What’s the highest a mountain can grow on Earth?

Published

3 years ago

April 9, 2023

admin

Could a mountain grow to greater heights than Everest? (Image credit: sansubba)

Sixty million years ago, when the Eurasian plate slammed into the Indian plate, a mountain range was born. Because these plates were of similar density, neither could sink below the other. The rocks had nowhere to go but up.

Now, the Himalayas host Earth’s tallest mountains. Mount Everest is the tallest, towering 5.4 miles (8.8 kilometers) above sea level. After Everest, the tallest is K2, which rises 5.3 miles (8.6 km) above Earth’s surface.

Could these mountains be any higher? For that matter, how high could any mountain grow on Earth?

Theoretically, a mountain could be “quite a bit taller than Everest,” Gene Humphreys (opens in new tab) , a geophysicist at the University of Oregon, told Live Science. But first it would have to overcome a few challenges that many mountains face as they grow.

For instance, because of Earth’s gravitational pull, any pile of rock that grows into a mountain will start to slouch, “much like a wad of bread dough will slowly flatten when placed on a table,” Humphreys said.

Related: Is Mount Everest really the tallest mountain on Earth?

Active processes, like erosion, also help keep mountains from growing too tall. Glaciers, vast blocks of slowly moving ice, are especially good at carving up mountains.

The peak of Mount Everest sites above the clouds of Tibet. (Image credit: Nicole Kucera)

Earth scientists refer to glacial erosion as “the glacial buzzsaw because they are so effective at taking the sides off of mountains,” Humphreys said. “[Glacial erosion] creates a steep-sided mountain that is then prone to landsliding.”

The effects of erosion and gravity mean that “the bigger the mountain, the greater the stresses created by gravity and the stronger the tendency to collapse,” Humphreys said. And although Mount Everest “could conceivably get elevated yet higher, its steep south side seems unstable,” which might lead to landslides.

However, there are ways a mountain could grow taller than Everest, Humphreys continued. Possibly even 1 mile (1.6 km) taller — but only if the conditions were just right. First, it’d have to be formed from volcanic processes rather than from continental collision. Volcanic mountains, like the Hawaiian Islands, grow as they erupt. Lava flowing out of the volcanoes cools in layers, building the volcanoes higher and higher. And finally, for the mountain to keep growing, it would need a continuing source of magma pumped higher and higher, allowing it to erupt, flow down the mountain’s sides, and cool.

This volcanic process is exactly how the solar system’s tallest mountain, Mars’ Olympus Mons, formed. Towering 16 miles (25 km), Olympus Mons is so tall that it actually pokes through the top of the Red Planet’s atmosphere, Briony Horgan (opens in new tab) , a planetary scientist at Purdue University in Indiana, told Live Science.Related Mysteries—Which country has the most islands?

—What’s the tallest wave ever recorded on Earth?

—What’s the oldest mountain range in the world? (How about the youngest?)

Olympus Mons could get so tall because Mars lacks plate tectonics, the large rafts of crust that dominate Earth’s geological processes. Olympus Mons formed over a hotspot — a deep well of rising magma — that repeatedly erupted. Just like the Hawaiian Islands, that erupted lava would flow down the sides of the mountain and cool into a new layer of rock.

However, even though the Hawaiian Islands also formed over a hotspot, the Pacific plate keeps moving, so the islands won’t stay over the hotspot long enough for their volcanoes to become as large as a mountain like Olympus Mons.

“On Mars if you just have that same hotspot but the plate isn’t moving, you can make enormous, enormous volcanoes over the course of hundreds of millions or billions of years of activity,” Horgan said.

But even giants like Olympus Mons have a limit. According to Horgan, if the volcano is still active (so far, we haven’t observed any current activity), it’s likely nearing the end of its growth. This is because the pressure required to continue to pump magma to the top of the mountain might soon be unable to overcome the forces working against it — the height of the mountain and Mars’ own gravitational pull.

“You can think of a volcano basically as a pipe that you’re trying to pump lava through, and on some level, if it’s too big, too high, you don’t have enough power to get the lava through,” Horgan said.

Business

Rachel Reeves hit by Labour rural rebellion over inheritance tax on farmers

Published

2 hours ago

December 3, 2025

admin

Rachel Reeves hit by Labour rural rebellion over inheritance tax on farmers

Chancellor Rachel Reeves has suffered another budget blow with a rebellion by rural Labour MPs over inheritance tax on farmers.

Speaking during the final day of the Commons debate on the budget, Labour backbenchers demanded a U-turn on the controversial proposals.

Plans to introduce a 20% tax on farm estates worth more than £1m from April have drawn protesters to London in their tens of thousands, with many fearing huge tax bills that would force small farms to sell up for good.

MPs voted on the so-called “family farms tax” just after 8pm on Tuesday, with dozens of Labour MPs appearing to have abstained, and one backbencher – borders MP Markus Campbell-Savours – voting against, alongside Conservative members.

In the vote, the fifth out of seven at the end of the budget debate, Labour’s vote slumped from 371 in the first vote on tax changes, down by 44 votes to 327.

‘Time to stand up for farmers’

The mini-mutiny followed a plea to Labour MPs from the National Farmers Union to abstain.

“To Labour MPs: We ask you to abstain on Budget Resolution 50,” the NFU urged.

“With your help, we can show the government there is still time to get it right on the family farm tax. A policy with such cruel human costs demands change. Now is the time to stand up for the farmers you represent.”

After the vote, NFU president Tom Bradshaw said: “The MPs who have shown their support are the rural representatives of the Labour Party. They represent the working people of the countryside and have spoken up on behalf of their constituents.

“It is vital that the chancellor and prime minister listen to the clear message they have delivered this evening. The next step in the fight against the family farm tax is removing the impact of this unjust and unfair policy on the most vulnerable members of our community.”

The government comfortably won the vote by 327-182, a majority of 145. But the mini-mutiny served notice to the chancellor and Sir Keir Starmer that newly elected Labour MPs from the shires are prepared to rebel.

Speaking in the debate earlier, Mr Campbell-Savours said: “There remain deep concerns about the proposed changes to agricultural property relief (APR).

“Changes which leave many, not least elderly farmers, yet to make arrangements to transfer assets, devastated at the impact on their family farms.”

Samantha Niblett, Labour MP for South Derbyshire abstained after telling MPs: “I do plead with the government to look again at APR inheritance tax.

“Most farmers are not wealthy land barons, they live hand to mouth on tiny, sometimes non-existent profit margins. Many were explicitly advised not to hand over their farm to children, (but) now face enormous, unexpected tax bills.

“We must acknowledge a difficult truth: we have lost the trust of our farmers, and they deserve our utmost respect, our honesty and our unwavering support.”

Labour MPs from rural constituencies who did not vote included Tonia Antoniazzi (Gower), Julia Buckley (Shrewsbury), Torquil Crichton (Western Isles), Jonathan Davies (Mid Derbyshire), Maya Ellis (Ribble Valley), and Anna Gelderd (South East Cornwall), Ben Goldsborough (South Norfolk), Alison Hume (Scarborough and Whitby), Terry Jermy (South West Norfolk), Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth), Noah Law (St Austell and Newquay), Perran Moon, (Camborne and Redruth), Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire), Jenny Riddell-Carpenter (Suffolk Coastal), Henry Tufnell (Mid and South Pembrokeshire), John Whitby (Derbyshire Dales) and Steve Witherden (Montgomeryshire and Glyndwr).

Politics

UK takes ‘massive step forward,’ passing property laws for crypto

Published

3 hours ago

December 3, 2025

admin

UK takes ‘massive step forward,’ passing property laws for crypto

The UK has passed a bill into law that treats digital assets, such as cryptocurrencies and stablecoins, as property, which advocates say will better protect crypto users.

Lord Speaker John McFall announced in the House of Lords on Tuesday that the Property (Digital Assets etc) Bill was given royal assent, meaning King Charles agreed to make the bill into an Act of Parliament and passed it into law.

Freddie New, policy chief at advocacy group Bitcoin Policy UK, said on X that the bill “becoming law is a massive step forward for Bitcoin in the United Kingdom and for everyone who holds and uses it here.”

Common law in the UK, based on judges’ decisions, has established that digital assets are property, but the bill sought to codify a recommendation made by the Law Commission of England and Wales in 2024 that crypto be categorized as a new form of personal property for clarity.

“UK courts have already treated digital assets as property, but that was all through case-by-case judgments,” said the advocacy group CryptoUK. “Parliament has now written this principle into law.”

“This gives digital assets a much clearer legal footing — especially for things like proving ownership, recovering stolen assets, and handling them in insolvency or estate cases,” it added.

Digital “things” now considered personal property

CryptoUK said that the bill confirms “that digital or electronic ‘things’ can be objects of personal property rights.”

UK law categorizes personal property in two ways: a “thing in possession,” which is tangible property such as a car, and and a “thing in action,” intangible property, like the right to enforce a contract.

The bill clarifies that “a thing that is digital or electronic in nature” isn’t outside the realm of personal property rights just because it is neither a “thing in possession” nor a “thing in action.”

The Law Commission argued in its report in 2024 that digital assets can possess both qualities, and said that their unclear fit into property rights laws could hamstring dispute resolutions in court.

Change gives “greater clarity” to crypto users

CryptoUK said on X that the law gives “greater clarity and protection for consumers and investors” and gives crypto holders “the same confidence and certainty they expect with other forms of property.”

“Digital assets can be clearly owned, recovered in cases of theft or fraud, and included within insolvency and estate processes,” it added.