Workshop on the Establishment of a Geological Model of ...

CHAPTER 6
INTEGRATION OF GEOPHYSICAL/GEOLOGICAL DATA FOR THE
RESERVED AREAS OF THE CLARION‐CLIPPERTON ZONE: NEW
PERSPECTIVES FROM CURRENT COMPILATION TECHNIQUES
Lindsay Parson and Alan Evans, Southampton Oceanography Centre, United Kingdom
Introduction
This paper has been prepared to illustrate the range of data types and considerations required when
preparing a data synthesis appropriate to the development of a geological model for the Clarion‐Clipperton
Region (CCR). It is not exhaustive, but by way of an introduction, it points the way forward to a methodology
and strategy for obtaining the base geological context within which a model of deep seabed polymetallic
nodule resources could be readily developed.
Integration of data types
We offer a review of the first order, that is, directly applicable datasets to the development of a
geological model. Additional and equally relevant data and compilations will be considered below, but in less
detail. Some general comments would be useful which apply to all datasets to be considered:
Analogue and/or digital data
It should be recognized that, in practice, it will be necessary to review the importance and suitability of
both analogue as well as digital data. In many cases, older records provide the only control on our
understanding of this enormous study area. Providing certain parameters to the data are acceptable in
quality (such as navigation accuracy, for example), these data should be considered. There is no reason why
paper record data, for instance, if appropriately quality controlled, should not contribute to the synthesis. A
chart or even an interpretation figure from a publication can be scanned and geo‐referenced so that it can be
integrated into a data synthesis/analysis. We should be aware that much of the highly relevant early data
which we know to have existed (such as from enterprises in the 1970s) may be effectively ‘lost’.
It is also essential that any model developed remain flexible and adaptable. The very nature of the
research process will dictate that the model will have to be organic. It is necessary for the result to be flexible
in approach. Several iterations of the model or synthesis will be expected; for instance, the distinguished
group of scientists gathered at the Authority from 13 to 17 January 2003 will not get it completely right, nor is
it likely that the May 2003 workshop will achieve a final product, so adaptability is an important character of
the model to be considered.
The model will have to be multi‐scalar. The area we are dealing with is huge ‐ in excess of 10 million
square kilometres ‐ so an approach should be arrived at on different scales. As elegantly demonstrated by Dr.
Kodagali in his accompanying paper on nested scale investigations in the Central Indian Basin, we should
recognize that different data type inputs relate to different scale of the processes we wish to consider within
the model (e.g., multi‐channel seismic reflection seismic profiler data is applicable to aspects of the model
related to scales of tens to thousands of kilometres, in contrast with bottom photography’s relevance to
around 0.01 kilometre process). The model will also have to consider temporal/spatial variability and related
parameters.
The model will have to be easy to use and accessible. The ability to operate, update and modify the
synthesis/model is paramount, along with the need for ease of interrogation of the model. It cannot be only
for a computer nerd to drive the bus ‐ and it should be accessible to as wide a community as possible, in
order that people feel a sense of ownership to it. I shall return to some ideas on this later ‐ but we should
96 | P age