New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

New Model Narrows Estimates for the Thickness of Europa's Icy Crust

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Image: Courtesy of ELIZABETH TURTLE/University of Arizona

Just how thick the layer of ice covering the surface of Jupiter's moon Europa is lies at the center of an ongoing scientific debate. Current theory holds that the icy layer covers a huge liquid ocean, so its thickness holds import for possible Europan oceanic explorations in the future. But estimates of the ice breadth have ranged from merely one or two kilometers to upwards of 30. Now new research, published in the current issue of Science, provides support for an intermediate thickness of at least three to four kilometers.

To investigate the thickness of the ice layer, Elizabeth Turtle and Elisabetta Peirazzo of the University of Arizona's Lunar and Planetary Laboratory exploited impact craters on Europa's surface. The scientists modeled the impact of comets into a layer of ice overlying liquid water and compared the results to six actual Europan craters imaged by Galileo and Voyager that exhibit central peaks (see image). As Turtle explains, because "central peaks are deep material that's been uplifted, that means these impacts could not have penetrated through Europan ice to water. Water would not have been able to form and maintain a central peak." The authors thus conclude that the ice shell must have been greater than three to four kilometers deep. They stress, however, that their observation can only be interpreted as a lower limit.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe