Geoscientists studying volcanoes must have a deep understanding of many topics such as heat transfer, fluid dynamics, and earthquakes. And in geophysics, innovative data analysis is often the name of the game.
Studying seismic signals: As such, it’s no surprise volcanologists (as opposed to Vulcanologists for my Star Trek nerds) have incorporated the Gutenberg and Richter frequency-magnitude distribution (FMD) of earthquakes: log 𝑁 = 𝑎 − 𝑏𝑀, where 𝑁 is the cumulative number of seismic events with magnitude greater or equal to 𝑀, 𝑎 represents the productivity, and the slope b is commonly referred to as the b value.
Key variable: The b value is useful as a descriptor of magma movement in the subsurface and potentially as an eruption predictor in the latest study out of Science Advances.
The b value is inverse to the magnitude of earthquakes that occur, so larger b values mean there are more smaller magnitude events.
Larger b = lots of boogie: Smaller magnitude events are often associated with volatile gasses coming out of the melt around magma storage zones that may increase fluid pressure within fractures and fault surfaces and cause slip.
Smaller b = bigger boogie: Conversely, tectonic loading or the rapid ascent of magma can pressurize the system without releasing considerable quantities of gas, which leads to the closure of microcracks, their propagation, and coalescence into larger fractures and lower b values.
What they looked at: The researchers, led by Marco Firetto Carlino, wanted to know if tracking b value movements through time could indicate an eruption was imminent.
What they did: To achieve that, they needed to understand how magma ascent impacted earthquake production, so they took nearly 20 years of earthquake data from the Istituto Nazionale Geofisica e Vulcanologia, Osservatorio Etneo and relocated them using the tomoDDPS software and a 3D velocity model that integrated active and passive seismic data.
With the locations better constrained, they binned earthquakes into three distinct areas under the volcano:
- A deeper volume interpreted to be a purely tectonic environment with a b value of 1.0 (10–30+ kilometers below sea level)
- A middle volume more poorly constrained between 7 and 12 kilometers below sea level with a high magmatic influence and a b value of 1.7
- A volume from surface to about 2 kilometers deep that is a shallow magma storage and plumbing area with a b value of 1.3
What they found: Looking at a five-year period of unrest at Etna, which included three different phases of volcanic activity, Carlino’s team saw the b value was in overall agreement with the expected sequence of mantle recharge, its transfer and storage at intermediate depths, and its final ascent to the uppermost part of the system.
Yes, but: A downside of the study is that it requires a dataset bred from accurate and continuous monitoring, which is available at some volcanoes, but not all, and there needs to be a relatively solid understanding of the volcanic system to begin with.
Transferable insights: When reading the article, I was struck by the parallels between understanding magma movement in the subsurface and oil and gas operations, including how changes in the stress regime were measured and might indicate whether subsurface fissures are sealed or transmissive, much like fractures in our wellbores.
The implications shown in this study could be applied to oil and gas reservoirs. Micro seismic is often used to track and understand fracture propagation in a reservoir, and perhaps applying the ideas displayed in this work could help us understand reservoir and fracture dynamics at a deeper level.
Dig deeper: There is so much more in the article, and I highly recommend checking it out to get a dose of volcanology and even some igneous petrology. For a higher-level overview, go here.