and O (phase I). The inner parts are dominated by Ca and O (phase II) Stanulla et al. Geotherm Energy (2017) 5:8 Page 7 of 11 Fig. 4 XRF analysis results for sample IS_Strýtan_01. All elements above the detection limit are shown. Table 1 gives the complete dataset Table 1 Chemical composition for sample IS_Strýtan_01 Major elements Minor elements Below detection limit Element wt% Abs. error Element ppm Abs. error Element ppm Abs. error Si 24.3 0.02 P 83.4 4.1 V <14 −13 Mg 19.51 0.03 Mn 69.6 1.8 Cs <4 0 Ca 1.685 0.004 La 66.2 6.3 Co <3 0 Al 1.145 0.004 Ta 53.2 1 Ag <2 0 Fe 0.4709 0.0008 Ba 33.2 4.1 Cd <2 0 Cl 0.4457 0.0005 Br 27.6 0.2 Ce <2 0 K 0.1703 0.0021 Ge 26.7 0.3 Cr <1 0 Ti 0.0933 0.0011 As 21.2 0.2 Hf <1 0 S 0.06038 0.00026 Zn 14.1 0.3 Tl <1 0 Ga 0.02009 0.00008 I 9.4 1.3 Bi <1 0 Sr 0.01314 0.00003 Ni 8.5 0.3 Pb <0.8 −0.8 U 8.5 0.2 W <0.7 0 Cu 7.6 0.5 Se <0.5 0 Zr 6.6 0.6 Nb <0.5 −0.5 Sb 4.3 0.6 Te 3.6 0.4 Rb 2.9 0.1 Y 2.5 0.1 Mo 2.5 0.3 Sn 2.2 0.3 Hg 2.1 0.4 Th 0.6 0.2 Elements below the detection limit are given as “<detection limit” Ag, Cd, Ce, Cr, Hf, Tl, Bi, Pb, W, Se, and Nb were below the respective detection limit which is given in Table 1. Neither anhydrite nor sulfides could be detected, although they are common minerals in hydrothermal chimneys (cf. Marteinsson et al. 2001). Stanulla et al. Geotherm Energy (2017) 5:8 Page 8 of 11 The overgrowth of mineral phases in the sample is also visible in its chemical compo - sition. This is proven by the EDX line scan shown in Fig.  3. It confirms the presence of different materials, although no mineral phase identification is possible by the use of this method. The outer parts (Phase I) are characterized by a dominance of Si, Mg, and O. In the inner parts (Phase II), the elements Ca and O prevail. According to the results of XRD analysis (Fig. 5), the material consists mainly of a tri- octahedral phyllosilicate of the smectite group, presumably saponite (cf. Geptner et  al. 2002), which has the chemical formula Mg [(OH) |(Si,Al) O ]·(Ca,Na) (H O) . 3 2 4 10 x 2 y Additionally, aragonite (chemical formula: C aCO ) and hisingerite (chemical formula: (III) Fe Si O (OH) ·2H O) seem to be present. Furthermore, the optical microscopy showed 2 2 5 4 2 disperse to nest-like arranged microcrystalline aggregates of plagioclase, glasses/opaque minerals, and biotite. A precise characterization of all mineral phases necessitates further intensive clay mineralogical investigations, which were not in focus of our work. Thermodynamic calculations An attempt was made to simulate the formation of saponite by means of thermodynamic modeling of the mixing of the geothermal fluid with the surrounding ocean water. Only the Hatches database (https://www.oecd-nea.org/tools/abstract/detail/nea-1210) con- tains specific data about saponite minerals such as saponite-Ca, saponite-Mg, saponite-K, saponite-Na, and saponite-H. However, preliminary simulations showed that the geo- thermal fluid reported by Marteinsson et al. (2001) is extremely oversaturated (saturation index, logarithmic) with respect to all saponites (SI ~ 20). Oversaturation was calculated for ocean water as well (SI ~ 4). From this, it is obvious that the precipitation of saponite is inhibited and a catalyst is needed (Schumann et al. 2012). It can be speculated that the cat- alyst is provided by the ocean water and temperature may play a role as well. Apart from that, thermodynamic calculations cannot help clarify the formation processes in this case. Discussion The hydrothermal chimneys Strýtan discharge fluids actively. Thus, it can be specu - lated that mineral precipitation is ongoing and cones are growing. The mineral precipi - tate is deposited in centimeter-thick layers. This indicates nearly constant depositional Fig. 5 Results of XRD analysis of sample IS_Strýtan_01 show that the hydrothermal cones are predominantly made up of a trioctahedral phyllosilicate, presumably saponite. Aragonite and hisingerite may also be present Stanulla et al. Geotherm Energy (2017) 5:8 Page 9 of 11 conditions during the formation of each layer. Generally, minor changes in a limited region of the depositional system during times of statistically constant conditions result in the formation of layering (Collinson et  al. 2006). Consequently, episodic changes in the depositional system might have led to the stratified architecture. Growth rates of sin - gle layers are at the moment completely unknown and cannot be discussed in detail here because the investigations did not consider any observations along a timeline. The main controlling factors of deposition are the supply of hydrothermal fluids (volume flow) and their geochemistry. Changes can be caused by varying volcanic activity. In times of increased volcanism, probably more fluid is emitted due to an increased amount of ther - mal energy and a rise of pressure in the system. Consequently, more mineral precipi- tates can be produced resulting in thick growth stages. In contrast, thin layers probably develop in times of decreased volcanic activity. However, this process could only have an indirect influence, as the emitted waters are assumed to be terrestrial freshwaters migrating along fractures while being heated on their way through the bedrock (Mar- teinsson et al. 2001). While macroscopic growth stages indicate episodic times of constant depositional conditions, microscopic layering actually indicates an intermittent deposition with short time changes or alternating conditions. Possible mechanisms are changes in sea- water composition or in water dynamics (pressure), mixing and/or stratification of the water column (currents, tides), and changes in temperature or salinity. However, min- eralogical