2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.apgeochem.2017.06.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The influence of oxygen isotope exchange between CO2 and H2O in natural CO2-rich spring waters: Implications for geothermometry

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
29
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 54 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
2
29
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The δ 18 O-CO 2(g) data (≈ 15‰) are subject to caution due to the inherent difficulty in obtaining representative samples especially because of the fast exchange between H 2 O and CO 2(g) (Panichi et al 1977;Gemery et al 1996). Nevertheless, these values are in the same order of magnitude of deep originated volcanic δ 18 O-CO 2(g) values calculated in Karolyte et al (2017). As a whole, the CO 2(g) isotopic signature of δ 13 C and δ 18 O seems to be compatible with a deep magmatic origin and scarcely affected by isotopic exchanges with subsurface waters, testified by quantitatively high and rapidly uprising CO 2(g) at the Shiwaga gas field.…”
Section: Co 2 Gas Isotopic Signaturementioning
confidence: 90%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The δ 18 O-CO 2(g) data (≈ 15‰) are subject to caution due to the inherent difficulty in obtaining representative samples especially because of the fast exchange between H 2 O and CO 2(g) (Panichi et al 1977;Gemery et al 1996). Nevertheless, these values are in the same order of magnitude of deep originated volcanic δ 18 O-CO 2(g) values calculated in Karolyte et al (2017). As a whole, the CO 2(g) isotopic signature of δ 13 C and δ 18 O seems to be compatible with a deep magmatic origin and scarcely affected by isotopic exchanges with subsurface waters, testified by quantitatively high and rapidly uprising CO 2(g) at the Shiwaga gas field.…”
Section: Co 2 Gas Isotopic Signaturementioning
confidence: 90%
“…Other mechanism such as precipitation-dissolution reactions, bubble formation, exchange with atmosphere, Fig. 3 δ 2 H vs. δ 18 O diagram of waters sampled at the Shiwaga gas field: with black circle: springs (S), gray circle: puddles (P) white circle: rivers samples (R), black line: regional meteoric water line (RMWL), gray line: global meteoric water line (GMWL) and dotted line: Shiwaga water line (SHI-WL) salinity effect, kinetic fractionation, which may affect the δ 18 O-H 2 O (Broecker and Siems 1984;Jähne et al 1987;Chiodini et al 2000), cannot likely be considered responsible for such large 18 O-shift (Karolyte et al 2017 (Bottinga 1968), whereas a mean value of 30.5‰ was measured (Table 1). This suggests that either time interaction between groundwater and gas is too short to reach isotopic equilibration or spring waters (δ 18 O ≈ − 15‰) result from a mixing, in 45 and 55% proportions, between (1) CO 2(g) equilibrated water (δ 18 O ≈ − 27‰) and (2) rainfall water unaffected by CO 2(g) (δ 18 O ≈ − 4‰), respectively.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recharge Source of the Hot Springs. As components of water molecules, stable hydrogen and oxygen isotopes are useful indicators of groundwater studies, which provide information on water origin, recharge and migration pathways, fault and fracture permeability to fluids, and so on [20]. The stable isotopes are commonly used to distinguish among meteoric, marine, and magmatic origins of spring water.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous geochemical modelling work showed that CO2 does not cause significant amounts of bedrock mineral dissolution in the Ordovician aquifer (Karolytė et al, 2017) and there is no geological evidence for addition of large amounts of crustal CO2 from other sources (e.g. carbonate metamorphism).…”
Section: Radiogenic 4 He Stripping From Enriched Pore-watermentioning
confidence: 97%