<p>This is a non-exhaustive list of factors influencing the permafrost thickness :</p>

<ul>
<li>latitude</li>
<li>altitude</li>
<li>aspect</li>
<li>material type</li>
<li>nature of the regional climate (dry, oceans, continental)</li>
<li>geologic history of the permafrost (formed after the last glacial maximum, or before?)</li>
</ul>

<p>Time is important: older permafrost can be very deep, especially in areas such as in Siberia, Yukon/Alaska where the effect of glacier was limited, thus exposing the ground to cold conditions for long time. Some areas in the Canadian archipelago are in excess of 1 km deep, and more than 500 m is not uncommon, largely depending on local and time conditions.</p>

<p>Yet, huge discrepancies in permafrost depth can be found between western Canada/AK, eastern Canada, Northern Europe and Siberia, given a constant latitude, and therefore isolation and thus comparable aspect. As an example at Svalbard (78N), permafrost depth was reported to be less than <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ppp.380/abstract" rel="nofollow">400 m</a>, while regional depth in the central canadian archipelago north of Baffin Island is more than 500 m (for 73 - 75 N) and 1500 m in northern Siberia (which is at a lower latitude than Svalbard).</p>

<p>To get back to your question, aspect (or solar radiation input) is pretty much uniform for a given latitude - but in this case, for the same latitude, permafrost depth vary.</p>

<p>On the other hand, material type vary locally. If wetlands, mosses and vegetation will contribute to cool the ground, enabling deeper permafrost in those areas. Areas were there is a lot of snow (snowbanks) will have a warmer permafrost compared to crests nearby. Lakes change how heat can be extracted from the ground (latent heat effect) so permafrost will be thin under a lake compared to around the lake (lake being a type of material in the context of your question). Desert ? Rock outcrop ? </p>

<p><strong>Each type of environment behave in a certain way regarding heat extraction and ultimately heat exchanges, which have a lot to do with the nature of the surface.</strong>.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-10-14T15:57:44.753Z
2016-10-14T15:57:44.753Z
marsisalie
<p>Studying for a midterm and I came across the following question. Is aspect more or less important than material type in determining permafrost thickness?</p>

<p>In physical geology, aspect is the compass direction that a slope faces. So the trail of the sun from east to west in the Northern hemisphere would provide more sunlight to the South than the North, but I would think that material type for determing permafrost would be more important. Not sure how but looking for a explanation</p>

<geology><geography><permafrost>
Permafrost thickness
permafrost
# Permafrost thickness

(Asked by: username_0 on 2016-10-14)

Studying for a midterm and I came across the following question. Is aspect more or less important than material type in determining username_0 thickness?

In physical geology, aspect is the compass direction that a slope faces. So the trail of the sun from east to west in the Northern hemisphere would provide more sunlight to the South than the North, but I would think that material type for determing username_0 would be more important. Not sure how but looking for a explanation

**Tags:** geology, geography, permafrost


---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2016-10-14. Score: 1

This is a non-exhaustive list of factors influencing the username_0 thickness :

* latitude
* altitude
* aspect
* material type
* nature of the regional climate (dry, oceans, continental)
* geologic history of the username_0 (formed after the last glacial maximum, or before?)

Time is important: older username_0 can be very deep, especially in areas such as in Siberia, Yukon/Alaska where the effect of glacier was limited, thus exposing the ground to cold conditions for long time. Some areas in the Canadian archipelago are in excess of 1 km deep, and more than 500 m is not uncommon, largely depending on local and time conditions.

Yet, huge discrepancies in username_0 depth can be found between western Canada/AK, eastern Canada, Northern Europe and Siberia, given a constant latitude, and therefore isolation and thus comparable aspect. As an example at Svalbard (78N), username_0 depth was reported to be less than [400 m](http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ppp.380/abstract), while regional depth in the central canadian archipelago north of Baffin Island is more than 500 m (for 73 - 75 N) and 1500 m in northern Siberia (which is at a lower latitude than Svalbard).

To get back to your question, aspect (or solar radiation input) is pretty much uniform for a given latitude - but in this case, for the same latitude, username_0 depth vary.

On the other hand, material type vary locally. If wetlands, mosses and vegetation will contribute to cool the ground, enabling deeper username_0 in those areas. Areas were there is a lot of snow (snowbanks) will have a warmer username_0 compared to crests nearby. Lakes change how heat can be extracted from the ground (latent heat effect) so username_0 will be thin under a lake compared to around the lake (lake being a type of material in the context of your question). Desert ? Rock outcrop ?

**Each type of environment behave in a certain way regarding heat extraction and ultimately heat exchanges, which have a lot to do with the nature of the surface.**.


---