processes such as (de-)carbonatization, silicification, or alteration may lead to small-scale differences within the growth stages (c.f. Okrusch and Matthes 2014). Hot spring silicification (e.g., Jones and Renaut 2011) is an especially common feature. Often, microbial activity influences this process (e.g., Konhauser et  al. 2004). In the present case, secondary silicification might influence the primary mineral phases too (see Fig.  3) as the hydrothermal fluid discharged is rich in Si (Marteinsson et al. 2001). The pale brownish (II-Pol) secondary mineral phase in the pore space, most likely an iron oxide or hydroxide mineral precipitate, possibly suggests a post-sedimen- tary impregnation by migrating water phases with a different (iron-bearing) chemical composition. The sedimentation as well as the hydrodynamic and hydrochemical processes forms a highly dynamic depositional environment at the hydrothermal chimneys of Akureyri Bay. Depositional rates and chemical variations cannot be determined over long periods at the moment. Such knowledge would give further insights into the processes of sedi- mentation and alteration. Therefore, long-term observations and measurements of the hydrothermal discharge features should be performed to produce more useful data on the processes taking place. Additionally, a comparison of the system to another location would give new insights into the processes taking place. At first glance, the Lost City hydrothermal field at the Atlantis Massif could comprise a similar system, but the Lost City hydrothermal field is characterized by carbonates precipitating on a peridotitic lithology characterized by intense serpentinization (e.g., Früh-Green 2003; Kellley et al. 2005, 2007). In contrast, the Strýtan chimney provides smectite group minerals and the base rock is basaltic. Moreo- ver, the Lost City chimney is situated in a deep-sea environment (e.g., Kellley et al. 2005, 2007) which makes a comparison to the shallow marine Icelandic system difficult in Stanulla et al. Geotherm Energy (2017) 5:8 Page 10 of 11 general: ambient pressure, temperatures, illumination, and many other physico-chemical and biological parameters vary significantly. For sure, the overall appearance (“habitus”) as well as some geometric data (height of chimneys) might be comparable. However, the mineralogical and (water-) geochemical properties are completely different. To our knowledge, there is no comparable system to the Strýtan chimneys docu- mented. Therefore, our study tries to complete the knowledge inventory about Strýtan which is the presumption for a substantive and meaningful comparison to other sites. Conclusions The findings of geological investigations at the hydrothermal chimneys Strýtan in North - ern Iceland presented in this publication contribute to the analysis of sedimentary pro- cesses in hydrothermal discharge structures. The results of in situ observations as well as of the structural, geochemical, and mineralogical analysis showed that the constructive processes at Strýtan hydrothermal cones act synsedimentary: a water discharge supplies hot, very sparsely mineralized hydrothermal water with a relatively constant water flow. When hydrothermal fluids come into contact with the cold subarctic seawater, it triggers catalytic-driven precipitation of smectite group minerals and other minerals. In the long term, elongated structures growing from the sea bottom are formed. The sample mate - rial shows a highly porous architecture, as it is built up of numerous small tubes. These constitute the waters’ pathway from the hydrothermal reservoir to the subarctic ocean water. Submarine hydrothermal discharge is often difficult to detect, especially in case of small and disperse venting. It is probably far more common than currently known. There are numerous coastal areas in shallow waters impacted by volcanisms, where compara- ble discharge of geothermal fluids is likely. A further study, e.g., about flow rates of the discharge at Strýtan could help understand such systems much better. Due to its position in a shallow water environment and the possibility of in situ investi- gations by scientific divers, this hydrothermal discharge feature is of enormous scientific interest as it may represent an analogue to comparable deep-sea systems, which are far more difficult to investigate due to the water depth at which they occur. Authors’ contributions Fieldwork and measurements were carried out by RST and CST. EB contributed during the fieldwork and with permis- sions for diving and sampling as well as with illustrating material and local information. BM attempted the thermody- namic modeling and contributed on hydrogeological and chemical issues. TP contributed to the geological model and biological issues. All authors contributed to discussions according to their respective areas of expertise. RST and CST drafted the final manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Author details 1 2 GeoWiD GmbH, Morseweg 44, 01129 Dresden, Germany. TU Bergakademie Freiberg, CMAS Scientific Diving Center, 3 4 Gustav-Zeuner-Straße 7, 09599 Freiberg, Germany. Strýtan Divecenter, Hjalteyri, 601 Akureyri, Iceland. GeoDive, Sach- senhofstraße 10, 09599 Freiberg, Germany. Acknowledgements We thank Dr. Kleeberg for help with the XRD analysis. Furthermore, thanks go to Dipl.-Ing. Uta Ballaschk for XCT analysis, to Dr. Jörg Pfänder for the geochemical advices, and to Prof. Dr. Klaus Stanek and Anja Obst for SEM and EDX analyses (all TU Bergakademie Freiberg). Last but not least, we thank the anonymous reviewers for their review and useful comments to improve the manuscript. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Availability of data and materials Data can be obtained via science@geowid.de or on ResearchGate. Stanulla et al. Geotherm Energy (2017) 5:8 Page 11 of 11 Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Received: 2 January 2017 Accepted: 7 June 2017 References Ármannsson H. The fluid geochemistry of Icelandic high temperature geothermal areas. Appl Geochem. 2016;66:14–64. Björnsson A. Exploration of low-temperature geothermal fields for district heating in Akureyri, North Iceland. Geotherm Resour Counc Trans. 1981;5:495–8. Björnsson A, Saemundsson K. Geothermal activity in the vicinity of Akureyri, p. 53. Orkustofnun report (OSJHD 7557). Orkustofnun, Reykjavík, Iceland; 1975. Collinson JD, Mountney NP, Thompson DB. Sedimentary structures. Harpenden: Terra Publ; 2006. p. 304. Dekov VM, Scholten J, Botz R, Garbe-Schönberg CD, Thiry M, Stoffers P, Schmidt M. Occurrence of kaolinite and mixed- layer kaolinite/smectite in hydrothermal sediments of Grimsey Graben, Tjörnes Fracture Zone (north of Iceland). Mar Geol. 2005;215(2005):159–70. Dekov VM, Scholten J, Garbe-Schönberg CD, Botz R, Cuadros J, Schmidt M, Stoffers P. Hydrothermal sediment alteration at a seafloor vent field: Grimsey Graben, Tjörnes Fracture Zone, north of Iceland. J Geophys Res. 2008;113(11):B11101. Früh-Green GL. 30,000 years of Hydrothermal activity at the Lost City vent field. Science. 2003;301(5632):495–8. Geptner A, Kristmannsdóttir H, Kristjansson J, Marteinsson V. Biogenic saponite from an active submarine hot spring, Iceland. Clays Clay Miner. 2002;50(2):174–85. Hannington M, Herzig P, Stoffers P, Scholten J, Garbe-Schönberg D, Jonasson IR, Roest W. First observations of high-temperature submarine vents and massive anhydrite deposits off the north coast of Iceland. Mar Geol. 2001;177:199–220. Jones B, Renaut RW. Hot springs and geysers. In: Reitner J, Thiel V, editors. Encyclopedia of geobiology. Dordrecht: Springer; 2011. p. 927. Kelly DS, Karson JA, Früh-Green GL, Yoerger DR. A serpentinite-hosted ecosystem: the Lost City hydrothermal field. Sci- ence. 2005;307(5714):1428–34. Kelly DS, Früh-Green GL, Karson JA, Ludwig KA. The Lost City hydrothermal field revisited. Oceanography. 2007;20(4):90–9. Kristmannsdottir H, Johnsen SJ. Chemistry and stable isotope composition of geothermal waters in the Eyjafjordur region, northern Iceland. Jokull. 1982;32:83–90. Konhauser KO, Jones B, Phoenix VR, Ferris G, Renaut RW. The microbial role in hot spring silicification. AMBIO. 2004;33(8):552–8. Lackschewitz KS, Botz R, Garbe-Schönberg D, Scholten J, Stoffers P. Mineralogy and geochemistry of clay samples from active hydrothermal vents off the north coast of Iceland. Mar Geol. 2006;225(1–4):177–90. Marteinsson VT, Kristjásnson JK, Kristmannsdóttir H, Dahlkvist M, Saemundson K, Hannington M. Discovery and descrip- tion of giant submarine smectite cones on the seafloor in Eyjafjordur, Northern Iceland, and a novel thermal micro - bial habitat. Appl Env Microbiol. 2001;67:827–33. Okrusch M, Matthes S. Mineralogie: Eine Einführung in die spezielle Mineralogie, Petrologie und Lagerstättenkunde. Berlin: Springer Spektrum; 2014. p. 728. Riedel C, Schmidt M, Botz R, Thielen F. The Grimsey hydrothermal field offshore North Iceland: crustal structure, faulting and related gas venting. Earth Planet Sci Lett. 2001;193:409–21. Rögnvaldsson S, Gudmundsson A, Slunga R. Seismotectonic analysis of the Tjörnes Fracture Zone, an active transform fault in north Iceland. J Geophys Res. 1998;103:30117–29. Scholten J, Blaschek H, Becker KP, Hannington M, Herzig P, Hißmann K, Jonasson I, Krüger O, Marteinsson V, Preißler H, Schauer J, Schmidt M, Solveig P, Theißen O. Hydrothermalism at the Kolbeinsey Ridge, Iceland. Technical Cruise Report PO 253. University of Kiel; 2000. p. 22–43. Schumann D, Hartman H, Eberl DD, Sears SK, Hesse R, Vali H. Formation of replicating saponite from a gel in the presence of oxalate: implications for the formation of clay minerals in carbonaceous chondrites and the origin of life. Astrobi- ology. 2012;12(6):549–61. Stoffers P, Botz R, Garbe-Schönberg D, Hannington M, Hauzel B, Herzig P, Hissmann K, Huber R, Kristjansson JK, Petursdot - tir SK, Schauer J, Schmitt M, Zimmerer M. Cruise Report Poseidon 229, Kolbeinsey Ridge: University of Kiel; 1997. p. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Geothermal Energy Springer Journals

Structural, geochemical, and mineralogical investigation of active hydrothermal fluid discharges at Strýtan hydrothermal chimney, Akureyri Bay, Eyjafjörður region, Iceland

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/structural-geochemical-and-mineralogical-investigation-of-active-J9ZmCOtoOM

References (27)

Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2017 by The Author(s)
Subject
Earth Sciences; Geotechnical Engineering & Applied Earth Sciences; Renewable and Green Energy; Geoecology/Natural Processes
eISSN
2195-9706
DOI
10.1186/s40517-017-0065-0
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

