Geophysical Journal International

Geophys. J. Int. (2014) 199, 829–843 doi: 10.1093/gji/ggu282

GJI Mineral physics, rheology, heat flow and volcanology

Vertical variation in heat flow on the Kola Peninsula: palaeoclimate

or fluid flow?

C. Vogt,1,2 D. Mottaghy,1,3 V. Rath,1,4,5 G. Marquart,1 L. Dijkshoorn,1,6 A. Wolf7,8

and C. Clauser1
1 Institute for Applied Geophysics and Geothermal Energy, E.ON Energy Research Center, RWTH Aachen University, Mathieustr. 10, D-52056 Aachen,
Germany. E-mail: cvogt@eonerc.rwth-aachen.de
2 Schlumberger GmbH, Niederlassung Aachen, Ritterstraße 23, D-52072 Aachen, Germany
3 Geophysica Beratungsgesellschaft mbH, Lütticher Str. 32, D-52064 Aachen, Germany
4 Department of Earth Sciences, Astronomy and Astrophysics,Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Ciudad Universitaria, E-28040 Madrid, Spain

Downloaded from http://gji.oxfordjournals.org/ at Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies on September 11, 2014
5 Institute for Advanced Studies, 5 Merrion Square, Dublin 2, Ireland
6 Divisie NL Energie en Klimaat, Agentschap NL, Sittard, Netherlands
7 Scientific Computing, RWTH Aachen University, Seffenter Weg 23, D-52074 Aachen, Germany
8 Hochschulrechenzentrum, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Mornewegstraße 30, D-64293 Darmstadt, Germany

Accepted 2014 July 18. Received 2014 July 17; in original form 2014 February 5

SUMMARY
Following earlier studies, we present forward and inverse simulations of heat and fluid transport
of the upper crust using a local 3-D model of the Kola area. We provide best estimates for
palaeotemperatures and permeabilities, their errors and their dependencies. Our results allow
discriminating between the two mentioned processes to a certain extent, partly resolving the
non-uniqueness of the problem. We find clear indications for a significant contribution of
advective heat transport, which, in turn, imply only slightly lower ground surface temperatures
during the last glacial maximum relative to the present value. These findings are consistent
with the general background knowledge of (i) the fracture zones and the corresponding fluid
movements in the bedrock and (ii) the glacial history of the Kola area.
Key words: Numerical solutions; Inverse theory; Hydrology; Heat flow; Permeability and
porosity; Heat generation and transport.

to separate advective from conductive heat transport quantitatively

1 I N T RO D U C T I O N
Subsurface temperatures are influenced by different factors, such
as radiogenic heat generation, fluid flow, sedimentation and het-
erogeneity, that is, spatial variation of thermal and hydraulic rock
properties. Additionally, borehole temperatures often show signa-
tures of transient variations of the Earth’s ground surface temper-
ature history (GSTH). Therefore, these borehole temperatures may
yield information for comparison with the results of large-scale cli-
mate models. In addition, accounting for past surface temperature
change is essential for identifying the factors and processes listed
above.
Long-term palaeoclimatic effects have been known since the
study of Hotchkiss & Ingersoll (1934), and corrections for palaeo-
climatic effects are required for obtaining meaningful estimates of
geothermal heat flow (amongst others, Vasseur & Lucazeau 1983;
Clauser 1984; Clauser et al. 1997; Fernandez et al. 1998; Golo-
vanova et al. 2008; Slagstad et al. 2009; Majorowicz & Wybraniec
2010; Westaway & Younger 2013). Climatic disturbance of subsur-
face temperatures related to the warming after the last ice age may
well modify the vertical temperature gradient by a few Kelvin per
metre (Kohl 1998; Rath et al. 2012). Such temperature anomalies
may also be caused by slow groundwater flow. Thus, when trying
(Rühaak et al. 2010), correction for palaeoclimate may be often
useful or even required. Heat flow profiles derived from thermo-
physical measurements in boreholes often show vertical variations,
such as those from the Kola super-deep borehole (Kukkonen &
Clauser 1994; Popov et al. 1999), from other deep boreholes in
Russia (Kukkonen et al. 1998; Glaznev et al. 2004; Golovanova
et al. 2008; Demezhko et al. 2013), and from the KTB boreholes
(Clauser et al. 1997). This vertical variation of heat flow with depth
may be used for identifying and quantifying the relative influences
of the various processes mentioned above. Based on a data set of
temperature and thermal rock properties from seven shallower bore-
holes and the super-deep hole SG-3 from the Kola Peninsula, we
investigate the relative contributions of heat advected by ground-
water flow and transient variation of the vertical heat flow due to
changing palaeotemperatures at the surface to the observed profiles
of borehole temperatures and heat flow.
The super-deep borehole SG-3 is located on the Kola Peninsula,
at the northern rim of the Fennoscandian Shield near the Finnish-
Russian border. It provides an unique opportunity for studying ad-
vective and conductive heat transport in the uppermost crust, with
glacial and interglacial climate changes superimposed. The area
was strongly influenced by a succession of glaciations, resulting in


C The Authors 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Royal Astronomical Society. 829
830 C. Vogt et al.
a gently rolling topography in the study region, with elevations be-
tween 300 and 400 m above sea level. The effect of the last glacial
cycle (LGC) can also be found in subsurface temperatures. Domi-
nant effects originate from the conditions at the base of the ice sheet
during and before the period of the last glacial maximum (LGM),
and the subsequent retreat of the ice sheet, exposing the ground
surface to atmospheric conditions. In contrast to earlier results (see,
e.g. Boulton et al. 2001; Hagdorn 2003; Forsström 2005), an en-
semble of calibrated ice sheet models for the Fennoscandian Ice
Sheet implies that the retreat of the ice sheet started near 20 ka BP.
However, the region considered here remained covered by ice until
about 11 ka BP (Tarasov 2013).
For the Kola super-deep borehole, earlier results already indi-
cated an important influence of advection in addition to the effects
of past ground temperature changes (Kukkonen & Clauser 1994;
Popov et al. 1999). However, studies in adjacent areas in Finland and
in the central Kola Peninsula (e.g. Kukkonen et al. 1998; Glaznev
et al. 2004) hold palaeoclimate effects responsible for the vertical
variation of heat flow. In the Kola region, the vertical variation of
thermal conductivity is well known from laboratory measurements
on rock samples of the super-deep borehole (Popov et al. 1999;
Mottaghy et al. 2005). This leaves advection and palaeoclimatic ef-
fects as candidates for explaining the observed heat flow variations.
Extensive modelling has shown that perturbations due to human ac-
tivity, for example, by the nearby open-pit mines of the Nikel area,
cannot explain the temperature variations found in the boreholes
due to the short operation times involved (Mottaghy & Rath 2007).
Two studies by Mottaghy et al. (2005) and Mottaghy (2007) evalu-
ated the influence of variable ground surface temperature histories
and groundwater advection for the area around the SG-3 super-deep
borehole based on 3-D forward and 1-D inverse simulations. They
proposed advection as the main reason for the vertical variation on
heat flow observed both in deep and in shallow boreholes, but the
quantitative contribution of palaeoclimate and fluid flow remained
open.
Here, we present a follow-up study focusing on the relative con-
tributions of palaeoclimate and fluid flow effects using the large data
base on vertical heat flow compiled by Mottaghy et al. (2005) and
a joint inverse 3-D modelling of transient diffusive and advective
heat transport. For a 3-D model based on geological observation
and data from the SG-3 borehole, we invert for the permeabili-
ties of four geological units and the palaeotemperature step at the
surface corresponding to a given glaciation model. Thus, besides
accounting for the influence of heat advection, our results also help
constraining the GSTH better, particularly regarding the amplitude
of the Pleistocene-Holocene warming.
2 GEOLOGICAL SETTING,
P E T R O P H Y S I C A L P R O P E RT I E S A N D
T E M P E R AT U R E O B S E RVAT I O N S
The Kola super-deep borehole SG-3 is situated in the Pechenga ore
district at 69◦ 23 N, 30◦ 36 E (see Figs 1 and 3). It is located in the
Penchenga graben-syncline and is the deepest borehole (12 262 m)
in the world to date. In the surroundings of the SG-3 borehole,
26 additional boreholes with a maximum depth of 1600 m were
considered for our study and are shown in Fig. 1.
Geological information derives mainly from mining exploration
in the Pechenga copper nickel mining district and the research re-
lated to the super-deep SG-3 borehole. The crustal rocks at the
SG-3 drilling site consist of high-degree metamorphic sedimentary-
volcanic rocks of the lower Proterozoic complex 2 down to 6842 m,
and gneisses and amphibolites of the Archean basement below. At
the surface, there is a thin layer of Quaternary glacial deposits,
typically reaching a thickness of only a few metres. Most of the
published data are summarized in a review article by Kremenetsky
& Ovchinnikov (1986), the monograph edited by Kozlovsky (1987)
and the technical report delivered by NEDRA (1992), where many
details can be found. All this data originate from a joint research
collaboration between Russia, Finland and Germany. During this
field campaign, 14 new temperature logs were recorded in the shal-
low boreholes around the SG-3. Additionally, 22 existing logs were
re-valuated. Regarding petrophysical data, tensor components of
thermal conductivity were determined on 1375 core samples from
21 boreholes. Additionally, specific heat capacity, density, porosity,
heat production rate and permeability were measured on a subset
of samples from 16 boreholes. Finally, this comprehensive data set
Downloaded from http://gji.oxfordjournals.org/ at Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies on September 11, 2014
was complemented by determining the temperature dependence of
thermal conductivity and specific heat capacity on 35 representative
samples. In Mottaghy et al. (2005), the detailed presentation of all
data is given. In the present study, we make use of this data set,
additionally to the data set available for the super-deep borehole
SG-3 (Popov et al. 1999). A summary of the data is given in the
sections below.
2.1 Thermal and hydraulic properties
An early overview on the thermal properties of the Kola region was
provided by Kremenetsky & Ovchinnikov (1986). For SG-3 as well
as for most of the shallower surrounding boreholes (depth up to
1600 m), laboratory measurements of thermal conductivities and
heat capacities were available (1375 samples). For seven boreholes,
which are used in this study and are indicated by black dots in
Fig. 1, temperature-dependent properties were measured (Popov
et al. 1999; Mottaghy et al. 2005).
Porosities of the rocks in SG-3 reported by Kozlovsky (1987)
are generally low (0.3–3.0 per cent). Unfortunately, information on
permeability in the study region is sparse (Borevsky et al. 1987;
Clauser et al. 1999). While the bulk permeability of metamorphic
rocks is low (Mottaghy et al. 2005), relevant permeability due to
faults and fractures cannot be excluded and may have a significant
impact on groundwater recharge and fluid flow. For the SG-3 bore-
hole, higher cavernosity was detected over a short depth interval at
1800 m, and increasing cavernosity was found below 4700 m, with a
maximum around 7 km (Gorbatsevich et al. 2010). The term ‘higher
cavernosity’ was used by Gorbatsevich et al. (2010) for sections in
SG-3 with numerous major borehole breakouts. Here, we identified
these sections with rock units of increased fracture density. At the
depth of 4700 m, the borehole intersects the Luchlompolo fault, a
mylonitic shear zone (Vidal 1984) and at 7000 m to the transition
of the metamorphic rocks to the Archean basement. At the depth of
1800 m, significant water influx was reported, too (Vidal 1984).
2.2 Temperature data
Temperature profiles are available for all shallow boreholes shown
in Fig. 1. We selected only those seven boreholes which rested undis-
turbed for several years or even decades before measurements were
taken in 1994 and they are assumed to be in thermal equilibrium
and also provide information on inclination for a depth correc-
tion. The subset used here is summarized in Table 1. Temperature
data were continuous logs and point measurements with a sampling
interval of 5–10 m. The logging tool used an Analog Device AD
 Fluid flow or palaeoclimate, Kola borehole 831

Downloaded from http://gji.oxfordjournals.org/ at Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies on September 11, 2014
Figure 1. Topographic map of the study area with the location of the boreholes (from GPS measurements) indicated by their numbers. The boreholes used in
this study are marked by dots, the size of the dots refers to the heat flow at the site; boreholes used for the inversion in this study are indicated by black dots.
(Figure redrawn from Mottaghy et al. 2005, the contour interval is 10 m.) Additionally, the location of the studied region on the Kola Peninsula is shown at the
upper right corner.

Table 1. Data characterizing the shallow boreholes studied: name, longitude version approach based on temperature profiles from the boreholes
(lon), latitude (lat), depth range d for which temperature measurements shown in Fig. 1, confirming this result. Inversions for the scientific
exist, surface elevation h, current average ground surface temperature T0 borehole in Outokumpu (Kukkonen et al. 2011) yielded differences
and average specific heat flow q over the given depth range. of about 8 K relative to modern temperatures, or 10 K relative to
Name lon lat d h T0 q the Holocene temperature maximum. This agrees well with val-
(◦ E) (◦ N) (m) (m asl) (◦ C) (mW m−2 ) ues derived from pollen and other biogeoclimatic indicators from
2271 30.6422 69.4067 50–1364 340 1.28 41 ± 3 nearby sites (Heikkilä & Seppä 2003), or large-scale multiproxy
3359 30.6278 69.3989 50–959 340 0.95 37 ± 3 reconstructions (Luterbacher et al. 2004). In contrast, much larger
3356 30.6614 69.3964 50–1063 350 1 38 ± 4 temperature differences were concluded from borehole observations
3209 30.6197 69.4022 50–806 336 1.1 38 ± 4 in northern Poland (Majorowicz et al. 2007; Mottaghy 2007) and
3200 30.6253 69.395 50–1620 370 1.03 35 ± 3 northwestern Russia (Demezhko et al. 2013), suggesting values of
2915 30.6522 69.4069 50–670 350 0.46 39 ± 5 12–20 K lower than today. Again, this consistent with surface tem-
2400 30.6433 69.4036 50–689 367 −0.3 38 ± 3 perature reconstructions for this area derived from various proxies
(see, e.g. Kageyama et al. 2001; Jost et al. 2005; Wu et al. 2007).
Reconstructions of the late Weichselian glaciation (Hubberten
590 chip sensor (resolution: ±10 mK, and accuracy: ±100 mK). et al. 2004; Siegert & Dowdeswell 2004; Svendsen et al. 2004;
Residual temperature logs obtained from these high-quality tem- Hättestrand & Clark 2006a,b) as well as ice sheet models (e.g.
perature measurements showed no obvious signatures of flow into Siegert & Dowdeswell 1998; Hagdorn 2003; Forsström 2005;
or out of the boreholes. Tarasov 2013) suggest that the Kola region was covered by ice
The temperature profile for the SG-3 (Fig. 2, left) from Popov much longer than Northern Poland. The calibrated model ensemble
et al. (1999) is available in digital format only down to a depth of of Tarasov (2013) shows that the Kola area had been ice-covered ap-
5000 m. The upper part of the SG-3 profile, above 2000 m, deviates proximately from 30 to 10 ka BP. The simulations imply that the ice
significantly deviation from profiles of the shallow boreholes and sheet was comparatively thick (≈1500 m), with near-melting con-
indicates too high temperatures close to the surface. Since we have ditions at its base. Near melting conditions, that is, about 0 ◦ C at the
no information about the conditions inside the super-deep borehole rock surface could explain the warmer palaeotemperatures inferred
SG-3 at the recording time of the available temperature profile, we for the Kola region. In contrast, northern Poland remained exposed
assumed a larger uncertainty range in the inverse modelling studies to the atmosphere most of the time, and was covered only between
for these data compared to those from the shallow boreholes. 22 and 18 ka BP with much thinner ice sheets. However, the par-
ticularly low temperatures are only partly due to the much shorter
time of ice coverage and smaller thickness of the ice sheet in these
2.3 Palaeoclimate, surface temperature history
locations. They constitute a pertinent challenge for global circula-
and basal heat flow
tion models of this region (Ramstein et al. 2007; Kim et al. 2008).
The GSTH during the LGC is essential for interpretation of verti- Regional models, taking into account the full coupling between at-
cal temperature profiles. Ground surface temperatures at the time mosphere, ice sheets and sea ice indicate that a reorganization of the
of drilling for the Kola Peninsula are around 1 ◦ C (see Table 1), regional circulation patterns related to the late development of the
compared to a surface temperature at the LGM which was 4–7 K ice sheet may play a dominant role (Harrison et al. 1995; Krinner
lower than today, as estimated by Kukkonen & Joeleht (2003). et al. 2004; Bromwich et al. 2005; Peyaud et al. 2007; Wohlfarth
Mottaghy (2007) and Rath & Mottaghy (2007) used an 1-D in- et al. 2007).
832 C. Vogt et al.

Downloaded from http://gji.oxfordjournals.org/ at Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies on September 11, 2014
Figure 2. Temperature depth profile (left) and heat flow with depth (right) for the SG-3 Kola deep borehole. The red curve in the left figure shows the observed
profile and the red curves in the right figure show the inferred heat flow profiles according to Borevsky et al. (1987) and Popov et al. (1999). The blue curves
show modelling results of Mottaghy et al. (2005) for purely conductive and conductive-advective (coupled) heat transport, using the simplified boxcar model
of the palaeoclimate for the last 80 ka with a temperature step T as shown in the inset; the modelled temperature profiles (left figure) are shown for T = 9 K,
the modelled heat flow profiles (right figure) are shown for different values of T.

3 MODELLING TOOLS where v is the specific discharge (m3 m−2 s−1 ), k the hydraulic
We use the 3-D finite difference code SHEMAT-Suite (Rath et al. permeability tensor (m2 ), μf the fluid dynamic viscosity (Pa s),
2006) for our forward and inverse numerical simulations. This ρf fluid density (kg m−3 ), g gravity (m s−2 ) and P the hydraulic
code, developed from the SHEMAT code (Clauser 2003), contains a pressure (Pa). Here, the unity vector is pointing upwards.
module for inverse estimation of model parameters and boundary In the following, hydraulic head h (m) is used. The corresponding
conditions. pore water pressure can simply be calculated from the distribution
of head and depth z d as (de Marsily 1986; Clauser 2003):
 zd
P(z d , h) = P0 + ρf (z˜d ) g(h − z˜d )dz˜d , (2)
0
3.1 Forward model
where P0 (z 0 ) ≈ 105 Pa is the pressure at the surface z d = 0. The
While various coupled non-linear differential equations are imple- equation for fluid flow implemented here is derived from eqs (1) and
mented in SHEMAT-Suite, we use only those for single-phase fluid (2), and the equation of continuity, using an extended Oberbeck–
flow and heat transport in this study. Fluid flow through a porous Boussinesq approximation (e.g. Kolditz et al. 1998; Diersch &
medium is commonly described by Darcy’s law (Darcy 1856): Kolditz 2002)
 
k ∂h ρf gk
v=− (∇ P + ρf g∇z) , (1) ρf g (α + φβ) =∇· (∇h + ρf ∇z) + W. (3)
μf ∂t μf

Table 2. Variation of matrix and fluid properties with tem-
perature and pressure implemented according to the given
references.
Property Function description
λm (T ), cm (T ) Mottaghy (2007)
λf (T, P) Phillips et al. (1981)
cf (T, P), ρf (T, P) Modified after Zylkovskij et al. (1994)
μ(T, P) for T > 0 Modified after Zylkovskij et al. (1994)
μ(T, P) for T ≤ 0 Modified after Speedy (1987)
Here, φ is porosity, while α and β denote the compressibility
(Pa−1 ) of the rock and the fluid phase, respectively. W corresponds
to a mass source term (kg m−3 s−1 ).
In an analogue way, the heat transport equation follows from
conservation of energy (e.g. Beardsmore & Cull 2001; Clauser
2003)
∂T
(ρc)e = ∇ · [λe ∇T ] + (ρc)f v∇T + H. (4)
∂t
In this equation, T is the temperature (◦ C), (ρc)e is the effec-
tive thermal capacity of the saturated porous medium and the fluid
(J m−3 K−1 ), (ρc)f is the thermal capacity of the fluid (J m−3 K−1 ),
λe is the tensor of effective thermal conductivity (W m−1 K−1 ) and
H a heat generation rate source term (W m−3 ). The effective thermal
conductivity of the rock, λe , depends on porosity φ, and is given by
the geometric mean of rock and fluid thermal conductivity λm and
λf : λe = λφf λm
1−φ
. Due to the very low porosity (below 2 per cent),
matrix thermal conductivity is approximately equal to effective ther-
mal conductivity. The physical properties of rock matrix and fluid,
and thus also the Darcy velocity or specific discharge in eq. (1),
depend on temperature and pressure. These functions for λ, c and
ρ form a non-linear coupling between both eqs (3) and (4). The
code SHEMAT-Suite allows to include the non-linear coupling due
to local (p,T)-conditions in a fully modular way. We implemented
site-specific temperature dependencies (Table 2) for the rock prop-
erties, for example, porosity changes due to permafrost, and specific
permeability-depth functions (see Section 3.2).
For solving eqs (3) and (4), they are discretized in space by a finite
difference/volume scheme, employing a general two-level stepping
scheme in time (see, e.g. Lynch 2005). The resulting non-linear
systems of equations are solved by a simple alternating fixed-point
iteration (Huyakorn & Pinder 1983).
3.2 Inverse model
Inverse methods are a powerful tool to calibrate numerical models
on observed data (Cooley 2004; Hill & Tiedeman 2006). In addition
to finding a preferred model, most of the applied methods will also
provide information on the uncertainty of the derived parameters.
A straightforward Bayesian inverse approach (Tarantola 2004) was
chosen here, which seeks a parameter set minimizing the non-linear
functional:
B = (d − g(p))T C−1
d,prior (d − g(p))
 T −1   (5)
+ p − pprior C p,prior p − pprior .
Here, g(p) is the vector of data simulated by the forward model
based on the parameter vector p, and d is the observed data vector.
Prior values for parameters pprior as well as the inverse covariance
matrices C−1 −1
d,prior and C p,prior need to be specified beforehand. It is
assumed that these are sufficient to characterize the prior probability
distributions of observations, that is, normality is assumed for both
Fluid flow or palaeoclimate, Kola borehole 833
quantities. Under these conditions, the minimum of the functional in
eq. (5) is called the maxmimum a posteriori (MAP) estimate, which
can, for instance, be found by a variety of methods. Our implementa-
tion includes data and parameter space formulations (Rodgers 1976;
Tarantola & Valette 1982a,b), and direct minimization of eq. (5) by
non-linear conjugate gradients, or a limited-memory quasi-Newton
technique (Nocedal & Wright 1999). Here, we use a quasi-Newton
iteration,
pk+1 = pk + μ · (JT C−1 −1
d,prior J + C p,prior )
−1
(6)
× {JT C−1 −1
d,prior [d − g(p )] − C p,prior [p − pprior ]}.
k k
The Jacobian J = ∂g/∂p refers to the matrix of partial deriva-
tives of the output variables with respect to the input parameters,
and μ is a damping parameter which is necessary for ensuring
sufficient decline of the objective functional. The calculation of
Downloaded from http://gji.oxfordjournals.org/ at Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies on September 11, 2014
the Jacobian J employs automatic differentiation of the forward
code (e.g. Rall 1981; Griewank & Walther 2008) in the forward
(tangent linear) mode, using the tools TAF (Giering & Kamin-
ski 1998, http://www.fastopt.com/), or TAPENADE (Hascoët &
Pascual 2013, http://www-sop.inria.fr/tropics).
Data to be inverted may comprise a subset of the nodal fields P
and T calculated by the forward model, or linear combinations of
these, that is, point measurements, gradients or integrals of both
data types. Parameters to be inverted in SHEMAT-Suite may be
rock properties such as porosity φ, permeability k, matrix thermal
conductivity λm or boundary conditions. Hydraulic permeability k,
as well as matrix thermal conductivity λm may be anisotropic and
are defined by their vertical component and anisotropy factors in
x- and y-directions. To guarantee positivity and to improve scaling,
parameters may be replaced by their natural logarithm, implying a
corresponding transformation of the Jacobian. Physical properties
are assigned to the grid cells by means of an index array. These
indices may represent, for instance, layers, isolated bodies and fault
zones, or may be assigned to single cells. For keeping the size
of the inverse problem moderate, the parameters of interest may
be assigned to geological units with homogeneous properties. The
current code provides considerable freedom for the user to choose
the appropriate setup for a given problem. In this study, we only
inverted for permeability, while porosity and thermal conductivity
were kept constant at values derived from core measurements.
4 M O D E L L AY O U T
Our model is a local refinement of an existing regional 3-D model
(Mottaghy 2007) and covers a domain of 12 km × 12 km × 10 km.
The model is shown in Fig. 3. It covers essentially the area shown
in Fig. 1 and is extended at the sides. It contains, in particular,
SG-3 and the seven shallow boreholes mentioned in Section 2. The
goal of our modelling is studying the influence of fluid flow and
palaeoclimate on the temperature gradient in more detail as well
as investigating the possibility of separating and quantifying the
competing effects.
The model comprises six units: a top layer (unit 1), representing
air, so that the surface of unit 2 coincides with topography, and
five different layers representing the geology as encountered in the
super-deep borehole SG-3 (Table 3). We did not resolve the thin
Quaternary top cover since it is not significant for deep heat transport
processes. The model comprises in particular the sections in SG-3
around 1800 m and below 4600 m depth (intersection with the
Luchlompolo Mylonitic shear zone) where increased permeability
is plausible. Topography is included (Mottaghy et al. 2005), and
834 C. Vogt et al.

Downloaded from http://gji.oxfordjournals.org/ at Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies on September 11, 2014
Figure 3. 3-D model around the super-deep borehole SG-3 and its setting on the Kola Peninsula. The black asterisk marks the location of the SG-3 on the
map and the model, respectively. The figure shows five different geological units: Proterozoic complex 1 (blue), Ultrabasic intrusions (light blue), Proterozoic
complex 2 (green), Mylonitic shear zone (yellow) and Archean basement (red). The constant properties are described in Table 3 and the permeabilities for
different models and inversion results in Tables 4 and 5.

Table 3. The five geological units of the 3-D model and corresponding depths in the super-deep borehole SG-3 and
average thermal and hydraulic parameters which are kept fixed for forward modelling and inversion: matrix thermal
conductivity λm at standard laboratory conditions, radiogenic heat generation rate A, porosity φ. For all layers, ρcp , the
product of density and specific heat capacity is 2.06 MJ K−1 m−3 . Colours refer to Fig. 3.
Code Geological unit Colour Depth in SG-3 (m) λm (W m−1 K−1 ) A (μW m−3 ) φ(−)
1 Air Not shown 0 0 1
2 Proterozoic complex 1 Blue 0–1500 3.0 0.67 0.007
3 Ultrabasic intrusions Light blue 1500–1800 3.3 0.26 0.001
4 Proterozoic complex 2 Green 1800–4500 3.4 0.4 0.02
5 Mylonitic shear zone Yellow 4500–5000 3.0 0.56 0.018
6 Archean basement Red 5000–10 000 2.9 1.4 0.01

the hydraulic head is set equal to topography. This has an important
effect on lateral pressure variations which drive fluid flow.
Regarding the model size, we chose dimensions where lateral
boundaries have no influence on the flow field in the area of borehole
data on the one hand. On the other hand, the model must not be too
large in order to keep CPU times at an acceptable level for the
computational demanding inverse simulations.
The model is girded in cells with dimensions of 100 m × 100 m in
horizontal orientation. The thicknesses of the cells vary and increase
with depth. At the top, a small thickness is required because the head
boundary condition and the surface temperature at the top of unit 2
follow the elevation. Thus, the smaller the cell thickness, the better
resolved is the topographic surface.
Modelling proceeds in two steps: First, we run a set of forward
models for studying the influence of surface temperature history and
fluid flow on the temperature profile; and secondly, we use inver-
sion methods for estimating permeability and palaeotemperature.
For the forward models, we started with a steady-state model with
fixed surface temperature for controlling the initial conditions for
a following transient forward simulation. For the transient model,
we assumed 2000 equal-sized time steps as a time-dependent tem-
perature boundary condition at the surface for a period of 100 ka,
which represents a highly simplified parameterization of the GSTH
of LGC surface conditions. We used the forward models for finding
at which depth range data are needed for distinguishing between
the influence of fluid flow advection and downward diffusion of
palaeotemperature. This is important for constraining the parame-
ter space and error range for inversion.
4.1 Thermal properties and thermal conditions
In the present study, we followed Mottaghy et al. (2005) and use
thermal conductivities and radiogenic heat production rates reported
by Popov et al. (1999) for SG-3 for the five geological units. For
the initial steady-state modelling, we assume a mean annual ground
surface temperature of 1 ◦ C, which is larger than the mean annual
air temperature of −1 ◦ C in the area (Boettger et al. 2003), or
the values slightly below 0 ◦ C which can be derived from recent

