CE3A8 SMJ Geology for Engineers 1

Plate Tectonics

The significance of plate tectonics in geological science can be likened to the significance of the theory
of evolution in biological science. In both cases, what at first had seemed a diverse set of observations
could suddenly be explained by a single, simple theory. Interestingly for geologists, most of the people
who pioneered the plate tectonic revolution (which culminated in the 1960s) are still alive to comment
on how they arrived at their ideas, whereas the biological pioneers like Charles Darwin are long dead.
For engineers, plate tectonics is significant because it ultimately explains in large part why and where
deformation of Earth’s surface occurs. It also explains the global distribution of earthquake and volcanic
hazards, although of course predicting the time and location of individual natural disasters within these
zones is much more tricky.

Historical Background Before the 1960s, there was no generally accepted global theory to explain
major features of the earth: the continents and oceans, the mountains and valleys, the volcanoes and
earthquakes. In the 1960s, a new theory emerged that explained all this and more as the result of
interactions of moving pieces of the earth’s surface layer, henceforth to be known as tectonic plates.
While the development of plate tectonics was a long time in coming — scientific evidence of continental
mobility had been recognised since the early 20th century — its acceptance was rapid and nearly absolute.
By the early 1970s, virtually all earth scientists accepted the new theory and textbooks were re-written.

Much of the text of this handout is abstracted directly from Plate Tectonics: An insider’s history of the
Modern Theory of the Earth (2003, N Oreskes (ed.), Westview). This book describes the new data sources
and scientific techniques that precipitated the plate tectonics revolution from a human angle. It opens
with an explanation of how the forerunners of the theory raised questions that were finally answered 30
years later. There follows a collection of essays from scientists who played key roles in developing the
theory which tell the stories of their involvement in the extraordinary evolution of the theory. For details
on the science behind plate tectonics, a good starting point is The Solid Earth: An introduction to global
geophysics (2003, CMR Fowler, Cambridge).

Continental Drift Since the 16th century, cartographers have noticed the jigsaw-puzzle fit of the con-
tinental edges. Since the 19th century, geologists have known that some fossil plants and animals are
extraordinarily similar across the globe, and that some sequences of rock formations in distant conti-
nents are also strikingly alike. Palaeoenvironmental data was puzzling too, with ancient glacial deposits
discovered near the equator and warm climatic indicators (such as limestones, laterites and coals) near
the poles. The theories of supercontinents and continental drift were suggested in the first part of the
20th century: the palaeontological and geological patterns and jigsaw-puzzle fit could be explained if the
continents had migrated across earth’s surface, sometimes joining together, sometimes breaking apart.
Alfred Wegener, a German meteorologist, was a particularly significant figure. In his book ‘The origins
of continents and oceans’ (1915), he proposed that continents were not immobile but have shifted their
position through time, and that previously all continents formed a single supercontinent, termed Pangaea.

Pangaea reconstruction based on modern climatic

data. See www.scotese.com for more information
and plate reconstruction animations.
CE3A8 SMJ Geology for Engineers 2

Initial Rejection Continental Drift was not accepted on the basis of the geological evidence, although
possible mechanisms for lateral movement of the continents were vigourously debated through the first
half of the 20th century. 19th century ideas such as Contraction Theory had explained the difference
between continents and oceans in terms of mainly vertical motions as the young hot Earth cooled and
contracted, but these theories became untenable following discovery of radiogenic heating of Earth’s
interior. Ideas arising from detailed surveying of India by Sir George Everest and others, together with
measurement of post-glacial rebound in NW Europe and N America, lead to the concept of isosasty,
whereby the continental crust floats on a fluid substratum. Isostasy meant that vertical movements of
the continents were accepted, but it was not clear whether lateral movements were also possible. A
paradox concerning material properties of the mantle presented a further stumbling block. The mantle
must be rigid because it transmits seismic waves, yet isostasy implies that the mantle behaves as a fluid.

From Palaeomagnetism to Seafloor Spreading When World War II broke out, arguments about
crustal mobility were put on hold as earth scientists applied their special knowledge and skills to surf
forecasting, submarine navigation, anti-submarine warfare and other pressing issues of the day. After-
wards, a group of British geophysicists who had worked on magnetism and warfare (mine-sweeping and
demagnetising ships) turned their attention to rock magnetism. Initially, they hoped to answer questions
about the origins of earth’s magnetic field. But they discovered something else entirely: rocks on land
recorded evidence that the position of the land masses relative to earth’s poles had changed over the
course of geological time. Some of them began to think again about continental drift. Yet these data did
not immediately cause a stampede, for they were new and uncertain and people doubted their reliability.

Meanwhile, American scientists had been measuring the magnetism of rocks on the sea floor, partly out
of curiosity, partly because the US Navy hoped these measurements might suggest new means to hide
or detect submarines. The results surprised everyone: a distinctive pattern in which some rocks were
magnetised in concert with earth’s current field and some in opposition to it. When plotted on paper in
black and white, the pattern looked like zebra stripes. Scientists wondered what these magnetic stripes
meant; noone at first connected the pattern with continental drift. Then, another group of scientists
proved that over the course of geological history earth’s magnetic field had reversed its polarity many
times. Suddenly the meaning of the stripes became clear: the sea floor was splitting apart, or spreading,
CE3A8 SMJ Geology for Engineers 3

and new volcanic rocks were magnetised in alignment with earth’s field each time they erupted at the sea
floor. Once the idea was in place, it took only a few years to demonstrate that it was right.

Heat Flow and Seismology The confirmation of seafloor spreading led to a rush — some might say a
stampede — to put together the pieces of the global story. There were several important lines of evidence
and at first it was not entirely clear if they would fit together. If seafloor spreading at mid-ocean ridges
was caused by convection currents rising from deep within very hot regions in the earth, then heat flow
should be highest over these ridges, but scientists found some heat flow values at the ridges that were
extremely low. This didn’t seem to fit the big picture. Nor did the fact that heat flow over the continents
was the same, on average, as over the ocean floors. For some scientists, these were reasons to remain
unconvinced. But while heat flow measurements caused a certain amount of confusion, seismic data
proved compelling.

Advances in seismology were crucial to illuminating the big picture. For some time, seismologists had been
mapping the distribution of global earthquakes and attempting to determine the nature of the motions
associated with them. But their data were often sparse, inaccurate or confusing. The development of the
worldwide standard seismograph network (WWSSN) to aid in detecting nuclear weapons tests came at
just the right time to solve the problems of plate tectonics: accurate locations of earthquakes displayed
a fabulous pattern outlining crustal blocks, and accurate determination of earthquakes’ slip directions
proved that these blocks were moving in just the ways that global tectonics required.

Global seismicity defines the plate boundaries. For more information on relationships between
seismicity and plate tectonics, refer to the lectures on earthquakes later in the course.

The Plate Model By 1967 most geophysicists and oceanographers were either convinced or on the
verge of being convinced that earth’s surface was divided into large blocks that were moving en masse:
splitting apart at mid-ocean ridges, moving laterally across the ocean basins and then sinking back into
the earth at the boundaries between continents and oceans. Moreover, it was becoming clear that the
geological arguments that had been put forward for continental drift more than 40 years earlier were
probably largely correct. But those data had been criticised as qualitative and not verifiable — or at
least they looked unverifiable in retrospect. It remained to quantify the motions of the crustal blocks
and to show that the motions calculated for any one block were consistent with the motions calculated
for adjacent blocks. The blocks began to be referred to as plates — flat, thin and rigid — and the result
was a theory called plate tectonics.
CE3A8 SMJ Geology for Engineers 4

From the Oceans to the Continents Continental drift was first proposed on the basis of geological
evidence accumulated from fieldwork by geologists on the continents. In contrast, plate tectonics was
developed largely on the basis of evidence from the sea floor, or earthquakes under it, collected mostly
by geophysicists. When geologists realised what was happening, the most alert among them saw an
opportunity for a radical reinterpretation of geological history based on the new model of crustal mobility.
Moreover, important geological features that had never been fully understood — like California’s great
San Andreas Fault — suddenly could be explained, clearly and elegantly, by the new model. With every
old understanding up for grabs and new understandings emerging daily, one of the 20th century’s greatest
scientific revolutions happened.

Continents Really Do Move Alfred Wegener died on the Greenland icecap trying to find proof of
continental drift. By proof he meant observations of the continents actually moving today. The geological
arguments for drift were all indirect: they were surprising facts that could be explained if the continents
had moved, but they were not actual observations of moving continents. Ironically, plate tectonics was
accepted without the evidence that Wegener sought. The geophysical data of plate tectonics — heat
flow, seismicity, palaeomagnetism — were in their own way also indirect. They were observations of
phenomena that followed from crustal motions or perhaps helped drive them, but they were not actual
observations of the motions themselves. It took another decade before such observations could be made
through the development of satellite-based global positioning systems. However, because of their military
applications, many of the data collected by these satellites remained classified until the 1990s. Finally,
almost a century after Alfred Wegener first suggested it and 30 years after earth scientists accepted it,
we now have direct evidence that the earth really does move.
CE3A8 SMJ Geology for Engineers 5

Plate vs Crust

• The crust is a compositional layer.

• Crust = ‘Light Scum’.
• When the mantle melts, the magma rises and solidifies to form crust.

• The plate is defined in terms of temperature and hence strength.

Plate = ‘Cold Skin’.
• Heat is supplied to the base of the plate by the convecting mantle, and heat is lost to the atmosphere
from the top of the plate.
• Plates have an equilibrium thickness (around 120 km) when the heatflux supplied to the bottom
balances the heatflux lost at the top.
• The Plate is composed of the crust and the part of the mantle rigidly attached to it.

Types of Plate Boundary

Earth’s surface is composed of a set of relatively rigid plates that ‘float’ on top of the mantle which,
although solid, behaves as a fluid over geological time. Motion between the plates is concentrated at 3
types of plate boundary.

• Constructive Plate Boundaries. Oceanic plates are created by Seafloor Spreading at mid-ocean
ridges.
• Destructive Plate Boundaries. So that Earth does not expand, oceanic plates are recycled (sub-
ducted) back into the mantle at oceanic trenches.
• Conservative Plate Boundaries. The plates slide past each other laterally.

Continents move with the oceans like parcels on a conveyor belt, so that there are 2 types of continent-
ocean boundary.

• Passive Continental Margins. The continental plate is fixed rigidly to the oceanic plate.
• Active Continental Margins. The continental plate over-rides the subducting oceanic plate.

Processes at constructive plate boundaries

• Plate Spreading. As the oceanic plates spread apart at a mid-ocean ridge, the hot convecting mantle
beneath the plates is drawn upwards to fill the gap.
• Melting. The hot mantle melts as it rises because the confining pressure decreases.
• Formation of crust. The magma rises, cools and solidifies to form oceanic crust of basaltic/gabbroic
composition.
CE3A8 SMJ Geology for Engineers 6

• Young plate is thin. Since hot, convecting mantle has been drawn upwards to lie directly beneath
the crust, the plate at the mid-ocean ridge is no thicker than the crust.
• Plate cools to equilibrium. As the plate spreads away from the mid-ocean ridge, it cools and thickens
towards its equilibrium thickness. The principle of isostasy means that because the plate’s thickness
and average density increase with age, the plate sinks with respect to the mid-ocean ridge crest. The
equilibrium plate thickness is ∼ 120 km, the equilibrium depth of oceanic abyssal plains is 6.5 km
and the characteristic time constant to reach these values is ∼ 60 Myr (million years). Solution of
the heatflow equations shows that both plate thickening and associated seafloor subsidence tend
exponentially to equilibrium values.

Processes at destructive plate boundaries

• Subduction. The old, cold, thick oceanic plate dives down into the mantle beneath either a conti-
nental or another oceanic plate. Bending of the plate results in a deep trench.
• Water. Sea water subducted down into the mantle along with the oceanic plate decreases the
melting temperature of the mantle, so magma begins to form.
• Volcanoes. The magma rises and adds to the overlying crust. The magma is more granitic in
composition than that which forms oceanic crust. This compositional difference makes the magma
more explosive, and a chain of volcanoes forms behind the oceanic trench and above the subducting
plate.

What drives Plate Tectonics? On the largest scale, Plate Tectonics is driven by the cooling of the
planet. The cycle of oceanic plate creation by Seafloor Spreading and destruction by Subduction allows
the Earth to lose heat much faster than it could if its surface were a single, rigid, spherical shell with
all heat lost by conduction. Water is also tremendously important; water returned to the mantle via
Subduction both allows production of the granites that form the continents, and has the rheological
effect of ‘lubricating’ the base of the plates as they slide over the mantle. On a more local scale, the
characteristic mid-ocean ridge topography helps plates ’slide away’ from the ridge (known as Ridge Push).
Furthermore, high-pressure metamorphism of oceanic crustal rocks as they are subducted down into the
mantle means that the density of the subducting plate increases, resulting in a force known as Slab Pull.