Exhumed hydrocarbon traps in East Greenland: Reply to Christensen et al.'s comment on Andrews et al. (2020)
Christansen et al. (2020) have raised concerns over the validity of the data and interpretation in our study of the exhumed hydrocarbon traps of East Greenland. Furthermore, they have put forward a model which they suggest that better suits their data. However, this markedly contradicts the data we...
| Published in: | Basin Research |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Manuscript |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2020
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/442997/ https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/442997/1/Andrews_et_al_New_Perspectives_revised.doc https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/442997/2/compiled_figures.pdf |
| Summary: | Christansen et al. (2020) have raised concerns over the validity of the data and interpretation in our study of the exhumed hydrocarbon traps of East Greenland. Furthermore, they have put forward a model which they suggest that better suits their data. However, this markedly contradicts the data we presented. The concerns raised by Christansen et al. (2020) centre around a number of key points: Acknowlegement of the history of previous debate around these structures It is suggested that pyrobitumen is only minor in occurrence and much of this material is, in fact, iron oxides The distribution of pyrobitumen that we document is disputed in favour of irregular distribution as would fit their model The requirement for a detailed diagenetic study The maturity of potential source rocks. A model is then presented which is suggested to best suit the available data. Each of these points is discussed, in turn, in this reply. |
|---|