science@geowid.de GeoWiD GmbH, Morseweg A submarine hydrothermal fluid discharge structure in Akureyri Bay, Eyjafjörður region, 44, 01129 Dresden, Germany Iceland, was investigated by means of structural, geochemical, and mineralogical Full list of author information is available at the end of the methods. Thermal and chemical gradients between the hydrothermal fluid and the article subarctic seawater lead to an ongoing mineral precipitation. This process builds up hydrothermal chimneys of dozens of meters in height and they are still growing. The structural analysis reveals an internal stratification of the mineral precipitates at various scales from sub-micrometers to several decimeters. This stratification indicates random changes in the depositional system during the formation of the hydrothermal cones. Some mineral layers are characterized by a dominance of Si, Mg, and O. In contrast, others are dominated by Ca and O. However, the results of XRD analysis proved that the material consists mainly of a trioctahedral phyllosilicate of the smectite group, presumably saponite or stevensite. Additionally, aragonite and hisingerite could be present. The material is built up of numerous parallel tubes, which act as conductors in the hydrothermal chimneys. Consequently, a large amount of available pore space with pore volumes of up to 6 mm was detected in the sample by the porosity analysis. Keywords: Submarine groundwater discharge, Hydrothermal chimney, Shallow-water hydrothermal system, Scientific diving, Iceland, Strýtan Background Due to its hot spot origin and position upon the Mid-Atlantic Ridge (MAR), Iceland is a predestined example for a volcanically determined depositional environment. Besides an exceptional amount of volcanic and volcaniclastic deposits, there exist many localities with intensive hydrothermal activity. Common features in subaerial strata are sulfuric gas emissions, hot springs, and mud pots, but submarine hydrothermal discharges occur as well. In the north of Iceland, intensive hydrothermal activity is known in the Tjörnes frac- ture zone, which connects the neo-volcanic zone of Iceland to the Kolbeinsey Ridge, the northern extension of the MAR (Rögnvaldsson et al. 1998; Riedel et al. 2001). Three © The Author(s) 2017. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. Stanulla et al. Geotherm Energy (2017) 5:8 Page 2 of 11 hydrothermal localities within the Tjörnes fracture zone are known: south of Kolbeinsey Island, east of Grimsey Island and in Akureyri Bay (Fig.  1a; Stoffers et  al. 1997, 2000; Hannington et  al. 2001); the former two comprise high-temperature geothermal fields (Hannington et al. 2001; cf. Ármannsson 2016). On the Kolbeinsey Ridge, hydrothermal Fig. 1 a The hydrothermal chimney Strýtan is situated in the Eyjafjörður region in northern Iceland. The diving locality lies in the fjord north of Akureyri at a water depth of 15–60 m. Map of Iceland modified after de.wikipedia.org; map of Strýtan modified after strytan.is/E. Bogason. b Schematic sketch of the three geo - thermal cones at Strýtan. Red arrow marks the approximate situation of the sampling point (image: strytan. is). c Top of the largest hydrothermal chimney with water emanations (arrows). Due to ongoing mineral precipitation, the cones are still growing. d Diver at the largest hydrothermal chimney at Strýtan. The cone rises approximately 45 m from the seafloor. Photography by E. Bogason. e Submarine water escape structure at Strýtan. Red arrows mark the small-scale tubes. Blue arrows indicate areas of diffuse venting (c.f. f). f Active, recent water escape structure. The large amount of water released and the resulting fibrillation of the water column obliterate the sedimentary pattern, although it is clearly visible in reality (c.f. e; photography by E. Bogason) Stanulla et al. Geotherm Energy (2017) 5:8 Page 3 of 11 discharge at a water depth of 100–110 m produces precipitates of orange-reddish mud or yellow-reddish iron hydroxide (Lackschewitz et al. 2006). The Grimsey vent field comprises a large hydrothermal area with anhydrite mounds and chimneys at a water depth of about 400  m (Hannington et  al. 2001). While on the Kolbeinsey Ridge the ground is made up of highly altered basalts, the Grimsey graben is filled with glacial sediments (Lackschewitz et  al. 2006). These volcaniclastic materi - als are altered by hydrothermal fluids, which cause the replacement by or precipitation of sulfides, sulfates, oxides, oxyhydroxides, carbonates, and phyllosilicates (Dekov et al. 2005, 2008). In Akureyri Bay, hydrothermal fluids escaping from the 6 to 12 Ma old basaltic seafloor (Björnsson 1981; Björnsson and Saemundsson 1975) show chemical properties (mete- oric origin, low mineralization, high pH values) and stable isotope ratios that are almost identical to those with similar temperature (50–100 °C) from other geothermal fields in the Eyjafjörður region (Kristmannsdottir and Johnsen 1982; Geptner et al. 2002). Quite special structures are the hydrothermal freshwater vents discovered and described by Marteinsson et al. (2001). These submarine cones, up to 45 m high (Fig.  1b, d), discharge hydrothermal fluids of pH 10.0 at a water temperature of around 70  °C. Their submarine discharge of SiO -rich, mineralized water is quenched upon contact with the cold subarctic ocean water (Mg-rich), resulting mainly in the precipitation of smectite. About 50 different species of thermophilic bacteria and archaea were found in the submarine discharge (Marteinsson et al. 2001). Two different studies were carried out on the hydrothermal chimneys at Strýtan using different approaches. Marteinsson et al. (2001) first discovered and described the cones and focused on hydrochemistry and microbiological issues of the hydrothermal fluid. Geptner et al. (2002) provide a concise description of the clay mineralogical aspects and characteristics of the material and investigated the clay mineralogical properties of the material at sub-micrometer scale. In contrast, the focus of our study is set on structural investigations and the integration of geochemical, structural, and mineralogical results to conclude on the depositional system and its processes. The largest of the three cones is in the focus of the present work (Fig.  1b). These enor - mously large chimneys are built up of small-scale discharge structures (Fig. 1c, e, f ). Per- mission was obtained to collect one rock sample of the small-scale degassing structures during dives at the major cone “Strýtan” at a water depth of 30 m (Fig. 1a, b). The aim of this study was to obtain a better understanding of the internal structure of the cones and of the forming conditions under which such silicates precipitate. This knowledge contributes to complete the knowledge inventory on the hydrothermal cones in the region and enhance a possible comparison to other sites in the future. Methods The fieldwork included mapping and photo-documentation of the hydrothermal chim - neys. All underwater investigations were carried out by specially trained scuba divers. The sample material was investigated for its structural, mineralogical, and geochemical properties using optical microscopy (thin sections), a macroscopic description of pol- ished sections, XCT, SEM (also combined with EDS), XRF, and XRD. Stanulla et al. Geotherm Energy (2017) 5:8 Page 4 of 11 Thin and polished sections as well as powder samples for chemical analysis (<63 µm) were prepared. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analysis was carried out using a JEOL JSM-7001 F Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscope. Energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) was performed with a BRUKER EDS, whereas for the XRF analysis a Spectro Xepos spectrometer was used. X-ray com- puted tomography (XCT) was performed with a ProCon X-Ray GmbH CTAlpha, a 160-kV transmission tube from Feinfocus Garbsen and a Hamamatsu Photonics K.K. C7942SK-05 detector. The operating parameters were 160 kV voltage, 180 μA amperage, and 13.1  W target power. Data processing was performed using Volex 6.0 (Fraunhofer Entwicklungszentrum Röntgentechnik Fürth) and visualization was carried out with VG Studio Max 2.1. The X-ray diffractometry analysis (XRD) was employed to identify single mineral phases in a powder sample. The analysis was carried out using a FPM/Seifert URD 6 with a cobalt tube. The statistical interpretation and illustration was realized using the program ANALYZE (Seifert-FPM). Results Hydrothermal chimneys The hydrothermal chimneys in the Eyjafjörður region show a complex architecture and a large number of potential pathways for hydrothermal waters. Their macrostructure is quite diverse ranging from several millimeters to nearly 45 m at the main cone Strýtan (Fig. 1d). Active discharge of hot water is a common feature (Fig. 1c, e, f ). It is well visible due to the high thermogradients between the hot hydrothermal water and the subarc- tic low-temperature seawater. The contrast in density causes the formation of schlieren in the water column above the discharge points (Fig.  1e, f ). According to Marteinsson et  al. (2001), the chemical composition of the discharging fluids is identical with that of geothermal waters in springs and wells onshore. These are very sparsely mineralized (290 µS/cm) with a pH of 10, but contain about 90 mg/l Si. Structural analysis The rock sample from the major cone Strýtan investigated (Fig.  2A) is of the size 90  ×  50  ×  60  mm. It consists of a relatively soft mineral precipitate, which has a pale grayish, whitish to grayish beige color. It appears whitish-yellowish to brownish-grayish (II-Pol) or dark gray to black (X-Pol) under the microscope. The fine crystalline to homogenous fabrics are characterized by numerous parallel arranged, small-scale tubes (cf. Figure  2F; horizontal and vertical specimens) and show an estimated pore space of up to 25% (thin section counting). The porosity analysis (cal - culated from XCT investigations) reveals a large amount of available pore space in the sample. The pore volume ranges from approximately 2 up to 6 mm per pore. Relatively few small pores have developed in the sample, whereas predominantly large pores with volume around 6  mm prevail. The spatial distribution of the pores is relatively homo - geneous (Fig.  2B–D). The walls of the pore space are partly coated by a pale brownish (II-Pol) salvage, which appears microcrystalline to banded with pale brown interference colors. This mineral also occurs in the form of impregnations or accumulation. Stanulla et al. Geotherm Energy (2017) 5:8 Page 5 of 11 Fig. 2 A Polished section of sample IS_Strýtan_01. The sample is stabilized with an epoxy resin. An enor- mous amount of pore space is obvious (red arrows). An internal stratification reveals depositional events (dashed lines). B Porosity analysis calculated from the XCT investigation. The color bar scales the pore volume. Apparently, few small pores have developed. Generally, large pores up to 6 mm prevail, showing a relatively homogenous spatial distribution. C XCT scan of the sample IS_Strýtan_01. The enormous amount of pore space in the sample is well visible (white—smectite, black—air/pore space). The red arrows mark the major water pathways. The red square shows one main duct as shown in E. D 2D projection of the porosity analysis. A homogenous distribution of the pores is well visible. The indicated great abundance of large pores hints on the large available pore space being involved in fluid migration. The material is highly permeable. E Sample investigated by Marteinsson et al. (2001). This sketch outlines clearly the layered construction of the chimney and shows the small tubes emitting the hydrothermal fluid (red arrows; modified after Marteinsson et al. 2001). F Sample IS_Strýtan_01 macroscopically. Red arrows mark the major dewatering tubes. Sample is in native orientation Stanulla et al. Geotherm Energy (2017) 5:8 Page 6 of 11 An internal stratification of the sample is macroscopically visible (Fig.  2A). The sin - gle layers are 0.5–1.5 cm thick and represent overgrowth of mineral phases. Transitions between these growth stages are relatively sharp. The layers themselves appear smooth and gently curving. Marteinsson et  al. (2001) also reported an “inner” and an “outer zone” of the small chimneys they investigated (Fig. 2E). Obviously, these zones represent the growth stages discussed here. Optical microscopy and SEM analysis show an overgrowth of minerals on micrometer scale (Fig. 3). Chemical and mineralogical composition The results of chemical analysis (XRF, Fig.  4; Table 1) show that the sample is dominated by the elements Si, Mg, Ca, and Al. Also Fe, Cl, and K are common. All other elements only occur in minor concentrations below 0.01 wt%: Ti, S, Ga, Sr, P, Mn, La, Ta, Ba, Br, Ge, As, Zn, I. Ni. U, Cu, Zr, Sb, Te, Rb, Y, Mo, Sn, Hg, and Th. The elements V, Cs, Co, Fig. 3 SEM image of the thin section IS_Strýtan_01. The micrometer-scale layers are well visible. The different colors are the result of varying material properties (the higher the atomic number, the lighter the color). The yellow arrow marks the orientation of the profile given below. The diagram documents the chemical behavior along the profile (green arrow). This EDX line scan confirms different materials, although no mineral phase identification is possible by the use of this method. The outer parts are characterized by a dominance of Si, Mg, and O (phase I). The inner parts are dominated by Ca and O (phase II) Stanulla et al. Geotherm Energy (2017) 5:8 Page 7 of 11 Fig. 4 XRF analysis results for sample IS_Strýtan_01. All elements above the detection limit are shown. Table 1 gives the complete dataset Table 1 Chemical composition for sample IS_Strýtan_01 Major elements Minor elements Below detection limit Element wt% Abs. error Element ppm Abs. error Element ppm Abs. error Si 24.3 0.02 P 83.4 4.1 V <14 −13 Mg 19.51 0.03 Mn 69.6 1.8 Cs <4 0 Ca 1.685 0.004 La 66.2 6.3 Co <3 0 Al 1.145 0.004 Ta 53.2 1 Ag <2 0 Fe 0.4709 0.0008 Ba 33.2 4.1 Cd <2 0 Cl 0.4457 0.0005 Br 27.6 0.2 Ce <2 0 K 0.1703 0.0021 Ge 26.7 0.3 Cr <1 0 Ti 0.0933 0.0011 As 21.2 0.2 Hf <1 0 S 0.06038 0.00026 Zn 14.1 0.3 Tl <1 0 Ga 0.02009 0.00008 I 9.4 1.3 Bi <1 0 Sr 0.01314 0.00003 Ni 8.5 0.3 Pb <0.8 −0.8 U 8.5 0.2 W <0.7 0 Cu 7.6 0.5 Se <0.5 0 Zr 6.6 0.6 Nb <0.5 −0.5 Sb 4.3 0.6 Te 3.6 0.4 Rb 2.9 0.1 Y 2.5 0.1 Mo 2.5 0.3 Sn 2.2 0.3 Hg 2.1 0.4 Th 0.6 0.2 Elements below the detection limit are given as “<detection limit” Ag, Cd, Ce, Cr, Hf, Tl, Bi, Pb, W, Se, and Nb were below the respective detection limit which is given in Table 1. Neither anhydrite nor sulfides could be detected, although they are common minerals in hydrothermal chimneys (cf. Marteinsson et al. 2001). Stanulla et al. Geotherm Energy (2017) 5:8 Page 8 of 11 The overgrowth of mineral phases in the sample is also visible in its chemical compo - sition. This is proven by the EDX line scan shown in Fig.  3. It confirms the presence of different materials, although no mineral phase identification is possible by the use of this method. The outer parts (Phase I) are characterized by a dominance of Si, Mg, and O. In the inner parts (Phase II), the elements Ca and O prevail. According to the results of XRD analysis (Fig. 5), the material consists mainly of a tri- octahedral phyllosilicate of the smectite group, presumably saponite (cf. Geptner et  al. 2002), which has the chemical formula Mg [(OH) |(Si,Al) O ]·(Ca,Na) (H O) . 3 2 4 10 x 2 y Additionally, aragonite (chemical formula: C aCO ) and hisingerite (chemical formula: (III) Fe Si O (OH) ·2H O) seem to be present. Furthermore, the optical microscopy showed 2 2 5 4 2 disperse to nest-like arranged microcrystalline aggregates of plagioclase, glasses/opaque minerals, and biotite. A precise characterization of all mineral phases necessitates further intensive clay mineralogical investigations, which were not in focus of our work. Thermodynamic calculations An attempt was made to simulate the formation of saponite by means of thermodynamic modeling of the mixing of the geothermal fluid with the surrounding ocean water. Only the Hatches database (https://www.oecd-nea.org/tools/abstract/detail/nea-1210) con- tains specific data about saponite minerals such as saponite-Ca, saponite-Mg, saponite-K, saponite-Na, and saponite-H. However, preliminary simulations showed that the geo- thermal fluid reported by Marteinsson et al. (2001) is extremely oversaturated (saturation index, logarithmic) with respect to all saponites (SI ~ 20). Oversaturation was calculated for ocean water as well (SI ~ 4). From this, it is obvious that the precipitation of saponite is inhibited and a catalyst is needed (Schumann et al. 2012). It can be speculated that the cat- alyst is provided by the ocean water and temperature may play a role as well. Apart from that, thermodynamic calculations cannot help clarify the formation processes in this case. Discussion The hydrothermal chimneys Strýtan discharge fluids actively. Thus, it can be specu - lated that mineral precipitation is ongoing and cones are growing. The mineral precipi - tate is deposited in centimeter-thick layers. This indicates nearly constant depositional Fig. 5 Results of XRD analysis of sample IS_Strýtan_01 show that the hydrothermal cones are predominantly made up of a trioctahedral phyllosilicate, presumably saponite. Aragonite and hisingerite may also be present Stanulla et al. Geotherm Energy (2017) 5:8 Page 9 of 11 conditions during the formation of each layer. Generally, minor changes in a limited region of the depositional system during times of statistically constant conditions result in the formation of layering (Collinson et  al. 2006). Consequently, episodic changes in the depositional system might have led to the stratified architecture. Growth rates of sin - gle layers are at the moment completely unknown and cannot be discussed in detail here because the investigations did not consider any observations along a timeline. The main controlling factors of deposition are the supply of hydrothermal fluids (volume flow) and their geochemistry. Changes can be caused by varying volcanic activity. In times of increased volcanism, probably more fluid is emitted due to an increased amount of ther - mal energy and a rise of pressure in the system. Consequently, more mineral precipi- tates can be produced resulting in thick growth stages. In contrast, thin layers probably develop in times of decreased volcanic activity. However, this process could only have an indirect influence, as the emitted waters are assumed to be terrestrial freshwaters migrating along fractures while being heated on their way through the bedrock (Mar- teinsson et al. 2001). While macroscopic growth stages indicate episodic times of constant depositional conditions, microscopic layering actually indicates an intermittent deposition with short time changes or alternating conditions. Possible mechanisms are changes in sea- water composition or in water dynamics (pressure), mixing and/or stratification of the water column (currents, tides), and changes in temperature or salinity. However, min- eralogical processes such as (de-)carbonatization, silicification, or alteration may lead to small-scale differences within the growth stages (c.f. Okrusch and Matthes 2014). Hot spring silicification (e.g., Jones and Renaut 2011) is an especially common feature. Often, microbial activity influences this process (e.g., Konhauser et  al. 2004). In the present case, secondary silicification might influence the primary mineral phases too (see Fig.  3) as the hydrothermal fluid discharged is rich in Si (Marteinsson et al. 2001). The pale brownish (II-Pol) secondary mineral phase in the pore space, most likely an iron oxide or hydroxide mineral precipitate, possibly suggests a post-sedimen- tary impregnation by migrating water phases with a different (iron-bearing) chemical composition. The sedimentation as well as the hydrodynamic and hydrochemical processes forms a highly dynamic depositional environment at the hydrothermal chimneys of Akureyri Bay. Depositional rates and chemical variations cannot be determined over long periods at the moment. Such knowledge would give further insights into the processes of sedi- mentation and alteration. Therefore, long-term observations and measurements of the hydrothermal discharge features should be performed to produce more useful data on the processes taking place. Additionally, a comparison of the system to another location would give new insights into the processes taking place. At first glance, the Lost City hydrothermal field at the Atlantis Massif could comprise a similar system, but the Lost City hydrothermal field is characterized by carbonates precipitating on a peridotitic lithology characterized by intense serpentinization (e.g., Früh-Green 2003; Kellley et al. 2005, 2007). In contrast, the Strýtan chimney provides smectite group minerals and the base rock is basaltic. Moreo- ver, the Lost City chimney is situated in a deep-sea environment (e.g., Kellley et al. 2005, 2007) which makes a comparison to the shallow marine Icelandic system difficult in Stanulla et al. Geotherm Energy (2017) 5:8 Page 10 of 11 general: ambient pressure, temperatures, illumination, and many other physico-chemical and biological parameters vary significantly. For sure, the overall appearance (“habitus”) as well as some geometric data (height of chimneys) might be comparable. However, the mineralogical and (water-) geochemical properties are completely different. To our knowledge, there is no comparable system to the Strýtan chimneys docu- mented. Therefore, our study tries to complete the knowledge inventory about Strýtan which is the presumption for a substantive and meaningful comparison to other sites. Conclusions The findings of geological investigations at the hydrothermal chimneys Strýtan in North - ern Iceland presented in this publication contribute to the analysis of sedimentary pro- cesses in hydrothermal discharge structures. The results of in situ observations as well as of the structural, geochemical, and mineralogical analysis showed that the constructive processes at Strýtan hydrothermal cones act synsedimentary: a water discharge supplies hot, very sparsely mineralized hydrothermal water with a relatively constant water flow. When hydrothermal fluids come into contact with the cold subarctic seawater, it triggers catalytic-driven precipitation of smectite group minerals and other minerals. In the long term, elongated structures growing from the sea bottom are formed. The sample mate - rial shows a highly porous architecture, as it is built up of numerous small tubes. These constitute the waters’ pathway from the hydrothermal reservoir to the subarctic ocean water. Submarine hydrothermal discharge is often difficult to detect, especially in case of small and disperse venting. It is probably far more common than currently known. There are numerous coastal areas in shallow waters impacted by volcanisms, where compara- ble discharge of geothermal fluids is likely. A further study, e.g., about flow rates of the discharge at Strýtan could help understand such systems much better. Due to its position in a shallow water environment and the possibility of in situ investi- gations by scientific divers, this hydrothermal discharge feature is of enormous scientific interest as it may represent an analogue to comparable deep-sea systems, which are far more difficult to investigate due to the water depth