USGS Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70209296

Drilling the central crater of the Chesapeake Bay Impact Structure: A first look

Ward E. Sanford·Gregory Gohn·David S. Powars·J. Wright Horton·Lucy E. Edwards·Jean Self-Trail·Roger H. Morin
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The late Eocene Chesapeake Bay impact structure is a well‐preserved example of one of Earth's largest impact craters, and its continental‐shelf setting and relatively shallow burial make it an excellent target for study. Since the discovery of the structure over a decade ago [ Edwards et al., 2004; Poag et al., 2004], test drilling by U.S. federal and state agencies has been limited to the structure's annular trough (Figure 1). In May 2004, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) drilled the first scientific test hole into the central crater of the Chesapeake Bay impact structure in Cape Charies,Virginia (Figure 1). This partially cored test hole, the deepest to date, penetrated postimpact sediments and impact breccias to a total depth of 823 m.

Explore related subjects

Eos, Earth and Space Science NewsArticle
90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 37.931200459333716° to 39.554883059924016° latitude; -77.27783203125° to -75.59692382812499° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Ward E. Sanford, Gregory Gohn, David S. Powars, J. Wright Horton, Lucy E. Edwards, Jean Self-Trail, Roger H. Morin. 2011-06-03. Drilling the central crater of the Chesapeake Bay Impact Structure: A first look. https://doi.org/10.1029/2004eo390001

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2020

Lessons from a post-eruption landscape

From March to May 1980, magma rose high into Mount St. Helens (MSH), swelling and—as it turned out—destabilizing its north flank. Scientists knew the volcano had been highly active at times over the past 40,000 years, but the mountain, located amid the Cascade Range in southwestern Washington, had been mostly quiet since the mid-19th century. The collapse of the north flank on 18 May shattered that quiet, triggering a cascade of events that left resounding impressions not only on those who witnessed and studied them but also on the surrounding landscape [Lipman and Mullineaux, 1981; Waitt, 2015]. The eruption of MSH also provided unparalleled opportunities for advancing several disciplines [e.g., Shore et al., 1986; Newhall, 2000; Franklin and MacMahon, 2000]. Although not as conspicuously as in volcanology, the eruption and its aftermath led to an intensification of research investigating biophysical impacts of eruptions and subsequent responses [e.g., Dale et al., 2005; Pierson and Major, 2014; Crisafulli and Dale, 2018]. Long-term research on the biophysical responses at MSH has provided important new insights, challenged long-standing ideas, and provided many societal benefits. The fortieth anniversary of the eruption this year offers a timely opportunity to reflect on these insights and influences. This long-term vantage is important because sustained, place-based studies following landscape disturbances are rare; because the MSH eruption spurred the greatest depth and breadth of multidisciplinary studies of biophysical responses to landscape disturbance; and because these responses created some of the most significant societal challenges to emerge after the eruption. We summarize key biophysical disturbances and responses, highlight salient insights, and suggest actions that can extend the usefulness of these insights to volcanically vulnerable communities worldwide.

Washington↗
USGS2020

Planetary cave exploration progresses

Planetary caves have been identified on the Moon and on Mars, and are likely to occur across the Solar System. They present a new frontier for planetary science, subsurface astrobiology, geology and human exploration. The fourth in a series of scientific meetings focusing on the science and exploration of planetary caves brought together 55 terrestrial and planetary scientists, robotics and instrumentation engineers, and students (16 including 1 undergraduate). Conference participants discussed the state of the art of relevant sciences and current engineering capabilities as applied to planetary cave exploration and research. Specifically, they considered cave formation mechanisms, preserved geological records, cave micro-climate and astrobiological potential, engineering challenges of subsurface exploration, and potential robotic mission concepts to explore the subsurface of other worlds, especially the Moon and Mars.

Eos, Earth and Space Science News↗