reconstructions (Luterbacher et al. 2004; Jones et al. 2012). The in-
creased value with respect to these reconstructions can be explained
by the insulating effects of snow cover (e.g. Kukkonen 1987; Bartlett
et al. 2004, 2005; Smerdon et al. 2006), which are commonly ob-
served in high latitude sites with tundra-like vegetation (Elina et al.
2010).
For the transient simulation, we assumed a ground surface
history approximating the effect of the glaciation by a boxcar-
shaped variation of temperature with time (see inlet Fig. 2) with
T0 (t) = 1 ◦ C + T between 15 and 90 ka BP, and T0 (t) = 1 ◦ C
at all other times. Thus, palaeoclimate is characterized by only
one parameter, namely the temperature amplitude T. Following
Mottaghy (2007), we assume an prior value step of −6 K, but also
used inverse methods to constrain this value.
Heat flow at the bottom of the model was set to 46 mW m−2
according to the value estimated from the temperatures at SG-
3 in a depth of approximately 10 km (Fig. 2) and based on the
well-constrained petrophysical properties (Borevsky et al. 1987;
Kukkonen & Clauser 1994; Popov et al. 1999). This value agrees
with estimates given by Kukkonen & Clauser (1994). In addition,
this estimate is probably not influenced by palaeoclimatic effects
due to the great depth, and not perturbed by groundwater flow due
to the low permeability of the metamorphic rocks. Zero heat flux
conditions were assumed at the lateral boundaries of the model.
Numerical experiments indicated that perturbing the specific heat
flow by ±3 mW m−2 does not result in significant changes of our
results. However, it should be mentioned that larger variations of
this value will probably impact on the estimation process.
4.2 Hydraulic properties and boundary conditions
Porosity values for the five units were assigned according Popov
et al. (1999). Without doubt, assigning permeability is a bigger
problem. As stated in Section 2.1, the porosity-related permeability
is very low and flow is mainly due to fracture networks in the
bedrock of the Kola region. However, the complexity of fracture
systems generally requires an approximation in the modelling code,
here we do so by representing fracture flow with Darcy flow in
porous media.
Very few reported values of permeability are available for SG-3
(Borevsky et al. 1987; Clauser et al. 1999), indicating a roughly
exponential decrease of permeability with depth with values of 6 ×
10−15 m2 at 1 km to 10−17 m2 at 7 km depth. A near exponential de-
crease of permeability with depth d (m) according to log10 (k) = −14
− 3.2 × log10 (d) was also suggested in general for non-sedimentary
crustal rocks by Manning & Ingebritsen (1999) due to loss of poros-
ity caused by the increase of pressure with depth. However, both
Vidal (1984) and Gorbatsevich et al. (2010) show evidence for
increased permeability in SG-3 around 1800 m depth and below
4600 m.
Table 4. The five geological units of the 3-D model and corresponding permeabilities k of the multiunit approach
for the models based on temperature profiles of only the shallow boreholes: k1 represents the values for forward
modelling and the initials and priors for inversion, k−3 K and k−6 K are inversion results for a surface temperature
decrease of −3 K and −6 K, respectively. Estimation errors are discussed in Section 5.2.2. Colours refer to Fig. 3.
Code Geological unit Colour
2 Proterozoic complex 1 Blue
3 Ultrabasic intrusions Light blue
4 Proterozoic complex 2 Green
5 Mylonitic shear zone Yellow
6 Archean basement Red
Fluid flow or palaeoclimate, Kola borehole 835
Therefore, when assigning the permeability, we chose the fol-
lowing approaches: in a first, single unit approach, we used a model
with only one unit with an exponential decrease of permeability.
Alternatively, we assume that permeability is distributed according
to the same units as thermal conductivity (Table 3). We call this the
multiunit approach.
In the single-unit case, the decrease of permeability k with depth
d is fitted to permeability data reported by Borevsky et al. (1987)
and Clauser et al. (1999) with the functional relationship
− dd
k = k0 · e 0 . (7)
−14
Here, the zero-depth permeability k0 = 1.8 × 10 2
m and the
attenuation length d0 = 950 m is estimated by fitting the available
permeability data manually.
For the multiunit case, we assumed for the forward model and for
Downloaded from http://gji.oxfordjournals.org/ at Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies on September 11, 2014
the prior model for inversion a permeability of the upper Proterozoic
complex 1 (unit 2) of 3 × 10−16 m2 corresponding to the (logarith-
mic) mean of the values by Borevsky et al. (1987) and Clauser et al.
(1999). This value is slightly decreased to 10−16 m2 for the deeper
Proterozoic complex 2 (unit 4) considering pore or fracture closure
with pressure. It is even more reduced to 10−18 m2 for the deep
Archean basement. This value corresponds to the permeability for
the deepest rocks studied by Borevsky et al. (1987) and Clauser
et al. (1999). For the two sections between 1500 and 1800 m, and
4500 and 5000 m, where Gorbatsevich et al. (2010) detected higher
cavernosity, we increased the permeability to 2 × 10−15 m2 . Addi-
tionally, we superpose an exponential depth-dependent decrease of
permeability separately for each unit according to eq. (7), where k0
is the permeability at the top of each unit and set to the values of
k1 according to Tables 4 and 5. The permeability depth distribution
based on k1 is shown in Fig. 4. It is used for forward modelling and
as prior for inversion.
For fluid flow, we assumed zero-flow conditions at all lateral
boundaries. No fluid flow occurs at the upper and lower boundary
due to the low permeability in the lowermost unit 6 and zero per-
meability in the top unit 1 (air). However, at the outcrop of unit 2
(uppermost geological layer), a hydraulic head boundary condition
allows fluid to discharge or recharge into the model.
5 M O D E L L I N G R E S U LT S
As stated before, we first run a set of forward models for studying
the influence of surface temperature history and fluid flow on the
temperature profiles at the seven shallow boreholes and the deep
borehole SG-3. Secondly, we use inversion methods for inferring
the permeabilities of rock units 2–5 and the palaeotemperature step
amplitude and study their correlation. Highlighting the importance
of data from SG-3, we first present our modelling results based (i)
Depth in SG-3 (m) k1 (m2 ) k−3 K (m2 ) k−6 K (m2 )
0–1500 3 × 10−16 4 × 10−15 1 × 10−15
1500–1800 2 × 10−15 3 × 10−16 6 × 10−15
1800–4500 1 × 10−16 6 × 10−18 3 × 10−18
4500–5000 2 × 10−15 2 × 10−12 2 × 10−12
5000–10 000 1 × 10−18 1 × 10−18 1 × 10−18
836 C. Vogt et al.

Table 5. The five geological units of the 3-D model and corresponding permeabilities k of the multiunit approach for the models based on
temperature profiles of the shallow boreholes and the deep SG-3 borehole: ki , kii and kiii are three different permeability profiles used in
forward models for studying the influence of a high permeability in unit 3 and unit 5; k1 represents the initial and prior values for inversion
(the same as in Table 4) and k2 the posterior joint inversion results. Estimation errors are discussed in Section 5.2.2. Colours refer to Fig. 3.
Code Geological unit Colour Depth in SG-3 (m) ki (m2 ) kii (m2 ) kiii (m2 ) k1 (m2 ) k2 (m2 )
2 Proterozoic complex 1 Blue 0–1500 1× 10−18 1× 10−18 1× 10−18 3× 10−16 9 × 10−15
3 Ultrabasic intrusions Light blue 1500–1800 1 × 10−18 1 × 10−15 5 × 10−16 2 × 10−15 4 × 10−17
4 Proterozoic complex 2 Green 1800–4500 1 × 10−18 1 × 10−18 1 × 10−18 1 × 10−16 6 × 10−17
5 Mylonitic shear zone Yellow 4500–5000 1 × 10−13 5 × 10−13 1 × 10−18 2 × 10−15 2 × 10−12
6 Archean basement Red 5000–10 000 1 × 10−18 1 × 10−18 1 × 10−18 1 × 10−18 1 × 10−18

Downloaded from http://gji.oxfordjournals.org/ at Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies on September 11, 2014
Figure 5. Comparison between temperature data from borehole 3200 lo-
cated close to the SG-3 (crosses), and modelled temperatures based on a
steady-state purely conductive (circles) and a coupled diffusive-advective
(triangles) model.

Figure 4. Permeability depth profiles: single-unit case (dotted line), prior
multiunit case based on values for k1 , posterior multiunit case based on
values for k2 (Table 5).
only on temperature profiles from the shallow boreholes and (ii) on
shallow temperature profiles and data from SG-3.
5.1 Results based on temperature profiles of the shallow
boreholes
In a first step, we calculated by forward modelling steady-state
temperature fields. We assumed both, a purely conductive situa-
tion based only on the thermophysical properties, and a coupled
diffusive–advective simulation based on the multiunit model in-
cluding also heat advection. For these first models, we show the
temperature profiles only for the upper 1000 m, for which sufficient
temperature data are available, but the numerical simulation was
performed for the entire model. Fig. 5 shows the resulting simulated
and observed temperatures at the location of one selected borehole
(number 3200, see Fig. 1). Obviously, the steady-state solutions
do not explain the measured temperatures, neither for purely con-
ductive, nor for coupled diffusive-advective heat transport. This is
not surprising because transient downward diffusion of past subsur-
face low temperatures is not considered in this model. We suppose
this to be the explanation for the too high purely conductive heat
flow. The temperatures obtained for the coupled process are too
low, which might be attributed to exceeding advective downward
directed transport in the unit 3 (just below the depth section shown
in Fig. 5) for which we assumed a permeability of 2 × 10−15 m2 .
While the data might be fitted using a different basal heat flow, this
value is relatively well constrained within a few mW m−2 (Popov
et al. 1999), as discussed above, and variations within this range do
not change the results significantly.
For a purely conductive model, fitting can simply be archived by
applying a surface temperature history according to the boxcar func-
tion (inlet to Fig. 2) and a temperature decrease T of −18 K (see
Fig. 6). However, for demonstrating that an equally good fit may be
obtained by considering a conductive-advective model, we assumed
the shown temperature profile, assumed values palaeoclimatic tem-
perature decrease of −3 K and −6 K, respectively, and inverted for
the permeabilities in units 2–5 (the very low permeability in unit
6 was fixed) by the method described in Section 3.2. Note that, at
this stage, we inverted only for the permeabilities in the different
units but kept the palaeotemperature step amplitude fixed during
the inversion. Inversion requires specifying prior values and prior
errors. Prior values (k1 ) are given in Table 4. Prior errors were set
such that possible optimal solutions of the inversion may be found
within a range of two orders of magnitude (logarithmic standard
deviation) around the prior values, because very little information
 Fluid flow or palaeoclimate, Kola borehole 837

Downloaded from http://gji.oxfordjournals.org/ at Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies on September 11, 2014
Figure 7. Temperature profile observed in S-3 (Popov et al. 1999) and from
Figure 6. Comparison of measured and simulated temperatures for bore-
different simulated models reduced by a conductive steady-state reference
hole 3200. Measured temperature (crosses) and the result of a steady-state
model. Red lines show transient conductive models with different palaeotem-
simulation (circles) are the same as in Fig. 4. Tpalaeo (dotted line) is the re-
perature step amplitudes (Tpalaeo ) and green lines show conductive-advective
sult of a pure conductive transient simulation with a boxcar surface ground
models of different permeability distributions ( ki , kii and kiii ; see Table 5)
temperature history and a temperature drop of −18 K. Tmultiunit are the tem-
and a palaeotemperature step amplitude of −3 K.
perature profiles according to assumed temperature drops of −3 and −6 K,
respectively, and permeability depth structures resulting from inversion (see
k−3 K and k−6 K in Table 4). 5.2 Results based on shallow temperature profiles
and data from SG-3
For testing whether deep temperature data can help to separate the
respective effects and to obtain a better understanding of the role
of the deep rock units for advective heat transport, we simulated by
is available on this parameter. Thus, we avoid fixing permeability
forward modelling the temperature profiles also at the location of
to small and potentially erroneous ranges.
SG-3. This was done for purely conductive heat transport models
The resulting (inverted) permeabilities k−3 K and k−6 K are given
with different palaeoclimatic temperature changes as well as for
in Table 4, while the corresponding temperature profiles are shown
conductive-advective multiunit models with different permeability–
in Fig. 6. The observed temperature can be explained equally well
depth distributions and a fixed surface temperature decrease of −3 K
by a strong cooling of −18 K during the LGC or by an only moderate
during the LGC.
temperature decrease of −3 K and advective processes with small
We used three permeability–depth distributions (ki , kii and kiii ;
residuals below 1 K.
given in Table 5) to study in particular the effect of high perme-
As can be expected from an inversion procedure, the fit is very
abilites in unit 3 and unit 5. For all cases, we assumed a low per-
good. The main characteristic of these conductive-advective models
meability of 10−18 m2 in all units, except (i) 10−13 m2 in unit 5, (ii)
is a high permeability around 10−12 m2 in the mylonitic shear zone,
10−15 and 5 × 10−13 m2 in units 3 and 5, respectively and (iii) 5 ×
indicating the importance of the Luchlompolo fault zone for the
10−16 m2 in unit 3.
tectonic history of the Kola peninsula. We show here the findings
The resulting temperature profiles are shown in Fig. 7 together
for the shallow borehole 3200, but they are pretty much the same
with temperatures in SG-3 (Popov et al. 1999). In order to the
for all seven shallow boreholes (marked in Fig. 1).
effects of fluid flow and palaeoclimate more visible, we references
Fig. 6 clearly demonstrates the non-uniqueness of our problem
the temperatures to a purely conductive steady-state temperature
when performing the joint inversion. Numerical test showed that as-
profile at the respective site.
suming palaeotemperature amplitudes of −3 to −18 K at the surface
The similarity of the shapes of the plotted curves in Fig. 7 above
together with heat advection resulting from appropriate hydraulic
about 1000 m illustrates that only beneath a depth of 1000 m below
properties may explain the observations in the shallow boreholes.
sea level the two processes can be clearly distinguished. Conse-
Therefore, it is impossible to distinguish between the effects of heat
quently, a data set from a sufficient depth is essential for obtaining
advection due to groundwater flow and transient downward diffu-
unique estimates. Therefore, the temperature profile of the super-
sion of past subsurface temperature variations based on the shallow
deep borehole SG-3 has to be taken into account at least partially
boreholes alone. In particular, a palaeotemperature step amplitude
for a successful inversion—even though we have less control on the
of −18 K in a purely conductive model fits the shallow data quite
measurement conditions in this case.
well as shown in Fig. 6.
Therefore, in a next step, we accounted for temperature data from
the super-deep borehole SG-3 and from the other seven shallow
5.2.1 Joint inversion for permeability and post-glacial warming
boreholes (see Fig. 1) in a joint inversion for studying whether the
individual contributions of both processes may be distinguished. For providing best estimates and covariances, we performed a joint
That is, we inverted jointly for the permeabilities of the rock units inversion for permeability and palaeocooling based on a transient
and the palaeotemperature step. model for conductive-advective transport. To this end, we used the
838 C. Vogt et al.

Downloaded from http://gji.oxfordjournals.org/ at Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies on September 11, 2014
Figure 8. Temperature difference T between simulated and measured tem-
peratures for the super-deep borehole SG-3. Lines correspond to transient
simulations accounting for the downward diffusion of a sudden decrease of
surface temperature between 15 and 90 ka BP. Symbols represent tempera-
tures from purely conductive steady-state simulations (circles) and temper-
atures from joint inversions of coupled diffusion and advection for a single-
and a multiunit model (triangles and squares, respectively).
Figure 9. Temperature difference T between simulated and measured
temperatures for boreholes 2271, 3359, 3356, 3209, 3200, 2915 and 2400
data from the shallow boreholes and from a section of the SG-3 located nearby the Kola super-deep borehole SG-3 (see Fig. 1). Symbols are
temperature profile between 2000 and 5000 m (see Section 2.2). explained in the caption of Fig. 8.
Even though data from SG-3 suffer from a larger error (1 K), deep
data are vital for a joint inversion, as shown in the previous section.
This corroborates our result that temperature observations from
Prior values and errors for permeability were set in the same way
shallow boreholes—while indispensable for information of the up-
as described above. We assumed a prior value for the palaeotem-
per 1 km and also for providing an areal coverage—are not suf-
perature step amplitude of −6 K ± 2 K at the top model boundary,
ficient for discriminating between different GSTHs for the glacial
in accordance with our previous results based on shallow boreholes
period. Fig. 9 also shows that the residuals do not scatter arbitrarily
and results of Mottaghy (2007).
around zero but correlated with depth. This implies some additional
For the single-unit approach (i.e. exponential decrease of perme-
depth-dependent factors influencing the temperature, such as het-
ability with depth (see eq. 8), we estimated the zero-depth perme-
erogeneity not captured by the simplified model geometry or the
ability k0 by numerical Bayesian inversion (eq. 5 and eq. 6) to about
simplified step function used for the GSTH. Therefore, any uncer-
6 × 10−15 m2 , the corresponding ‘optimal’ palaeotemperature step
tainty estimate can only be an approximation.
amplitude was −0.6 K, which corresponds to a surface tempera-
Regarding the posterior permeability of the multiunit model
ture of 0.4 ◦ C. For the multiunit approach, Table 5 lists the prior
(Table 3), it turned out that in the mylonitic shear zone (unit 5),
permeability values k1 and the values k2 obtained by the numerical
it is considerably increased (by three orders of magnitude) com-
joint inversion for units 2–5. The corresponding palaeotemperature
pared to the prior assumption. In the top geological layer (unit 2),
step amplitude was −0.3 K, which corresponds to a temperature of
it is slightly increased, but reduced again in the thin layer beneath
0.7 ◦ C. Hence, a very small palaeotemperature step amplitude is re-
(unit 3).
quired for fitting the observed temperature profile down to 5 km for
both assumptions on the subsurface permeability distribution. For
the model with an exponential decrease of permeability with depth,
the temperature step amplitude is positive, implying a temperature 5.2.2 Errors and parameter resolution
that was even higher during glaciation than today, which seems to
be unlikely. For characterizing the information content of the inverse solution,
In Fig. 8, we plotted the temperature depth profile at SG-3 based we calculate the posterior covariance matrix (Tarantola 2004), which
on the two conduction-advection inversion results (single-unit and is meaningful in a linear neighbourhood around the MAP estimate.
multiunit model) and on the transient conductive model for various Keeping in mind this assumption, this symmetric matrix can be
palaeotemperature step amplitudes at the surface. written as
Clearly, the best fit of the SG-3 temperature data below 1500 m  −1
C p,post = JT C−1 −1
d,prior J + C p,prior . (8)
depth is obtained with the multiunit model. As suggested by the
inversion for the shallow temperature data in well 3200, the fit for In contrast to the prior covariance matrix C p,prior , which was
the temperature data of all seven shallow wells is equally good for assumed to be diagonal in this study, this new covariance matrix
the purely conductive model with T = −18 K and the single-unit, is fully occupied in general. While the diagonal elements can be
and multiunit models with the small temperature step amplitudes of used for estimating the errors of the corresponding parameters, the
−0.6 and −0.3 K, respectively (see Fig. 9). relations between different parameters induced by the particular

Figure 10. Correlation matrix M (see eq. 9), illustrating the correlations be-
tween the different parameters. Note the strong anti-correlation between unit
2 and unit 5. The temperature amplitude T seem reasonably well resolved
independently, showing no significant correlation with other parameters.
prior information can be studied with the help of the correlation
matrix M (Tarantola 2004). It is calculated from the covariance as
Ci j
Mi j = . (9)
Ci j · Ci j
M inherits symmetry from C p,post and can be interpreted
more easily than this matrix, as it is normalized to the range
−1 ≤ M(i, j) ≤ +1. A value of ±1 indicates perfect correlation
or anti-correlation.
Prior errors were assumed to be two orders of magnitude in per-
meability for units 2–5 and 2 K for the palaeotemperature step
amplitude. The final estimation errors are defined by the posterior
covariance matrix in eq. (8). The inversion indicates that a sig-
nificant uncertainty reduction is obtained by our joint numerical
inversion only for unit 2 and unit 5 and for the palaeotemperature
step amplitude.
For the prior model, we assumed slightly increased permeabil-
ities in unit 3 and unit 5, but inversion yielded slightly increased
permeability in unit 2 and a high permeability in unit 5. While
fluid circulation in the deep and thick unit 5 is essential for fitting
the temperature profile, fluid flow in the thin unit 3 seems to be
insignificant with respect to the temperature profile at the given
resolution. However, the permeabilities of unit 2 and unit 5 can-
not be estimated independently from each other, because they are
strongly anti-correlated as shown by the correlation matrix (Fig. 10)
computed using eq. (9).
For both, the single-unit and the multiunits models, the poste-
rior error of the palaeotemperature step amplitude is 0.2 ◦ C, with
corresponding estimated surface temperatures close to 0 ◦ C. Thus,
our results support the assumption of near-melting conditions at the
base of the ice sheet at this site. For the ice thicknesses simulated
by Tarasov (2013), melting would occur between −0.5 and −1 ◦ C
(e.g. Marshall 2012).
However, also, the goodness-of-fit as given by the root-mean-
square (rms) needs to be considered. It is defined as
 the data. This is not surprising considering the various unknowns
 

Fluid flow or palaeoclimate, Kola borehole 839
Here, T sim denotes the simulated temperature, T obs the observed
temperature, σ T its error, nd the number of data, and np  nd the
number of parameters. A rms of 1 indicates a fit within the given
prior errors.
For the multiunit approach, the rms equals about 1, while for
the single-unit approach, it equals about 1.5. The smaller rms for
the multiunit approach reflects the improved fit of the multiunit
approach as shown in Fig. 8. Since the rms for the single-unit
approach does not equal about 1, the posterior variance needs to be
multiplied with rms2 for obtaining a meaningful error estimate (e.g.
Hill & Tiedeman 2006). Resulting logarithmic errors are less than
one order of magnitude in unit 2 and unit 5 for both the multiunit
approach and the single-unit approach. Thus, the uncertainty is
drastically decreased by the inversion. Given the lack of data at
greater depth, the posterior uncertainty in units 2 and 5 seems
acceptable for identifying the influence of fluid flow. The uncertainty
Downloaded from http://gji.oxfordjournals.org/ at Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies on September 11, 2014
for units 3 and 4 is not reduced by the inversion, remaining on the
order of two magnitudes. Again, the rms indicates the multiunit
approach as preferable compared to the single-unit approach. While
generally more free parameters yield better fits but not necessarily
more information, the multiunit approach also captures the overall
geology more appropriately.
Taking into account the covariance matrix information, the ac-
tive flow zones represented by unit 2, and in particular by unit 5
dominate the estimation of the optimal subsurface properties. At
the same time, they help fitting the observed temperatures even
at great depths. Interestingly, unit 5 is supposed to be a high-
permeability zone according to prior geological information (Vidal
1984), whereas unit 2 is not. Fluid flow in the other units, including
the supposed high permeability unit 3, does more or less not affect
the fit of the temperature field. However, the permeabilities of unit
2 and unit 5 cannot be identified independently as they are strongly
anti-correlated. This is indicated clearly by the correlation matrix
M. Surprisingly, this matrix also indicates no significant correlation
between palaeotemperature and permeabilities.
5.2.3 Vertical variation of heat flow
Fig. 11 shows the vertical component of heat flow at the Kola
super-deep borehole SG-3 reported by Borevsky et al. (1987) and
Popov et al. (1999) based on observed data and laboratory mea-
surements, and on the results of our numerical models. The curve
of Popov et al. (1999) based on high-resolution temperature mea-
surements and thousands of thermal conductivity measurements on
rock samples shows large variations with depth with a rather small
uncertainty on the order of ±4 mW m−2 (Popov et al. 1999). In
contrast, the vertical profile of heat flow by Borevsky et al. (1987)
represents an average value over greater depth intervals. The mod-
elled curves are shown for the case of a transient conductive model
with −18 K temperature decrease during the LGM, and for the mul-
tiunit and single-unit conductive-advective models with parameters
for permeability and temperature step obtained by inversion. Be-
low, a depth of about 5 km heat flow for all three models converges,
since at that depth, advection is negligible and only conductive heat
transport is relevant.
Comparison of the model results and the observed heat flow
shows that none of our modelling results can exactly reproduce
T sim −T obs 2 and simplifications in our study. In particular, heat flow might

σT be too small in our models in the mylonitic shear zone (unit
rms = .
nd − n p 5) at depths between 4500 and 5000 m. As Popov et al. (1999)
840 C. Vogt et al.
Figure 11. Vertical component of specific heat flow q at the Kola super-
deep borehole SG-3 according to observations (full and dotted black lines;
the curve of Popov et al. 1999, is smoothed) and our numerical models (red
dotted line: result of a transient conductive model with −18 K temperature
drop during the last glacial; green squares and blue triangles: results of
multiunit and single-unit conductive-advective models with parameters for
permeability and temperature step obtained by inversion).
conclude, purely conductive heat flow cannot explain this increase
up to nearly 80 mW m−2 . They attribute this non-conductive regime
to the presence of a fracture zone with fluid flow, which is, however,
not separately resolved in our model. It is rather approximated by
the bulk parameters of unit 5, yielding lower heat flow values.
In general, the multiunit approach (green squares in Fig. 10)
generally agrees with the trend of the observations. An important
result is that we can explain this trend with parameters estimated
only by using data from a maximum depth of ≈5000 m, since fluid
flow and heat transport follow inclined structures from these shallow
depths to deeper regions of the model in this particular geological
setting. This enhances the confidence in this estimated parameter
configuration. Geological units encountered in the shallow depths
are similar to those at larger depths. This justifies the extrapolation
of rock properties to large depths to a certain degree, of course,
taking into account the P-T-dependence.
6 D I S C U S S I O N A N D C O N C LU S I O N
In this study, we used temperature–depth profiles from a number of
shallow wells (down to 1000 m), and from the Kola super-deep bore-
hole SG-3 down to 5000 m for assessing the impact of past surface
temperature changes during the last glacial period on the subsurface
temperature regime, and to evaluate the individual contributions of
conductive and advective heat transport.
We used forward and inverse modelling for estimating the per-
meability of the various geological layers in the subsurface and the
increase of surface palaeotemperature at the end of the last glacial.
We demonstrated that an analysis including only data from shal-
low boreholes is ambiguous and does not allow discriminating be-
tween conductive and advective processes affecting the temperature
gradient in the Kola region.
In principle, palaeotemperatures of 18 K lower than today may
explain the observations from shallow boreholes without any con-
tribution of heat advection. However, the majority of boreholes is
shallower than 1000 m. Compared to the depth of the maximum
peak of the reduced temperature (Fig. 7), this indicates already that
temperatures from shallow boreholes are insufficient for identifying
the glacial signal properly. Therefore, in a second step, we consid-
ered data from the deeper parts of the super-deep borehole SG-3.
Combining the data from the deep well with those from the shallow
wells is important, compared to only considering data from SG-3
alone, because they show a spatial change in vertical thermal gra-
dient which cannot be explained by a (constant) surface palaeotem-
perature change. Indeed, including data from the deeper parts of the
super-deep borehole SG-3 contradicts a purely conductive regime
and such a low palaeotemperature.
Therefore, we considered significant fluid flow consistent with the
supposed permeability distribution and known surface topography.
One may conclude that deep temperature data are best to estimate
the advective fluid flow in (deep) highly permeable layers, while
shallower data are best to estimate the palaeotemperature change
which is closer to the surface. However, as mentioned above, the
Downloaded from http://gji.oxfordjournals.org/ at Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies on September 11, 2014
geometry of the local geology of the Kola peninsula is complicated
and units with considerable advective flow even outcrop in the north
and east of our model (see Fig. 3). Thus, the shallow boreholes are
not uniformly far away from the units with considerable advective
flow. Therefore, fluid flow in these units also contributes to the
temperatures measured in the shallow wells.
From a transient joint inversion of permeabilites and palaeotem-
perature, the best fit of the observed temperatures supposes
palaeotemperatures very near to 0 ◦ C and advective transport within
a dipping high permeable structure. As the geometry of units is fixed
(by geological prior knowledge) in our model, this process is located
in unit 5 (yellow colour in Fig. 3) by the inversion algorithm. The
combined model leads to a consistent interpretation of both data
sets (SG-3 and shallow wells).
The result indicates near-melting conditions at the base of the ice
sheet. Independent palaeoclimatic observations as well as simula-
tion results indicate a long duration (20 ka), large thickness of ice
cover and moderate basal velocities for the Kola region (Siegert &
Dowdeswell 1998; Hagdorn 2003; Forsström 2005; Tarasov 2013;
Kleman et al. 2013). Thus, large palaeotemperature step amplitudes
(<−7 K) seem unlikely. We conclude that a combination of fluid
flow and palaeoclimate with a low to moderate postglacial tempera-
ture step is the most plausible explanation of the observed variation
in the vertical temperature gradient. It should also be pointed out
that a temperature at the base of the ice sheet not much lower than
present has also been found by several studies for the Canadian
Ice sheet (Sass et al. 1971; Rolandone et al. 2003; Chouinard &
Mareschal 2009), and was inferred for the Fennoscandian Ice Sheet
by Kukkonen & Joeleht (2003). However, no ice sheet is homo-
geneously at melting conditions, neither in space not in time. At
the Kola location state-of-the-art glacial system modelling (Tarasov
2013, personal communications) shows that this result is consistent
with ice sheet physics and climatic development, as it was a site of
high ice velocities during most of the LGM.
The favoured hydrogeological model employs a small number of
geologically motivated units. Permeability is assigned to each unit
individually, and is assumed to decrease exponentially with depth
within each unit (eq. 7). Small-scale variations of thermal properties
were not considered in this study and are of minor importance
compared to the studied effects of advection and palaeotemperature
diffusion, as was shown by Mottaghy et al. (2005) and Mottaghy
(2007). All results are based on a fixed value of basal heat flow,
which is a first assumption. The value of 46 mW m−2 at 10 km depth
used in this study might be wrong by ±(3–5) mW m−2 (Popov et al.
1999). Additionally, it is likely to vary laterally at a depth of 12 km
due to the dip of the geological layers.

We tested our results from the shallow boreholes against the heat
flow obtained for the SG-3 (Popov et al. 1999). This is, at least partly,
an independent test, since thermal conductivities in the various units
had not been adjusted by the inversion. Our favoured heat flow for
the multiunit configuration is consistent with the data, in particular
at depths below 5000 m in the super-deep borehole SG-3. The
improved fit of our modelled heat flow below 5000 m also represents
the main improvement of our modelling approach compared to the
results of Mottaghy et al. (2005) (see Fig. 2). Moreover, we used
a fully 3-D model including all available geological information,
while Mottaghy (2007) only performed 3-D forward modelling and
1-D inverse modelling.
In addition to best estimates for palaeotemperature and perme-
ability, the inversion also provides parameter covariances and corre-
lations. A more detailed study of resolution also favours a multiunit
model but indicates that the permeabilities of unit 2 (top geological
unit) and unit 5 (mylonitic shear zone below 4500 m) cannot be
identified independently from each other. Despite this, the observed
heat flow below 4500 m, of up to 80 mW m−2 as well as increased
3
He/4 He ratios below 3500 m (Gorbatsevich et al. 2010) indicate a
fractured region providing pathways for motion of fluid (including
3
He) from greater depth. While our inverted permeability for unit
5 (between 5 × 10−13 m2 and 2 × 10−12 m2 ) is probably overesti-
mated, however, an increased permeability in this unit is very likely
and consistent with Gorbatsevich et al. (2010). Thus, within the
limitations of the approach, the individual contributions to the heat
flow by fluid flow driven heat advection and transient downward
diffusion of past surface temperature variations can be identified.
Since we combined all available information with respect to the
appropriate resolution of the multiunit model, the values obtained
for permeability and palaeotemperature may be considered best
estimates in view of data quality and estimation errors.
This being said, our results still leave several questions unan-
swered. Although we presumably captured the main geological fea-
tures in our subsurface model, there is clearly room for model im-
provement. The most important limitations of the current study are
related to the complex glaciation history of the area. The Fennoscan-
dian ice sheet had important effects on subsurface conditions, in
addition to the changes in surface temperature involved. The ice
sheet of the LGM also produced a huge water pressure pulse at
the surface which would conservatively amount to up to 10 MPa
(corresponding to a hydraulic head of about 1000 m). Deep migra-
tion of subglacial waters into the subsurface is well known in many
sedimentary basins worldwide (e.g. Person et al. 2007; Bense &
Person 2008; Lemieux et al. 2008). Lately, it has been found im-
portant in crystalline areas in the context of nuclear waste disposal
(Neuzil 2012; Person et al. 2012a,b; Provost et al. 2012; Vidstrand
et al. 2013). Both the hydrogeological conditions at the base of the
ice sheet and the thermal consequences are not well known. In par-
ticular, the interaction with existing hydrogeologically important
structures (e.g. fault zones) needs further research. Furthermore,
the deformation of the crust originating from the burden of the ice
masses will probably have an effect on crustal permeability. With
regional ice sheet models (e.g. Tarasov 2013) and reconstructions
developing rapidly (e.g. Gyllencreutz et al. 2007; Mangerud et al.
2011), more sophisticated studies may be feasible in the future.
AC K N OW L E D G E M E N T S
This project was funded by the National German Science Foun-
dation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft) under research grant
Fluid flow or palaeoclimate, Kola borehole 841
CL 121/4-4 to Christoph Clauser. We thank Yuri Popov for pro-
viding digital temperature data for the Kola super-deep borehole.
Volker Rath was funded by the Spanish Government by its Ramón
y Cajal Program, project CCG10-UCM/ESP-5070 (Comunidad de
Madrid/UCM) and project CGL2011-29672-C02-01 (Ministerio de
Economı́a y Competitividad).
REFERENCES
Bartlett, M.G., Chapman, D.S. & Harris, R.N., 2004. Snow and the ground
temperature record of climate change, J. geophys. Res., 109, F04008,
doi:10.1029/2004JF000224.
Bartlett, M.G., Chapman, D.S. & Harris, R.N., 2005. Snow effect on
north American ground temperatures, 1950–2002, J. geophys. Res., 110,
F03008, doi:10.1029/2005JF000293.
Downloaded from http://gji.oxfordjournals.org/ at Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies on September 11, 2014
Beardsmore, G.R. & Cull, J.P., 2001. Crustal Heat Flow, Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Bense, V. & Person, M.A., 2008. Transient hydrodynamics within inter-
cratonic sedimentary basins during glacial cycles, J. geophys. Res., 113,
F04005, doi:10.1029/2007JF000969.
Boettger, T., Hiller, A., Kremenetski, C. & Friedrich, M., 2003. Interrelations
between climatic changes and northern and alpine Holocene pine-limit
movements ? Deduced from stable isotope signals of 14C-dated subfossil
pines (Pinus sylvestris L.) on the Kola Peninsula, northwestern Russia, in
TRACE—Tree Rings in Archaeology, Climatology and Ecology, Proceed-
ings of the DENDROSYMPOSIUM 2002, Bonn/Jülich, Germany, Vol. 33,
pp. 52–59.
Borevsky, L.V., Vartanyan, G.S. & Kulikov, T.B., 1987. Hydrological essay,
in The Superdeep Well of the Kola Peninsula, pp. 271–287, ed. Kozlovsky,
Y.A., Springer.
Boulton, G., Dongelmans, P., Punkari, M. & Broadgate, M., 2001.
Palaeoglaciology of an ice sheet through a glacial cycle: the Euro-
pean ice sheet through the Weichselian, Quat. Sci. Rev., 20(4), 591–
625.
Bromwich, D.H., Toracinta, E.R., Oglesby, R.J., Fastook, J.L. & Hughes,
T.J., 2005. Lgm summer climate on the southern margin of the Laurentide
ice sheet: wet or dry?, J. Climate, 18(16), 3317–3338.
Chouinard, C. & Mareschal, J.-C., 2009. Ground surface temperature history
in southern Canada: temperatures at the base of the Laurentide ice sheet
and during the Holocene, Earth planet. Sci. Lett., 277, 280–289.
Clauser, C., 1984. A climatic correction on temperature gradients us-
ing surface-temperature series of various periods, Tectonophysics, 103,
33–46.
Clauser, C., 2003. Numerical Simulation of Reactive Flow in Hot Aquifers,
Springer-Verlag.
Clauser, C. et al., 1997. The thermal regime of the crystalline continental
crust: implications from the KTB, J. geophys. Res., 102(B8), 18 417–
18 441.
Clauser, C., Popov, Y. & Kukkonen, I.T., 1999. Heat transfer processes
in the upper crust — a detailed geothermal and hydrological study in
the area of the Kola deep hole, Russia, Final report, intas-93-273-ext,
Archiv Nr. 119469, Leibniz Institute for Applied Geosciences, Hannover,
Germany.
Cooley, R.L., 2004. A theory for modeling ground-water flow in heteroge-
neous media, Professional Paper 1679, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS),
Reston VA, Available at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/1679/report.pdf (last
accessed 19 August 2014).
Darcy, H., 1856. Les Fontaines Publiques de la Ville de Dijon, Dalmont.
de Marsily, G., 1986. Quantitative Hydrogeology, Academic Press.
Demezhko, D.Y., Gornostaeva, A.A., Tarkhanov, G.V. & Esipko, O.A., 2013.
30,000 years of ground surface temperature and heat flux changes in
Karelia reconstructed from borehole temperature data, Bull. Geogr. Phys.
Geogr. Ser., 6, 7–25.
Diersch, H.J.-G. & Kolditz, O., 2002. Variable-density flow and transport
in porous media: approaches and challenges, Adv. Water Resour., 25,
899–944.
842 C. Vogt et al.
Elina, G.A., Lukashov, A.D. & Yurkovskaya, T.K., 2010. Late Glacial
and Holocene – Palaeovegetation and Palaeogeography of Eastern
Fennoscandia, no. 4 in The Finnish Environment, The Finnish Environ-
ment Institute, Natural Environment Centre.
Fernandez, M., Marzan, I. & Ramalho, A.C.E., 1998. Heat flow, heat produc-
tion, and lithospheric thermal regime in the Iberian Peninsula, Tectono-
physics, 291, 29–53.
Forsström, P.-L., 2005. Through a glacial cycle: simulation of the Eurasian
ice sheet dynamics during the last glaciation, PhD thesis, Helsinki
University.
Giering, R. & Kaminski, T., 1998. Recipes for adjoint code construction,
ACM Trans. Math Softw., 24(4), 437–474.
Glaznev, V.N., Kukkonen, I.T., Raevskii, A.B. & Jokinen, J., 2004. New data
on thermal flow in the central part of the Kola peninsula, Doklady Earth
Sci., 396, 512–514.
Golovanova, I.V., Puchkov, V.N., Salmanova, R.Y. & Demezhko, D.Y., 2008.
A new version of the heat flow map of the Urals with paleoclimatic
corrections, Doklady Earth Sci., 422(7), 1153–1156.
Gorbatsevich, F.F., Ikorsky, S.V. & Zharikov, A.V., 2010. Structure and
permeability of deep-seated rocks in the Kola superdeep borehole section
(SG-3), Acta Geodyn. Geomater., 7(2), 145–152.
Griewank, A. & Walther, A., 2008. Evaluating Derivatives: Principles and
Techniques of Algorithmic Differentiation, 2nd edn, no. 105 in Applied
Mathematics, SIAM.
Gyllencreutz, R., Mangerud, J., Svendsen, J.-I. & Lohne, Ø., 2007. DATED –
a GIS-based reconstruction and dating database of the Eurasian deglacia-
tion, in Applied Quaternary Research in the Central Part of Glaciated
Terrain, vol. 46 of Special Paper, pp. 113–120, eds Johansson, P. & Sar-
ala, P., Geological Survey of Finland.
Hagdorn, M.K.M., 2003. Reconstruction of the past and forecast of the
Future European and British Ice sheets and associated sealevel change,
PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh.
Harrison, S.P., Kutzbach, J.E., Prentice, C.E., Behling, P.J. & Sykes, M.T.,
1995. The response of northern hemisphere extratropical climate and
vegetation to orbitally induced changes in insolation during the last inter-
glaciation, Quat. Res., 43, 174–184.
Hascoët, L. & Pascual, V., 2013. The Tapenade automatic differentiation
tool: Principles, model, and specification, ACM Tran. Math. Softw., 39(3),
20:1–20:43.
Hättestrand, C. & Clark, C., 2006a. The glacial geomorphology of Kola
Peninsula and adjacent areas in the Murmansk region, Russia, J. Maps,
2006, 30–42.
Hättestrand, C. & Clark, C., 2006b. Reconstructing the pattern and style of
deglaciation of Kola Peninsula, NE Fennoscandian Ice Sheet, in Glaciol-
ogy and Earth’s Changing Environment, Chap. 39, pp. 199–201, ed.
Knight, P., Blackwell.
Heikkilä, M. & Seppä, H., 2003. A 11,000 yr palaeotemperature recon-
struction from the southern boreal zone in Finland, Quat. Sci. Rev., 22,
541–554.
Hill, M.C. & Tiedeman, C.R., 2006. Effective Model Calibration: With
Analysis of Data, Sensitivities, Predictions, and Uncertainty, Wiley.
Hotchkiss, W. & Ingersoll, L., 1934. Post-glacial time calculations from
recent geothermal measurements in the Calumet copper mines, J. Geol.,
42, 113–142.
Hubberten, H.W. et al., 2004. The periglacial climate and environment in
northern Eurasia during the last glaciation, Quat. Sci. Rev., 23(11–13),
1333–1357.
Huyakorn, P.S. & Pinder, G.F., 1983. Computational Methods in Subsurface
Flow, Academic Press.
Jones, P.D., Lister, D.H., Osborn, T.J., Harpham, C., Salmon, M. & Morice,
C.P., 2012. Hemispheric and large-scale land-surface air temperature vari-
ations: an extensive revision and an update to 2010, J. geophys. Res., 117,
D05127, doi:10.1029/2011JD017139.
Jost, A., Lunt, D., Kageyama, M., Abe-Ouchi, A., Peyron, O., Valdes, P.J. &
Ramstein, G., 2005. High-resolution simulations of the last glacial max-
imum climate over Europe: a solution to discrepancies with continental
palaeoclimatic reconstructions, Climate Dyn., 24, 577–590.
Kageyama, M., Peyron, O., Pinot, S., Tarasov, P., Guiot, J., Joussaume,
S. & Ramstein, G., 2001. The last glacial maximum climate over the
Europe and western Siberia: a PMIP comparison between models and
data, Climate Dyn., 17, 23–43.
Kim, S.-J., Crowley, T.J., Erickson, D.J., Govindasamy, B., Duffy, P.B. &
Lee, B.Y., 2008. High-resolution climate simulation of the last glacial
maximum, Climate Dyn., 31, 1–16.
Kleman, J., Fastook, J., Ebert, K., Nilsson, J. & Caballero, R., 2013. Pre-lgm
northern hemisphere ice sheet topography, Climate Past, 9(5), 2365–
2378.
Kohl, T., 1998. Paleoclimatic temperature signals – can they be washed out?,
Tectonophysics, 291, 225–234.
Kolditz, O., Ratke, R., Diersch, H.-J.G. & Zielke, W., 1998. Coupled ground-
water flow and transport: 1. Verification of variable density flowand trans-
port models, Adv. Water Resour., 21, 21–46.
Kozlovsky, Y.A. ed., 1987. The Superdeep Well of the Kola Peninsula,
Springer-Verlag.
Downloaded from http://gji.oxfordjournals.org/ at Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies on September 11, 2014
Kremenetsky, A. & Ovchinnikov, L., 1986. The precambrian continental
crust: its structure, composition and evolution as revealed by deep drilling
in the USSR, Precambrian Res., 33, 11–43.
Krinner, G., Mangerud, J., Jakobsson, M., Crucifix, M., Ritz, C. & Svendsen,
J.I., 2004. Enhanced ice sheet growth in Eurasia owing to adjacent ice-
dammed lakes, Nature, 427, 427–432.
Kukkonen, I.T., 1987. Vertical variation of apparent and palaeoclimatically
corrected heat flow densities in the central baltic shield, J. Geodyn., 8,
33–53.
Kukkonen, I.T. & Clauser, C., 1994. Simulation of heat transfer at the Kola
deep-hole site: implications for advection, heat refraction and paleocli-
matic effects, Geophys. J. Int., 116, 409–420.
Kukkonen, I.T., Gosnold, W.D. & Šafanda, J., 1998. Anomalously low heat
flow density in eastern Karelia, Baltic Shield: a possible palaeoclimatic
signature, Tectonophysics, 291(1–4), 235–249.
Kukkonen, I.T. & Joeleht, A., 2003. Weichselian temperatures from
geothermal heat flow data, J. geophys. Res., 108(B3), 2163,
doi:10.1029/2001JB001579.
Kukkonen, I.T., Rath, V., Kivekäs, L., Šafanda, J. & Čermak, V., 2011.
Geothermal studies of the Outokumpu Deep Drill Hole, Finland: vertical
variation in heat flow and palaeoclimatic implications, Phys. Earth planet.
Inter., 188, 9–25.
Lemieux, J.-M., Sudicky, E.A., Peltier, W.R. & Tarasov, L., 2008. Dynam-
ics of groundwater recharge and seepage over the Canadian landscape
during the Wisconsinian glaciation, J. geophys. Res., 113, F01011, doi:
10.1029/2007JF000838.
Luterbacher, J., Dietrich, D., Xoplaki, E., Grosjean, M. & Wanner, H.,
2004. European seasonal and annual temperature variability, trends and
extremes since 1500, Science, 303, 1499–1503.
Lynch, D.R., 2005. Numerical Partial Differential Equations for En-
vironmental Scientists and Engineers: A First Practical Course,
Springer.
Majorowicz, J. & Šafanda, J.S. Torun-1 Working Group, 2007. Heat
flow variation with depth in Poland: evidence from equilibrium tem-
perature logs in 2.9-km-deep well Torun-1, Int. J. Earth Sci., 97,
doi:10.1007/s00531-007-0210-2.
Majorowicz, J. & Wybraniec, S., 2010. New terrestrial heat flow map of
europe after regional paleoclimatic correction application, Int. J. Earth
Sci., 100(4), 881–887.
Mangerud, J., Gyllencreutz, R., Lohne, O. & Svendsen, J.I., 2011. Glacial
history of norway, in Quaternary Glaciations–Extent and Chronology: A
Closer Look, vol. 15 of Developments in Quaternary Sciences, pp. 279–
298, eds. Ehlers, J., Gibbard, P.L. & Hughes, P.D., Elsevier.
Manning, C.E. & Ingebritsen, S.E., 1999. Permeability of the continental
crust: implications of geothermal data and metamorphic systems, Rev.
Geophys., 37, 127–150.
Marshall, S.J., 2012. The Cryosphere, Princeton University Press.
Mottaghy, D., 2007. Heat transfer processes in the upper crust: influence
of structure, fluid flow, and paleoclimate, Doctoral dissertation, RWTH
Aachen University.

Mottaghy, D. & Rath, V., 2007. Paleoclimate from the surroundings of the
Kola deep drilling site: influences of topography and fluid flow?, Geophys.
Res. Abstr., 9, EGU2007-A-02019.
Mottaghy, D., Popov, Y.A., Schellschmidt, R., Clauser, C., Kukkonen, I.T.,
Nover, G., Milanovsky, S. & Romushkevich, R.A., 2005. New heat
flow data from the immediate vicinity of the Kola superdeep borehole:
vertical variation in heat flow density confirmed, Tectonophysics,
401(1–2), 119–142.
NEDRA, 1992. Characterization of crystalline rocks in deep boreholes.
The Kola, Krivoy Rog and Tyrnauz boreholes, Tech. Rep. TR-92-39,
SKB.
Neuzil, C.E., 2012. Hydromechanical effects of continental glaciation on
groundwater systems, Geofluids, 12(1), 22–37.
Nocedal, J. & Wright, S.J., 1999. Numerical Optimization, Springer.
Person, M., McIntosh, J., Bense, V. & Remenda, V.H., 2007. Pleis-
tocene hydrology of North America: the role of ice sheets in reor-
ganizing groundwater flow systems, Rev. Geophys., 45, RG3007, doi:
10.1029/2006RG000206.
Person, M., Bense, V., Cohen, D. & Banerjee, A., 2012a. Models of ice-sheet
hydrogeologic interactions: a review, Geofluids, 12(1), 58–78.
Person, M., McIntosh, J., Iverson, N., Neuzil, C.E. & Bense, V., 2012b.
Geologic isolation of nuclear waste at high latitudes: the role of ice sheets,
Geofluids, 12(1), 1–6.
Peyaud, V., Ritz, C. & Krinner, G., 2007. Modelling the Early Weichselian
Eurasian Ice Sheets: role of ice shelves and influence of ice-dammed
lakes, Climate Past, 3, 375–386.
Phillips, S.L., Igbene, A., Fair, J.A., Ozbek, H. & Tavana, M., 1981.
A technical data book for geothermal energy utilization, Techni-
cal Report 12810 UC-66a, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, University
of California, Berkeley, CA, Available at: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/
abs/1981STIN...8212614P (last accessed 19 August 2014).
Popov, Y.A., Pevzner, S.L., Pimenov, V.P. & Romushkevich, R.A., 1999.
New geothermal data from the Kola superdeep well SG-3, Tectonophysics,
306, 345–366.
Provost, A.M., Voss, C.I. & Neuzil, C.E., 2012. Glaciation and re-
gional groundwater flow in the Fennoscandian shield, Geofluids, 12(1),
79–96.
Rall, L.B., 1981. Automatic Differentiation: Techniques and Applications,
vol. 120 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer.
Ramstein, G., Kageyama, M., Guiot, J., Wu, H., Hély, C., Krinner, G. &
Brewer, S., 2007. How cold was Europe at the last glacial maximum?
A synthesis of the progress achieved since the first PMIP model-data
comparison, Climate Past, 3, 331–339.
Rath, V. & Mottaghy, D., 2007. Smooth inversion for ground surface tem-
perature histories: estimating the optimum regularization parameter by
generalised cross-validation, Geophys. J. Int., 171(3), 1440–1448.
Rath, V., González-Rouco, J. & Goosse, H., 2012. Impact of postglacial
warming on borehole reconstructions of last millennium temperatures,
Climate Past, 8, 1059–1066.
Rath, V., Wolf, A. & Bücker, M., 2006. Joint three-dimensional inversion
of coupled groundwater flow and heat transfer based on automatic dif-
ferentiation: sensitivity calculation, verification, and synthetic examples,
Geophys. J. Int., 167, 453–466.
Rodgers, C.D., 1976. Retrieval of athmospheric temperature and composi-
tion from remote measurements of thermal radiation, Rev. geophys. Space
Phys., 14, 609–624.
Rolandone, F., Mareschal, J.-C. & Jaupart, C., 2003. Temperatures at the
base of the Laurentide Ice Sheet inferred from borehole temperature data,
Geophys. Res. Let., 30, 1944, doi:10.1029/2003GL018046.
Fluid flow or palaeoclimate, Kola borehole 843
Rühaak, W., Rath, V. & Clauser, C., 2010. Detecting thermal anomalies
within the Molasse Basin, Southern Germany, Hydrogeol. J., 18(8), 1897–
1915.
Sass, J.H., Lachenbruch, A.H. & Jessop, A.M., 1971. Uniform heat flow
in a deep hole in the Canadian Shield and its paleoclimatic implications,
J. geophys. Res., 76, 8586–8596.
Siegert, M.J. & Dowdeswell, J.A., 1998. Late Weichselian Glaciation of the
Russian High Arctic, Quat. Res., 52, 273–285.
Siegert, M.J. & Dowdeswell, J.A., 2004. Numerical reconstructions of the
Eurasian Ice Sheet and climate during the Late Weichselian, Quat. Sci.
Rev., 23(11–13), 1273–1283.
Slagstad, T., Balling, N., Elvebakk, H., Midttømme, K., Olesen, O., Olsen,
L. & Pascal, C., 2009. Heat-flow measurements in Late Palaeoprotero-
zoic to Permian geological provinces in south and central Norway and a
new heat-flow map of Fennoscandia and the Norwegian Greenland Sea,
Tectonophysics, 473, 341–361.
Smerdon, J.E., Pollack, H.N., Cermak, V., Enz, J.W., Kresl, M., Safanda,
Downloaded from http://gji.oxfordjournals.org/ at Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies on September 11, 2014
J. & Wehmiller, J.F., 2006. Daily, seasonal and annual relationships be-
tween air and subsurface temperatures, J. geophys. Res., 111, D07101,
doi:10.1029/2004JD005578.
Speedy, R.J., 1987. Thermodynamic properties of supercooled water at 1
atm, J. Phys. Chem., 91(12), 3354–3358.
Svendsen, J.I. et al., 2004. Late quaternary ice sheet history of northern
Eurasia, Quat. Sci. Rev., 23(11–13), 1229–1271.
Tarantola, A., 2004. Inverse Problem Theory. Methods for Model Pa-
rameter Estimation, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
(SIAM).
Tarantola, A. & Valette, B., 1982a. Generalized nonlinear inverse problems
solved using the least squares criterion, Rev. Geophys. Space Phys., 20(2),
219–232.
Tarantola, A. & Valette, B., 1982b. Inverse problems = quest for information,
J. Geophys., 50, 159–170.
Tarasov, L., 2013. GLAC-1b: a new data-constrained global deglacial ice
sheet reconstruction from glaciological modelling and the challenge of
missing ice, Geophys. Res. Abstr., 15, EGU2013-12342.
Vasseur, G. & Lucazeau, F., 1983. Bounds on paleotemperatures and pale-
oclimatic corrections, Zentralbl. Geol. Paleontol., 1, 17–24.
Vidal, H., 1984. The Kola super-deep borehole SG-3 – first look at the
deepest hole of the world, GeoJournal, 9(4), 431–432.
Vidstrand, P., Follin, S., Selroos, J.-O., Näslund, J.-O. & Rhén, I., 2013.
Modeling of groundwater flow at depth in crystalline rock beneath a mov-
ing ice-sheet margin, exemplified by the Fennoscandian Shield, Sweden,
Hydrogeol. J., 21(1), 239–255.
Westaway, R. & Younger, P.L., 2013. Accounting for palaeoclimate and
topography: a rigorous approach to correction of the British geothermal
dataset, Geothermics, 48, 31–51.
Wohlfarth, B., Lacourse, T., Bennike, O., Subetto, D., Tarasov, P., Demi-
dov, I., Filimonova, L. & Sapelko, T., 2007. Climatic and environmental
changes in north-western Russia between 15,000 and 8000 yr BP: a re-
view, Quat. Sci. Rev., 26(13–14), 1871–1883.
Wu, H., Guiot, J., Brewer, S. & Guo, Z., 2007. Climatic changes in Eurasia
and Africa at the last glacial maximum and mid-Holocene: reconstruction
from pollen data using inverse vegetation modelling, Climate Dyn., 29,
311–329.
Zylkovskij, G.A., Robinson, B.A., Dash, V.B. & Trease, L.L., 1994. Models
and methods summary for the FEHMN application, Technical Report
LA-UR-94-3787, Los Alamos Natioal Laboratory, Albuquerque NM,
Available at: https://fehm.lanl.gov/pdfs/fehm_mms.pdf (last accessed
19 August 2014).