In the Krafla region in North East Iceland, a change in the deformation pattern was observed in 2018. Since the 1975-1984 rifting event, there was subsidence seen in the Krafla caldera and along the fissure swarm. This subsidence was explained by deflation which decreased exponen
...
In the Krafla region in North East Iceland, a change in the deformation pattern was observed in 2018. Since the 1975-1984 rifting event, there was subsidence seen in the Krafla caldera and along the fissure swarm. This subsidence was explained by deflation which decreased exponentially along the years. In 2018, this deformation pattern reversed, and for the first time since 1989, uplift was observed in the region. Therefore, this work concentrates on examining the change in deformation pattern in the region that occurred in 2018. Four geodetic techniques, a combination of ground and space geodetic techniques, are used to study this change in deformation pattern noted in the Krafla region. Data from 2016 to 2019 are considered as they span the time of interest when the change took place. In levelling, InSAR and GPS, the uplift observed is located to the North of the Krafla power plant. Similarly, there is an increase in net gravity seen to the North of the power plant. This suggests there is an increase in mass/density. A possible reason could be movement of magma from the deep to the shallow magma chamber. The reason behind this start of the magma movement is not known. On the other hand, there is continued subsidence and an increase in net gravity seen in the fissure swarms present to the south of the power plant. This result agrees with the fact that the uplift is concentrated (a local phenomena) in the northern region and there is still subsidence seen in the south. A simple Mogi model is fitted to InSAR and GPS data to understand the cause for this change in deformation. But, the fitted model provided very few insights in this work. The results from modelling mainly concentrated on the subsidence in the southern region and corresponding model parameters were obtained. The location of the source responsible for the modelled deformation (subsidence) is found to be near the power plant. The depth and volume however are not properly constrained. But since the model tries to constrain at deeper depths, correspondingly larger volume is also seen. This outcome strengthens the hypothesis that the source for the deformation could lie at deeper depths. Based on the overall results, the following recommendations are made to enhance the results: i) Maintaining the continuity in the data ii) To increase the number of benchmarks measured near the deformation area (especially in gravity and levelling) iii) Use of multiple source modelling for the better understanding of the sub-surface processes.