东海陆架盆地西湖凹陷岩石圈热流变性质

为了探讨东海陆架盆地西湖凹陷岩石圈热流变性质,本文以实测地温数据为依据,模拟西湖凹陷岩石圈热结构,在此基础上,应用流变学原理模拟确定西湖凹陷岩石圈流变性质。结果表明,西湖凹陷岩石圈为一个冷地壳-热地幔、强地壳-弱地幔的"奶油蛋糕"型岩石圈。西湖凹陷平均地表热流密度为71 m W/m~2,地幔热流密度为40~65 m W/m~2,对地表热流密度的贡献度达73%~79%,地表热流受地幔热流控制,莫霍面温度在700℃左右,热岩石圈平均厚度为66 km。西湖凹陷岩石圈流变分层明显,上、中地壳基本为脆性层,下地壳和岩石圈上地幔为韧性层,岩石圈总流变强度平均约为2.65′10~(12) N/m,其中地壳流变强度为2.12′10~(12) N/m,地幔流变强度为5.29′10~(11) N/m,有效弹性厚度为11.7~14.5 km,地壳的流变性质控制了岩石圈的流变行为。此外,西湖凹陷岩石圈总强度较低,在构造应力作用下易于变形,且存在壳幔解耦现象。西湖凹陷岩石圈热状态及流变性质决定了西湖凹陷东部地区主要以浅部地壳的断层滑动和地层破裂来调节深部的构造应力。     

渭河盆地岩石圈热结构模拟及其对地热系统热源机理的启示

深部温度场与岩石圈热结构特征是认识地热系统深部热源机理的重要途径。本文在系统分析渭河盆地及其邻区现今大地热流特征基础上,基于旬邑—西峡宽角反射/折射地震测深剖面揭示的地壳分层结构,采用二维有限元方法,对渭北隆起、渭河盆地以及北秦岭构造带的深部温度场和岩石圈热结构开展数值模拟研究,在此基础上分析渭河盆地地热系统深部热源机理。结果表明,旬邑—西峡剖面上大地热流介于57.6～75.7mW/m²之间,平均为(70.4±4.7)mW/m²;地幔热流在29.5～38.6mW/m²之间,平均值为34.1mW/m²;莫霍面温度变化范围约在600～740℃之间;“热”岩石圈厚度约为95～110km。从渭北隆起—渭河盆地—秦岭造山带,大地热流、莫霍面温度和地幔热流值表现出低→高→低的变化规律,相应地“热”岩石圈厚度则表现出厚→薄→厚的变化趋势。渭河盆地地壳厚度减薄明显,莫霍面温度显著高于渭北隆起和秦岭造山带,暗示着渭河盆地地壳活动性显著。然而,从渭北隆起—渭河盆地—秦岭造山带,“热”岩石圈厚度变化范围不大,且渭河盆地内...     

渤海盆地现今岩石圈热结构及新生代构造-热演化史

依据236口井共2 706组的静温数据以及25口井的系统测温数据,分析计算了渤海盆地地温梯度及大地热流;建立地壳分层结构模型,利用回剥法计算现今地幔热流、深部温度以及岩石圈厚度;在此基础上,利用地球动力学方法恢复本区热流演化史。结果表明：渤海盆地背景地温梯度为322 ℃/km,热流值为648 mW/m2;盆地现今热岩石圈厚度在61~69 km之间,地幔热流占地表热流的比例在60%左右,属于“热幔冷壳”型岩石圈热结构,盆地地壳底部或莫霍面温度变动在548~749 ℃之间;热流演化的特征与盆地的构造演化背景吻合,新生代以来盆地经历了3期岩石圈减薄并加热的过程,在东营组沉积末期热流达到最高(70~83 mW/m2）,这期间盆地内产出多期碱性玄武岩,表明盆地经历了波及地幔的裂谷过程,随后进入热沉降期,热流逐渐降低,盆地向坳陷型转变。     

青海共和盆地岩石圈热-流变结构及地热意义

地球深度热状况是深部地球动力学和岩石圈活动性研究的重要内容, 岩石圈热结构和热-流变结构可以很好地揭示岩石圈范围内的热状况。近年来, 在青海共和盆地钻探揭露了深部高温干热岩体, 关于其热源机制尚未有定论。本文以青海共和盆地为研究对象, 分析壳内温度分布和流变强度, 探讨壳内低速体的地质属性。结果表明, 共和盆地的地壳流变结构从上而下分为脆性和韧性两层, 韧性层又包括中地壳和下地壳两层韧性层, 在上地壳尺度均表现为脆性破裂为主, 并逐渐过渡为韧性流变; 恰卜恰地区在脆性破裂的上地壳延伸至中下地壳时, 破裂沿一系列滑脱面发生韧性滑动, 局部地段形成壳内熔融, 为恰卜恰地区提供了额外的热源, 使其大地热流值(109.6 mW/m2)显著高于贵德地区(77.6 mW/m2)。这一认识为共和盆地壳内低速体存在提供了新的佐证, 也为区内干热岩热源分析以及高温地热资源探测开发提供了科学依据。     

渤海湾盆地中—新生代岩石圈热结构与热-流变学演化

文章主要利用中—新生代热史、地壳分层结构以及流变学参数,模拟计算渤海湾盆地中—新生代岩石圈热结构和热-流变结构演化特征。结果表明,盆地由三叠纪—侏罗纪时期的"冷幔热壳"型岩石圈热结构转变为白垩纪至今的"热幔冷壳"型岩石圈热结构。从济阳坳陷岩石圈热-流变结构演化特征来看,中生代早期上地壳上部、中地壳上部及上地幔顶部表现为厚的脆性层;早白垩世初期中地壳上部及上地幔顶部的脆性层完全转变为韧性层;晚白垩世开始,中地壳上部出现薄层的脆性层;古近纪早期中地壳上部脆性层变薄变浅;现今则除了发育上地壳上部、中地壳上部脆性层外,上地幔顶部开始在浅部发育薄的脆性层。中—新生代岩石圈总强度演化表明在早白垩世晚期和古近纪早期经历了两期减弱,中生代早期岩石圈总强度远大于中侏罗世之后的岩石圈总强度。岩石圈热-流变结构和强度演化与华北克拉通破坏过程中岩石圈厚度的变化具有良好的对应关系,从侧面反映太平洋板块俯冲和回撤导致华北克拉通东部破坏的地球动力学过程。因此,岩石圈热-流变结构可以为盆地形成、大陆边缘和造山带等的动力学演化过程研究提供科学依据。     

南海北部陆缘热流变化特征及其影响因素分析

热流调查和构造热演化数值模拟是油气地热研究不可或缺的重要内容。沉积盆地在其演化过程中往往叠加了特殊构造事件。通过热流调查和构造热演化数值计算可以更好地约束这些特殊过程,重建更为真实的构造热演化历史。该文通过对南海北部琼东南盆地和珠江口盆地中段热流变化特征分析和构造热演化数值模拟,探讨了影响其热流变化的主要因素。结果表明,琼东南盆地可分3个热流分区:北部陆架与上陆坡区(50~70mW/m~2)、中央坳陷带深水区(70~85mW/m~2)和盆地东部深水区高热流带(85mW/m~2);珠江口盆地中段从陆架往海盆方向热流呈阶梯式抬高,西江凹陷平均热流为55mW/m~2,番禺低隆起为58mW/m~2,白云凹陷为70mW/m~2,下陆坡区为85mW/m~2;陆坡区高热流不仅与岩石圈强烈减薄相关,而且还受到岩石圈破裂时引起的深部热物质上涌的影响,后者对现今陆坡区还有约20mW/m~2的热流贡献;琼东南盆地东部高热流值则主要受到晚中新世以来的岩体侵位热事件的影响,岩体侵入热事件对现今热流值贡献可达10~25mW/m~2。分析表明,在南海深水盆地开展构造热演化数值计算时,需要考虑沉积过程、海底扩张以及岩浆活动等影响因素。     

南黄海盆地地层生热率及岩石圈热结构

岩石圈热结构的研究不仅可以了解岩石圈深部动力学演化机制,也是含油气区油气资源评价的重要组成部分.由于南黄海盆地生热率数据的匮乏,阻碍了岩石圈热结构的研究进展.本文通过GR（伽马值）-A（岩石生热率）的经验关系,计算了南黄海盆地沉积地层的生热率;在大地热流、地层生热率、南北向贯穿盆地的二维多道地震剖面及OBS2013地壳速度结构剖面的约束下,建立了南黄海盆地地壳生热模型,计算了盆地的岩石圈热结构.岩石圈热结构计算结果表明：（1）南黄海盆地北部坳陷、中部隆起及南部坳陷3个次级单元的平均莫霍面温度依次为602.2±15.25℃、592.7±2.56℃、650.6±20.24℃;（2）平均热岩石圈厚度依次为99.7±2.20 km、101.7±0.51 km、88.2±2.49 km;(3)壳幔热流比分别为0.76±0.02、0.88±0.01、0.71±0.15,具有“冷壳热幔”的特征.研究结果表明,南黄海盆地现今具有与全球新生代拉张构造区相似的较高热流,处于构造活动区向构造稳定区转换的过渡阶段.此外,现今南黄海盆地3个次级单元展现的不同岩石圈热结构特征,可能与印支期至早燕山期扬子块体与华北...     

沧县隆起中部大地热流及岩石圈热结构特征：以献县地热田为例

岩石圈热结构是了解大陆岩石圈构造变形及演化等大陆动力学问题的重要基础,更是地热田热源机理研究的核心问题,尤其对于深部地热资源开发具有重要的科学指导意义.沧县隆起中部地热资源丰富,地热地质条件较好,但该地区岩石圈热结构尚不明确,制约着区域地热资源勘查开发.本文以沧县隆起中部献县地热田为研究区,开展了4 000 m深井测温、精细的岩土热物性测试,查明了该区大地热流特征及热结构特征,填补了大地热流测量空白区,建立了研究区岩石圈热结构概念模型,估算了其深部温度及岩石圈厚度.结果表明,献县地热田大地热流值为70.58 mW/m²,居里面埋深约为24 km,莫霍面温度约为749℃,热岩石圈厚度约为85～96 km.     

柴达木盆地英东地区大地热流及影响因素

英雄岭构造带是柴达木盆地油气最为富集的地区之一,地温场对油气成藏过程有重要影响,也是油田开发工程实施的重要参考.利用试油静温数据,结合激光扫描法开展岩心热导率及放射性生热测试,对研究区地温场进行了研究.英东地区地温梯度为31.8～35.3℃/km,平均为33.6℃/km,新近系热导率为1.8～2.4W/m/K,平均为2.07W/m/K,大地热流值为65～74mW/m²,平均为69mW/m².热流呈“西高东低”特征,昆北、南翼山及一里坪等地热流值超过65mW/m²,而阿尔金山前、冷湖构造带及涩北等地较低,咸水泉和冷湖等地普遍低于50mW/m².新近系实测平均生热率为2.84μW/m³,对热流的贡献约20%.研究区具有“热壳温幔”特征,其影响因素包括地壳放射性生热、蚀源区高U中酸性侵入岩、印度板块汇聚引起的构造热及热岩石圈厚度较薄等.     

岩石圈流变结构研究进展

岩石圈流变学研究,近年来国外已取得较大进展。国内学者在岩石圈热结构、强度剖面和盆地流变学演化、构造流变计等方面取得了丰富的成果。岩石圈流变性取决于岩石圈的地热状态、物质组成和结构,并量化为岩石圈总强度。不同构造区的地热状态可由地表热流值获得,岩石圈的物质组成和热力学结构可由地球物理资料获得,在此基础上可得出岩石圈流变性在区域上的变化。岩石圈流变性的空间变化产生了构造上的软弱带,成为极易变形区域。岩石圈流变性及岩石圈总强度反映的岩石圈热力学性质在盆地的形成过程中也起了重要作用,它决定了岩石圈的变形位置、盆地的几何形状及格局。构造流变计用来研究不同尺度地质体的流变结构和地质体的流变学演化,具有很好的发展前景。     

阿坝-简阳地学剖面深部温度及热结构

在青藏高原东部到四川盆地这两个构造单元进行了稳态钻孔温度测量和岩石热导率测试,确定了相应钻孔的大地热流数据.应用这些可靠的热流数据,对横穿这两个构造单元的阿坝-简阳地学断面进行了2-D温度场研究,获得其深部热结构的认识.模拟结果显示,松潘-甘孜地块地表为高热流区域,达到80～110 mW/m2,四川盆地地表为中低热流区...     

