4.8 Article

Earth's air pressure 2.7 billion years ago constrained to less than half of modern levels

Journal

NATURE GEOSCIENCE
Volume 9, Issue 6, Pages 448-+

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/NGEO2713

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NASA Exobiology/Astrobiology grant [NNX08AP56G]
  2. NASA Astrobiology Institute grant [NNA13AA93A]
  3. Division Of Earth Sciences
  4. Directorate For Geosciences [1338810] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  5. NASA [NNA13AA93A, 95844, 475676, NNX08AP56G] Funding Source: Federal RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

How the Earth stayed warm several billion years ago when the Sun was considerably fainter is the long-standing problem of the 'faint young Sun paradox'. Because of negligible(1) O-2 and only moderate CO2 levels(2) in the Archaean atmosphere, methane has been invoked as an auxiliary greenhouse gas(3). Alternatively, pressure broadening in a thicker atmosphere with a N-2 partial pressure around 1.6-2.4 bar could have enhanced the greenhouse effect(4). But fossilized raindrop imprints indicate that air pressure 2.7 billion years ago (Gyr) was below twice modern levels and probably below 1.1 bar, precluding such pressure enhancement(5). This result is supported by nitrogen and argon isotope studies of fluid inclusions in 3.0-3.5Gyr rocks(6). Here, we calculate absolute Archaean barometric pressure using the size distribution of gas bubbles in basaltic lava flows that solidified at sea level similar to 2.7Gyr in the Pilbara Craton, Australia. Our data indicate a surprisingly low surface atmospheric pressure of P-atm = 0.23 +/- 0.23 (2 sigma) bar, and combined with previous studies suggests similar to 0.5 bar as an upper limit to late Archaean P-atm. The result implies that the thin atmosphere was rich in auxiliary greenhouse gases and that P-atm fluctuated over geologic time to a previously unrecognized extent.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available