SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “geophysical”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Future Lunar Geophysical Mission Opportunities Including the Lunar Geophysical Network and CLPS

In the next few years, several opportunities are underway to take new geophysical observations of the Moon including geodetic and seismic. NASA’s novel Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) program seeks to acquire delivery services from 14 US companies. Nine funded task orders have been selected with payloads from multiple disciplines. Here we review the upcoming geophysical CLPS payloads and their measurement objectives then we provide a review of the Lunar Geophysical Network mission in development for New Frontiers 5. The Lunar Geophysical Network (LGN) mission is proposed to land on the Moon in the early 2030’s and deploy packages at four locations to enable continuous geophysical measurements for a minimum of 6 and a goal of 10 years. Returning to the lunar surface with a long-lived geophysical network is a key next step to advance lunar and planetary science. LGN will greatly expand our primarily Apollo-based knowledge of the deep lunar interior by identifying and characterizing mantle melt layers, as well as core size and state. To meet the mission objectives, the instrument suite provides complementary seismic, geodetic, heat flow, and electromagnetic (EM) observations. We discuss the network landing site requirements and provide example sites that meet these requirements. Landing sites include the P-5 region within the Procellarum KREEP Terrane (PKT; (lat:15˚; lon:-35˚), Schickard basin (lat:-44.3˚; lon:-55.1˚), Crisium basin (lat:18.5˚; lon:61.8˚), and the farside Korolev basin (lat:-2.4˚; lon:-159.3˚) (Figure 1). Network optimization considers the best locations to observe seismic core phases, e.g., ScS and PKP. Ray path density and proximity to young fault scarps are also analyzed to provide increased opportunities for seismic observations. Geodetic constraints from laser ranging require the LGN to have at least three nearside stations at maximum limb distances. Heat flow and EM measurements should be obtained away from terrane boundaries and from magnetic anomalies at locations representative of global trends. In our recent paper, an in-depth case study is provided for Mare Crisium. We also discuss the consequences for scientific return of less-than-optimal locations or number of stations.

Moons↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Future Lunar Geophysical Mission Opportunities Including the Lunar Geophysical Network, Artemis and CLPS

Moons↗

DOE OSTI2021

Post-remediation geophysical assessment: Investigating long-term electrical geophysical signatures resulting from bioremediation at a chlorinated solvent contaminated site

There is a growing need to assess long-term impacts of active remediation strategies on treated aquifers. A variety of biogeochemical alterations can result from interactions of the amendment with the aquifer, conceivably leading to a geophysical footprint of the long-term alteration of an aquifer. This concept of post-remediation geophysical assessment was investigated in a shallow, chlorinated solvent-contaminated aquifer six to eight years after amendment delivery. Surface resistivity imaging and cross-borehole resistivity and induced polarization (IP) imaging were performed on a transect that spanned treated and untreated zones of the aquifer. Established relationships between IP parameters and surface electrical conductivity were used to predict vertical profiles of electrolytic conductivity and surface conductivity from the inverted cross-borehole images. Aqueous geochemistry data, along with natural gamma and magnetic susceptibility logs, were used to constrain the interpretation. The electrical conductivity structure determined from surface and borehole imaging was foremost controlled by the electrolytic conductivity of the interconnected pore space, being linearly related to fluid specific conductance. The electrolytic conductivity (and thus the conductivity images alone) did not discriminate between treated and untreated zones of the aquifer. In contrast, inverted phase angles and surface conductivities did discriminate between treated and untreated zones of the aquifer, with the treated zone being up to an order of magnitude more polarizable in places. Supporting aqueous chemistry and borehole logging datasets indicate that this geophysical footprint of the long-term impact of the remediation on the aquifer is most likely associated with the formation of polarizable, dispersed iron sulfide minerals. The study opens the door to the possibility of employing time-lapse electrical geophysical measurements to assist with long-term environmental stewardship of legacy sites undergoing active remediation.

bioremediation↗

DOE OSTI2022

Porous Colloidal Nanoparticles as Injectable Multimodal Contrast Agents for Enhanced Geophysical Sensing

Injecting fluids into underground geologic structures is crucial for the development of long-term strategies for managing captured carbon and facilitating sustainable energy extraction operations. Here, we have previously reported that the injection of metal–organic frameworks (MOFs) into the subsurface can enhance seismic monitoring tools to track fluids and map complex structures, reduce risk, and verify containment in carbon storage reservoirs because of their absorption capacity of low-frequency seismic waves. Here, we demonstrate that water-based Cr/Zn/Zr MOF colloidal suspensions (nanofluids) are multimodal geophysical contrast agents that enhance near-wellbore logging tools. Based on experimental fluid-only measurements, MIL-101(Cr), ZIF-8, and UiO-66 nanofluids have distinct complex conductivity and/or low-field nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) signatures that are relevant to field-deployed technologies, implying the potential to enhance near-wellbore monitoring of CO 2 injection and associated processes with downhole logging tools. Small- and wide-angle X-ray scattering characterization of ~0.5 wt % MIL-101(Cr) suspensions confirmed phase stability and provided insight into the fractal nature of colloidal nanoparticles. Finally, low-field (2 MHz) NMR measurements of MIL-101(Cr) nanofluid injection into a prototypical Berea sandstone demonstrate how paramagnetic high-surface area MOFs may dominate the relaxation times of hydrogen-bearing fluids in porous geologic matrices, enhancing the mapping of near-surface and near-wellbore transport pathways and advancing sustainable subsurface energy technologies.

NMR↗

DOE OSTI2022

Geophysical monitoring for geologic carbon storage

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Geosciences↗

DOE OSTI2022

Geophysical Characterization and Monitoring of the 200 Area Treated Effluent Disposal Facility to Support Permit Renewal; TEDF Geophysical Monitoring

The Treated Effluent Disposal Facility (TEDF), located in the 200 East Area of the Hanford Site, is a site where non-hazardous and non-radioactive liquid wastes are disposed into two state-permitted infiltration basins. In 2016, the Washington State Department of Ecology denied a permit renewal request for TEDF due to the inability to adequately assess the impact of TEDF discharge water on the underlying groundwater quality. TEDF overlies the relatively impermeable Ringold Lower Mud (RLM) unit, whose upper contact lies in the vadose zone approximately 30 m below ground surface and approximately 10 m above the water table boundary. The RLM is assumed to isolate TEDF discharge water from the natural groundwater aquifer, which is monitored using wellbores screened below the RLM. Therefore, samples collected from monitoring wells near TEDF are not considered representative of TEDF discharge water. Rather, TEDF discharge water is assumed to mound on top of the RLM to form a perched aquifer. To support permitting of the TEDF, a new monitoring well is required that can be used to sample water from the presumed perched water aquifer above the RLM. Ideally, the screened section of the well would be located at the peak of the perched water mound(s), which presumably occurs at the point of maximum vertical flux from TEDF to the RLM, or equivalently where the dominant infiltration flow paths reach the RLM. This report describes how time-lapse 3D electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) was used in conjunction with nominal TEDF discharge operations to image the dominant flow paths from each pond to the RLM. Results are summarized in Figure ES.1. Figure ES.1A shows a satellite image of the TEDF overlain by an array of surface ERT electrodes. The solid and dashed black circles denote the zones of maximum vertical flux at the RLM within the south and north ponds, respectively, and presumably the regions where perched water peaks during discharge. Figure ES.1B shows time-lapse difference imaging results approximately 15 days after switching discharge from the south pond to the north pond. Blue iso-surfaces beneath the north pond denote regions of increasing bulk electrical conductivity caused by increasing saturation due to infiltrating water. Red iso-surfaces beneath the south pond denote regions that were previously saturated during the south pond discharge and are now de-saturating, causing a decrease in bulk electrical conductivity. In both cases, the zones of maximum change mark the dominant flow paths to the RLM. Figure ES.1C shows time-lapse imaging results approximately 15 days after switching discharge from the north pond to the south pond. In this case, blue iso-surfaces mark the dominant flow paths to the RLM from the south pond. The red iso-surfaces mark the dominant flow paths that existed during discharge to the north pond. The regions of maximum change in bulk conductivity (due to saturation or desaturation) that mark the primary flow paths are equivalent in both cases and denoted by the dashed solid and black circles. If a perched water zone forms on the RLM, it is likely to mound within or near the dashed circle during discharge to the north pond, and in the solid circle during discharge to the south pond. In other words, if perched water mounding occurs, the circles mark the optimum locations suggested by the ERT imaging for monitoring boreholes to be placed, enabling samples to be collected that are representative of TEDF discharge impacts on groundwater quality.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

NASA NTRS1997

Geophysical Characterization of Some Terranes and the Geophysical Modeling of Candidate Suture Zones

Indian participation in this project was terminated during the last year by a sudden withdrawal of support by the Department of Science and Technology, India, to the Indian Institute of Geomagnetism, Bombay. As a result, significant changes in the project focus had to be undertaken. Much of the work carried out at Southern Illinois University at Carbondale during the first year of the project anticipated the Indian participation and included development of computer programs to be used on gravity and magnetic data from the Indian subcontinent and preparations for fieldwork, tutorials, and workshops in India. Despite these setbacks, which were beyond our control, a number of significant tasks have been accomplished during the project period. These include: (1) Completion of digitization of the regional Bouguer gravity anomaly map of India and the regional ground total intensity magnetic anomaly map of India at an overdetermined spacing of 0.05 degrees. (2) We investigated and assessed the limitations of the Euler method using environmental examples because detailed aeromagnetic maps of parts of India were not available for interpretation by this method. (3) We also undertook an assessment of a suture zone between the Nyaza Craton (Archean) and the Mozambique Belt (Pan African) in the Kenya Rift, Africa, using gravity anomalies and the lithospheric seismological models. (4) We studied Magsat and high-altitude (approx. 4 km) aeromagnetic data over Canada.

Ravat, D.↗

DOE OSTI2022

Kimberlina 1.2 CCUS Geophysical Models and Synthetic Data Sets

This synthetic multi-scale and multi-physics data set was produced in collaboration with teams at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, National Energy Technology Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Colorado School of Mines through the Science-informed Machine Learning for Accelerating Real-Time Decisions in Subsurface Applications (SMART) Initiative. Data are associated with the following publication: Alumbaugh, D., Gasperikova, E., Crandall, D., Commer, M., Feng, S., Harbert, W., Li, Y., Lin, Y., and Samarasinghe, S., “The Kimberlina Synthetic Geophysical Model and Data Set for CO2 Monitoring Investigations”, The Geoscience Data Journal, 2023, DOI: 10.1002/gdj3.191. The dataset uses the Kimberlina 1.2 CO2 reservoir flow model simulations based on a hypothetical CO2 storage site in California (Birkholzer et al., 2011; Wainwright et al., 2013). Geophysical properties models (P- and S-wave seismic velocities, saturated density, and electrical resistivity) were produced with an approach similar to that of Yang et al. (2019) and Gasperikova et al. (2022) for 100 Kimberlina 1.2 reservoir models. Links to individual resources are provided below: [CO2 Saturation Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-co2-saturation-models); Resistivity Models – [part 1](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-1), [part 2](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-2), and [part 3](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-3); [Vp Velocity Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-vp-velocity-models); [Vs Velocity Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-vs-velocity-models); [Density Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-density-models). The 3D distributions of geophysical properties for the 33 time stamps of the SIM001 model were used to generate synthetic seismic, gravity, and electromagnetic (EM) responses for 33 times between zero and 200 years. Synthetic surface seismic data were generated using 2D and 3D finite-difference codes that simulate the acoustic wave equation (Moczo et al., 2007). 2D data were simulated for six point-pressure sources along a 2D line with 10 m receiver spacing and a time spacing of 0.0005 s. 3D simulations were completed for 25 surface pressure sources using a source separation of 1 km in both the x and y directions and a time spacing of 0.001 s. Links to individual resources are provided below: [2D velocity models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-2d-velocity-models) and [2D surface seismic data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-2d-surface-seismic-data). [3D velocity models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-velocity-models), and 3D seismic data [year0](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year0), [year1](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year1), [year2](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year2), [year5](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year5), [year10](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year10), [year15](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year15), [year20](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year20), [year25](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year25), [year30](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year30), [year35](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year35), [year40](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year40), [year45](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year45), [year49](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year49), [year50](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year50), [year51](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year51), [year52](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year52), [year55](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year55), [year60](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year60), [year65](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year65), [year70](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year70), [year75](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year75), [year80](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year80), [year85](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year85), [year90](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year90), [year95](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year95), [year100](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year100), [year110](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year110), [year120](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year120), [year130](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year130), [year140](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year140), [year150](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year150), [year175](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year175), [year200](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year200). The Python scripts to read these models and data are provided [here](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-python-scripts). EM simulations used a borehole-to-surface survey configuration, with the source located near the reservoir level and receivers on the surface using the code developed by Commer and Newman (2008). Pseudo-2D data for the source at [2500 m](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-pseudo-2d-csem-data-tz2500m) and [3025 m](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-pseudo-2d-csem-data-tz3025m), used a 2D inline receiver configuration to simulate a response over 3D resistivity models. The [3D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-csem-data) contain electric fields generated by borehole sources at monitoring well locations and measured over a surface receiver grid. Vector gravity data, both on the surface and in boreholes, were simulated using a modeling code developed by Rim and Li (2015). The simulation scenarios were parallel to those used for the EM: [pseudo-2D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-gravity-data) were calculated along the same lines and within the same boreholes, and [3D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-gravity-data) were simulated over 3D models on the surface and in three monitoring wells. A series of [synthetic well logs](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-well-logs) of CO2 saturation, acoustic velocity, density, and induction resistivity in the injection well and three monitoring wells are also provided at 0, 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, and 20 years after the initiation of injection. These were constructed by combining the low-frequency trend of the geophysical models with the high-frequency variations of actual well logs collected in the Kimberlina 1 well that was drilled at the proposed site. Measurements of permeability and pore connectivity were made on cores of Vedder Sandstone, which forms the primary reservoir unit: [CT micro scans](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-ct-micro-scans-of-vedder-formation) and [Industrial CT Images](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-industrial-ct-images-vedder-formation). These measurements provide the range of scales in the otherwise synthetic data set to be as close to a real-world situation as possible. References: Birkholzer, J.T., Zhou, Q., Cortis, A. and Finsterle, S., 2011. A sensitivity study on regional pressure buildup from large-scale CO2 storage projects. Energy Procedia, 4, 4371-4378. Commer, M., and Newman, G.A., 2008. New advances in three-dimensional controlled-source electromagnetic inversion, Geophysical Journal International, 172, 513-535. Gasperikova, E., Appriou, D., Bonneville, A., Feng, Z., Huang, L., Gao, K., Yang, X., Daley, T., 2022, Sensitivity of geophysical techniques for monitoring secondary CO2 storage plumes, Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control, Volume 114, 103585, ISSN 1750-5836, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2022.103585. Moczo, P., J.O. Robertsson and L. