Search for: All records

Abstract How will bank erosion rates in Arctic rivers respond to a warming climate? Existing physical models predict that bank erosion rates should increase with water temperature as permafrost thaws more rapidly. However, the same theory predicts much faster erosion than is typically observed. We propose that these models are missing a key component: a layer of thawed sediment on the bank that buffers heat transfer and slows erosion. We developed a 1D model for this thawed layer, which reveals three regimes for permafrost riverbank erosion. Thaw‐limited erosion occurs in the absence of a thawed layer, such that rapid pore‐ice melting sets the pace of erosion, consistent with existing models. Entrainment‐limited erosion occurs when pore‐ice melting outpaces bank erosion, resulting in a thawed layer, and the relatively slow entrainment of sediment sets the pace of erosion similar to non‐permafrost rivers. Third, the intermediate regime occurs when the thawed layer goes through cycles of thickening and failure, leading to a transient thermal buffer that slows thaw rates. Distinguishing between these regimes is important because thaw‐limited erosion is highly sensitive to water temperature, whereas entrainment‐limited erosion is not. Interestingly, the buffered regime produces a thawed layer and relatively slow erosion rates like the entrainment‐limited regime, but erosion rates are temperature sensitive like the thaw‐limited regime. The results suggest the potential for accelerating erosion in a warming Arctic where bank erosion is presently thaw‐limited or buffered. Moreover, rivers can experience all regimes annually and transition between regimes with warming, altering their sensitivity to climate change. 

Abstract Climatic warming and permafrost thaw are predicted to increase Arctic riverbank erosion, threatening communities and accelerating sediment, carbon and nutrient cycling between rivers and floodplains. Existing theory assumes that pore‐ice thaw sets riverbank erosion rates, but overpredicts observed erosion rates by orders of magnitude. Here, we developed a simple model that predicts more modest rates due to a sediment‐entrainment limitation and riverbank armoring by slump blocks. Results show that during times of thaw‐limited erosion, the river rapidly erodes permafrost and undercuts its banks, consistent with previous work. However, overhanging banks generate slump blocks that must thaw and erode by sediment entrainment. Sediment entrainment can limit bank and slump block erosion rates, producing seasonally averaged rates more consistent with observations. Importantly, entrainment‐limited riverbank erosion does not depend on water temperature, indicating that decadal erosion rates may be less sensitive to warming than predicted previously. 

Abstract Permafrost thaw is hypothesized to increase riverbank erosion rates, which threatens Arctic communities and infrastructure. However, existing erosion models have not been tested against controlled flume experiments with open‐channel flow past an erodible, hydraulically rough permafrost bank. We conducted temperature‐controlled flume experiments where turbulent water eroded laterally into riverbanks consisting of sand and pore ice. The experiments were designed to produce ablation‐limited erosion such that any thawed sediment was quickly transported away from the bank. Bank erosion rates increased linearly with water temperature, decreased with pore ice content, and were insensitive to changes in bank temperature, consistent with theory. However, erosion rates were approximately a factor of three greater than expected. The heightened erosion rates were due to a greater coefficient of heat transfer from the turbulent water to the permafrost bank caused by bank grain roughness. A revised ablation‐limited bank erosion model with a heat transfer coefficient that includes bank roughness matched our experimental results well. Results indicate that bank erosion along Arctic rivers can accelerate under scenarios of warming river water temperatures for cases where the cadence of bank erosion is set by pore‐ice melting rather than sediment entrainment. 

Abstract Whether permafrost systematically alters the rate of riverbank erosion is a fundamental geomorphic question with significant importance to infrastructure, water quality, and biogeochemistry of high‐latitude watersheds. For over four decades, this question has remained unanswered due to a lack of data. Using remotely sensed imagery, we addressed this knowledge gap by quantifying riverbank erosion rates across the Arctic and subarctic. To compare these rates to non‐permafrost rivers, we assembled a global data set of published riverbank erosion rates. We found that erosion rates in rivers influenced by permafrost are on average nine times lower than non‐permafrost systems; erosion rate differences increase up to 40 times for the largest rivers. To test alternative hypotheses for the observed erosion rate difference, we examined differences in total water yield and erosional efficiency between these rivers and non‐permafrost rivers. Neither of these factors nor differences in river sediment loads provided compelling alternative explanations, leading us to conclude that permafrost limits riverbank erosion rates. This conclusion was supported by field investigations of rates and patterns of erosion along three rivers flowing through discontinuous permafrost in Alaska. Our results show that permafrost limits maximum bank erosion rates on rivers with stream powers greater than 900 Wm⁻¹. On smaller rivers, however, hydrology rather than thaw rate may be the dominant control on bank erosion. Our findings suggest that Arctic warming and hydrological changes should increase bank erosion rates on large rivers but may reduce rates on rivers with drainage areas less than a few thousand km². 

This dataset describes measurements of river migration rates (averaged over the period 2016-2022) in three locations within the Yukon River Watershed: Huslia, Alaska (AK) (65.700 N, 156.387 W), Beaver, AK (66.362 N, 147.398 W), and Alakanuk, AK (62.685 N, 164.644 W). Huslia is located on the Koyukuk River and Beaver and Alakanuk are located on the Yukon River. The river migration rates are quantified from sub-pixel correlation of optical satellite imagery (Sentinel-2 imagery, 10 meter (m) spatial resolution), following the methodology of Geyman et al. (2024). The methodology allows for the detection of riverbank erosion at scales approximately 5-10 times smaller than the pixel size, so the detection threshold is 1-2 m over the approximately 7-year interval, corresponding to a migration rate of 0.1 to 0.3 m/year. The motion of the eroding and accreting sides of the river are quantified separately. The river migration rate datasets are made available as georeferenced shapefiles. 

This dataset describes measurements of inter-annual to sub-seasonal riverbank erosion rates on the Koyukuk River, Alaska, over the period 2016-2022. The data are used in the paper: “Geyman, E., Douglas, M., Avouac, J.-P. and Lamb, M. Permafrost slows Arctic riverbank erosion, in review (2024).” The dataset contains two sets of measurements: (1) riverbank displacement estimated from Sentinel-2 optical satellite imagery (10 meter (m) resolution) over the period 30-Aug-2016 to 13-Jul-2022, and (2) riverbank displacement estimated from Planet optical satellite imagery (3 m resolution) over the period 31-Aug-2016 to 01-Oct-2022. The first dataset is based on comparison of Sentinel-2 satellite acquisitions from the start and end of the study interval. The second dataset analyzes 65 PlanetScope image mosaics (for an average of 9 observations per year). The Matlab code used to analyze the Sentinel-2 and PlanetScope imagery, as well as to process the sub-seasonal displacement estimates, is included in the file “Code.zip”. 

This dataset contains supporting files detailing five frozen flume experiments conducted at the Caltech Earth Surface Dynamics Laboratory to investigate rates of ablation-limited permafrost riverbank erosion under controlled conditions. Water flowed past a bank of saturated, frozen sand and ice and gradually eroded the bank by thawing pore ice and immediately entraining sand and washing it downstream. Experiments were scaled for flow hydraulics and heat transfer allowing comparisons between our results and natural permafrost riverbanks. For each experiment, we measured the initial and final sand bank topography using a Keyence laser scanner, water surface slope at 3-min intervals throughout the experiment using a Massa sonar scanner, bank erosion using 10-sec overhead timelapse imagery taken by an overhead camera, water and bank temperature using thermistors frozen into the sand bank and sampling at 2 Hz, and water discharge using an in-line flow meter. We include calibration data for the carriage (engineered by the Saint Anthony Falls Laboratory) used to make sonar and laser topography measurements. We also include calibration data for temperature sensors, water discharge measurements, and images of a regular grid placed in the flume to align overhead camera images with the carriage datum. Grain size analysis for the channel bed (gravel) was produced using a pebble count and bank sand was measured using a Camsizer X2. In addition to the five frozen experiments, we include sonar scans of water surface slope and Keyence scans of bed and bank topography for calibration experiments ran with an immobile gravel bank and bed.