at which they occur. Authors’ contributions Fieldwork and measurements were carried out by RST and CST. EB contributed during the fieldwork and with permis- sions for diving and sampling as well as with illustrating material and local information. BM attempted the thermody- namic modeling and contributed on hydrogeological and chemical issues. TP contributed to the geological model and biological issues. All authors contributed to discussions according to their respective areas of expertise. RST and CST drafted the final manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Author details 1 2 GeoWiD GmbH, Morseweg 44, 01129 Dresden, Germany. TU Bergakademie Freiberg, CMAS Scientific Diving Center, 3 4 Gustav-Zeuner-Straße 7, 09599 Freiberg, Germany. Strýtan Divecenter, Hjalteyri, 601 Akureyri, Iceland. GeoDive, Sach- senhofstraße 10, 09599 Freiberg, Germany. Acknowledgements We thank Dr. Kleeberg for help with the XRD analysis. Furthermore, thanks go to Dipl.-Ing. Uta Ballaschk for XCT analysis, to Dr. Jörg Pfänder for the geochemical advices, and to Prof. Dr. Klaus Stanek and Anja Obst for SEM and EDX analyses (all TU Bergakademie Freiberg). Last but not least, we thank the anonymous reviewers for their review and useful comments to improve the manuscript. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Availability of data and materials Data can be obtained via science@geowid.de or on ResearchGate. Stanulla et al. Geotherm Energy (2017) 5:8 Page 11 of 11 Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Received: 2 January 2017 Accepted: 7 June 2017 References Ármannsson H. The fluid geochemistry of Icelandic high temperature geothermal areas. Appl Geochem. 2016;66:14–64. Björnsson A. Exploration of low-temperature geothermal fields for district heating in Akureyri, North Iceland. Geotherm Resour Counc Trans. 1981;5:495–8. Björnsson A, Saemundsson K. Geothermal activity in the vicinity of Akureyri, p. 53. Orkustofnun report (OSJHD 7557). Orkustofnun, Reykjavík, Iceland; 1975. Collinson JD, Mountney NP, Thompson DB. Sedimentary structures. Harpenden: Terra Publ; 2006. p. 304. Dekov VM, Scholten J, Botz R, Garbe-Schönberg CD, Thiry M, Stoffers P, Schmidt M. Occurrence of kaolinite and mixed- layer kaolinite/smectite in hydrothermal sediments of Grimsey Graben, Tjörnes Fracture Zone (north of Iceland). Mar Geol. 2005;215(2005):159–70. Dekov VM, Scholten J, Garbe-Schönberg CD, Botz R, Cuadros J, Schmidt M, Stoffers P. Hydrothermal sediment alteration at a seafloor vent field: Grimsey Graben, Tjörnes Fracture Zone, north of Iceland. J Geophys Res. 2008;113(11):B11101. Früh-Green GL. 30,000 years of Hydrothermal activity at the Lost City vent field. Science. 2003;301(5632):495–8. Geptner A, Kristmannsdóttir H, Kristjansson J, Marteinsson V. Biogenic saponite from an active submarine hot spring, Iceland. Clays Clay Miner. 2002;50(2):174–85. Hannington M, Herzig P, Stoffers P, Scholten J, Garbe-Schönberg D, Jonasson IR, Roest W. First observations of high-temperature submarine vents and massive anhydrite deposits off the north coast of Iceland. Mar Geol. 2001;177:199–220. Jones B, Renaut RW. Hot springs and geysers. In: Reitner J, Thiel V, editors. Encyclopedia of geobiology. Dordrecht: Springer; 2011. p. 927. Kelly DS, Karson JA, Früh-Green GL, Yoerger DR. A serpentinite-hosted ecosystem: the Lost City hydrothermal field. Sci- ence. 2005;307(5714):1428–34. Kelly DS, Früh-Green GL, Karson JA, Ludwig KA. The Lost City hydrothermal field revisited. Oceanography. 2007;20(4):90–9. Kristmannsdottir H, Johnsen SJ. Chemistry and stable isotope composition of geothermal waters in the Eyjafjordur region, northern Iceland. Jokull. 1982;32:83–90. Konhauser KO, Jones B, Phoenix VR, Ferris G, Renaut RW. The microbial role in hot spring silicification. AMBIO. 2004;33(8):552–8. Lackschewitz KS, Botz R, Garbe-Schönberg D, Scholten J, Stoffers P. Mineralogy and geochemistry of clay samples from active hydrothermal vents off the north coast of Iceland. Mar Geol. 2006;225(1–4):177–90. Marteinsson VT, Kristjásnson JK, Kristmannsdóttir H, Dahlkvist M, Saemundson K, Hannington M. Discovery and descrip- tion of giant submarine smectite cones on the seafloor in Eyjafjordur, Northern Iceland, and a novel thermal micro - bial habitat. Appl Env Microbiol. 2001;67:827–33. Okrusch M, Matthes S. Mineralogie: Eine Einführung in die spezielle Mineralogie, Petrologie und Lagerstättenkunde. Berlin: Springer Spektrum; 2014. p. 728. Riedel C, Schmidt M, Botz R, Thielen F. The Grimsey hydrothermal field offshore North Iceland: crustal structure, faulting and related gas venting. Earth Planet Sci Lett. 2001;193:409–21. Rögnvaldsson S, Gudmundsson A, Slunga R. Seismotectonic analysis of the Tjörnes Fracture Zone, an active transform fault in north Iceland. J Geophys Res. 1998;103:30117–29. Scholten J, Blaschek H, Becker KP, Hannington M, Herzig P, Hißmann K, Jonasson I, Krüger O, Marteinsson V, Preißler H, Schauer J, Schmidt M, Solveig P, Theißen O. Hydrothermalism at the Kolbeinsey Ridge, Iceland. Technical Cruise Report PO 253. University of Kiel; 2000. p. 22–43. Schumann D, Hartman H, Eberl DD, Sears SK, Hesse R, Vali H. Formation of replicating saponite from a gel in the presence of oxalate: implications for the formation of clay minerals in carbonaceous chondrites and the origin of life. Astrobi- ology. 2012;12(6):549–61. Stoffers P, Botz R, Garbe-Schönberg D, Hannington M, Hauzel B, Herzig P, Hissmann K, Huber R, Kristjansson JK, Petursdot - tir SK, Schauer J, Schmitt M, Zimmerer M. Cruise Report Poseidon 229, Kolbeinsey Ridge: University of Kiel; 1997. p.

Journal

Geothermal EnergySpringer Journals

Published: Jun 17, 2017

There are no references for this article.