中上扬子区奉节-观音垱剖面深部温度场及热结构特征

在大地热流密度分布的基础上,本文基于二维稳态热传导方程,根据研究区热导率、生热率等热物理性质参数,对横穿川东北地区、秭归盆地、黄陵穹窿和江汉盆地等几个构造单元的奉节（FJ）-观音垱（GYD）地学剖面进行了温度场数值模拟研究,获得了其深部热结构认识。模拟结果显示,地幔热流自西向东逐渐升高,变化范围约为25.3～34.7 mW/m²。莫霍面温度大约在380 ℃～450 ℃之间变化。热岩石圈厚度自西向东先稍微增厚,后逐渐变薄,变化范围约为115～171 km。江汉盆地中新生代的伸展作用使其地幔热流稍有升高,“热”岩石圈厚度相对较薄（约116 km）,而川东北地区则受到早期的挤压和晚期的抬升剥蚀作用,地幔热流相对较低,其深部“热”岩石圈厚度也相对较厚（约168 km）。     

中国东南地区岩石圈热结构特征及其构造意义

中国东南地区地质演化复杂,中—新生代构造变形强烈,岩石圈深部热力学状态及其对构造活动的影响有待深入。文章结合最新的大地热流数据与地壳结构Crust 1.0模型,利用稳态热传导方程,以岩石捕虏体温压数据和地震学观测为约束,构建了华南地区扬子克拉通、华夏地块以及南海北缘等不同单元的岩石圈热结构。结果表明该区岩石圈热结构存在强烈的不均一性：除了上扬子地区（四川盆地）为“温壳温幔”的热结构,华南其他大部分地区都表现为“热壳热幔”的特征;同一深度下,华夏地块与南海北缘的深部温度显著高于扬子克拉通;热岩石圈厚度从克拉通内部向沿海地区（NWSE）逐渐降低,也即由四川盆地的~200 km减少到华夏地块的~110 km,再到南海的~70 km。此外,我们还发现陆内地震的分布与岩石圈温度密切相关,地震活动集中分布于600℃等温线以内。总体而言,扬子克拉通中西部岩石圈热结构具有冷而厚的特征,而华夏地块和南海北缘受古太平洋平板俯冲和新生代大陆边缘构造—岩浆作用的改造,表现为热且薄的特征,岩石圈的热弱化进而加速了华南大陆边缘的裂解及随后的南海扩张过程。     

中国地下热水分布之特点及属性

本文依据我国近年来地下热水资源调研和勘探的新进展及其与有关的研究结果，简述我国地下热水形成和赋存的地热地质背景，分析和归纳构造隆起区中的温泉和中、新生代沉积盆地中的地下热水分布之基本特点，讨论主要水热带的地热学属性和沉积盆地热水的形成机制，为我国地热资源的勘探、开发和今后地球科学有关问题的深化研究提供参考。     

Meso–Cenozoic thermal regime in the Bohai Bay Basin,eastern North China Craton

This article discusses the Meso–Cenozoic thermal history, thermal lithospheric thinning, and thermal structure of the lithosphere of the Bohai Bay Basin, North China. The present-day thermal regime of the basin features an average heat flow of 64.5 ± 8.1 mW m^–2, a lithospheric thickness of 76–102 km, and a ‘hot mantle but cold crust’-type lithospheric thermal structure. The Meso–Cenozoic thermal history experienced two heat flow peaks in the late Early Cretaceous and in the middle to late Palaeogene, with heat flow values of 82–86 mW m^?2 and 81–88 mW m^?2, respectively. Corresponding to these peaks, the thermal lithosphere experienced two thinning stages during the Cretaceous and Palaeogene, reaching a minimum thickness of 43–61 km. The lithospheric thermal structure transformed from the ‘hot crust but cold mantle’ type in the Triassic–Jurassic to the ‘cold crust but hot mantle’ type in the Cretaceous–Cenozoic, according to the ratio of mantle to surface heat flow (q_m/q_s). The research on the thermal history and lithospheric thermal structure of sedimentary basins can effectively reveal the thermal regime at depth in the sedimentary basins and provide significance for the study of the basin dynamics during the Meso–Cenozoic.     

Lithosphere thermal structure at the eastern margin of the Bohemian Massif: a case petrological and geophysical study of the Nied?wied? amphibolite massif (SW Poland)

The crustal section beneath amphibolite Nied?wied? Massif (Fore-Sudetic Block in NE Bohemian Massif), modelled on the basis of geological and seismic data, is dominated by gneisses with subordinate granites (upper and middle crust) and melagabbros (lower crust). The geotherm was calculated based on the chemical analyses of the heat-producing elements in the rocks forming the crust and the measurements of their density and heat conductivity. The results were verified by heat flow calculations based on temperature measurements from 1,600?m deep well in the Nied?wied? Massif and by temperature–depth estimates in mantle xenoliths coming from the nearby ca. 4.5?My basanite plug in Lutynia. The paleoclimate-corrected heat flow in the Nied?wied? Massif is 69.5?mW?m^?2, and the mantle heat flow is 28?mW?m^?2. The mantle beneath the Massif was located marginally relative to the areas of intense Cenozoic thermal rejuvenation connected with alkaline volcanism. This results in geotherm which is representative for lithosphere parts located at the margins of zones of continental alkaline volcanism and at its waning stages. The lithosphere–asthenosphere boundary (LAB) beneath Nied?wied? is located between 90 and 100?km depth and supposedly the rheological change at LAB is not related to the appearance of melt.     

The thermal structure and thickness of continental roots

We compare heat flow data from the Precambrian shields in North America and in South Africa. We also review data available in other less well-sampled Shield regions. Variations in crustal heat production account for most of the variability of the heat flow. Because of this variability, it is difficult to define a single average crustal model representative of a whole tectonic province. The average heat flow values of different Archean provinces in Canada, South Africa, Australia and India differ by significant amounts. This is also true for Proterozoic provinces. For example, the heat flow is significantly higher in the Proterozoic Namaqua–Natal Belt of South Africa than in the Grenville Province of the Canadian Shield (61 vs. 41 mW m⁻² on average). These observations indicate that it is not possible to define single value of the average heat flow for all provinces of the same crustal age. Large amplitude short wavelength variations of the heat flow suggest that most of the difference between Proterozoic and Archean heat flow is of crustal origin. In eastern Canada, there is no good correlation between the local values of heat flow and heat production. In the Archean, Proterozoic and Paleozoic provinces of eastern Canada, heat flow values through rocks with the same heat production are not significantly different. There is therefore no evidence for variations of the mantle heat flow beneath these different provinces. After removing the local crustal heat production from the surface heat flow, the mantle (Moho) heat flow was estimated to be between 10–15 mW m⁻² in the Archean, Proterozoic and Paleozoic provinces of eastern Canada. Estimates of the mantle heat flow in the Kaapvaal craton of South Africa may be slightly higher (≈17 mW m⁻²). Large-scale variations of bulk crustal heat production are well-documented in Canada and imply significant differences of deep lithospheric thermal structure. In thick lithosphere, surficial heat flow measurements record a time average of heat production in the lithospheric mantle and are not in equilibrium with the instantaneous heat production. The low mantle heat flow and current estimates of heat production in the lithospheric mantle do not support a mechanical (conductive) lithosphere thinner than 200 km and thicker than 330 km. Temperature anomalies with surrounding oceanic mantle extend to the convective boundary layer below the conductive layer, and hence to depths greater than these estimates. Mechanical and thermal stability of the lithosphere require the mantle part of the lithosphere to be chemically buoyant and depleted in radiogenic elements. Both characteristics are achieved simultaneously by partial melting and melt extraction.     

Thermal and rheological structures of the Xisha Trough, South China Sea

The Xisha Trough, located in the northwest of the South China Sea (SCS) mainly rifted 30 Ma ago, has been a failed rift since the cessation of the seafloor spreading of the NW subbasin. Based on the velocity–depth model along Profile OBH-4 across the Xisha Trough, a seven-layer density–depth model is used to estimate density structure for the profile. The relationship between seismic velocity and radiogenic heat production is used to estimate the vertical distribution of heat sources in the lower crust. The 2-D temperature field is calculated by applying a 2-D numerical solution of the heat conduction equation and the thermal lithosphere thickness is obtained from the basalt dry solidus (BDS). The rheology of the profile is estimated on the basis of frictional failure in the brittle regime and power-law steady-state creep in the ductile regime. Rheological model is constructed for a three-layer model involving a granitic upper crust, a quartz diorite lower crust and an olivine upper mantle. Gravity modeling supports basically the velocity–depth model. The Moho along Profile OBH-4 is of relatively high heat flow ranging from 46 to 60 mW/m² and the Moho heat flow is higher in the trough than on the flanks. The depth of the “thermal” lithospheric lower boundary is about 54 km in the center, deepens toward two sides, and is about 75 km at the northern slope area and about 70 km at the southern Xisha–Zhongsha Block. Rheological calculation indicates that the two thinnest ductile layers in the crust and the thickest brittle layer in the uppermost mantle lie in the central region, showing that the Xisha Trough has been rheologically strengthened, which are mainly due to later thermal relaxation. In addition, the strengthening in rheology during rifting was not the main factor in hampering the breakup of the Xisha Trough.