Found: The Coldest Place on Earth

The record had stood for nearly 30 years: minus 128.6 degrees F (-89.2 C), recorded a few meters above the ground at the Russian Vostok Research Station in East Antarctica.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


The record had stood for nearly 30 years: minus 128.6 degrees F (-89.2 ˚C), recorded a few meters above the ground at the Russian Vostok Research Station in East Antarctica. It was the coldest temperature ever sensed on Earth.

Not any more. Researchers from the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colo., announced a new record low today: -136 ˚F (-93.2 ˚C). The place: a small valley between two peaks on the East Antarctic Plateau.

The temperature actually occurred on Aug. 10, 2010, but researchers only discovered it recently after analyzing reams of data recorded by several Earth-sensing satellites. At first they were doubtful, but further analysis showed that temperatures very close to -136 ˚F also occurred dozens of times in other “pockets”—small, downslope valleys along a 620-mile-long ridge between Dome Argus and Dome Fuji.


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.


The temperatures occurred on the surface, “as if you reached down and touched the snow,” explained Ted Scambos, lead scientist at the data center, speaking on Monday at the annual American Geophysical Union fall meeting in San Francisco. Not that you would want to do so. Scambos has been on the icy continent in conditions nearly as cold. In those situations, people must breath through a snorkel-like device worn inside their special jackets which warms the air before it enters the lungs, which would freeze if exposed. Even then, Scambos says, “it hurts to breath.” And walking on the surface, he says, “sounds like walking on crushed glass.”

Scambos and his colleagues think they have figured out why the temperature drops so low in the little valleys. When skies stay clear for several days, heat from below the surface of the high peaks radiates upward from the tops of the peaks. That creates a layer of super-chilled air just above the surface. That air is denser than the relatively warmer air right around it, so it sinks, and slides down the slope into the valley. There is can get stuck, motionless, cooling even further.

Data from the new Landsat 8 satellite, launched earlier this year, revealed four such pockets along the ridge on July 31 that were all about -135 ˚F, reassuring Scambos's team that their 2010 record was legitimate, and convincing them that temperatures almost that low occur regularly in various pockets.

For perspective, -136 ˚F is about as far below water’s freezing point as boiling is above that point. It’s also about 50 degrees colder than the coldest temperatures ever recorded in North America, including Alaska. “It’s more like what you’d find on Mars on a nice summer day, “Scambos says.

So how low can Earth’s temperature go? Scambos doesn’t expect it could drop much further. Some latent heat exists even a meter beneath the surface that radiates some “warmth” upward, and any kind of clouds, even thin ones, would help keep a bit of that heat in. “So it may be,” Scambos says, “that weather might not allow temperatures to go much lower.”

Image courtesy of Walta on WikimediaCommons

Mark Fischetti was a senior editor at Scientific American for nearly 20 years and covered sustainability issues, including climate, environment, energy, and more. He assigned and edited feature articles and news by journalists and scientists and also wrote in those formats. He was founding managing editor of two spin-off magazines: Scientific American Mind and Scientific American Earth 3.0. His 2001 article “Drowning New Orleans” predicted the widespread disaster that a storm like Hurricane Katrina would impose on the city. Fischetti has written as a freelancer for the New York Times, Sports Illustrated, Smithsonian and many other outlets. He co-authored the book Weaving the Web with Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web, which tells the real story of how the Web was created. He also co-authored The New Killer Diseases with microbiologist Elinor Levy. Fischetti has a physics degree and has twice served as Attaway Fellow in Civic Culture at Centenary College of Louisiana, which awarded him an honorary doctorate. In 2021 he received the American Geophysical Union’s Robert C. Cowen Award for Sustained Achievement in Science Journalism. He has appeared on NBC’s Meet the Press, CNN, the History Channel, NPR News and many radio stations.

More by Mark Fischetti

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe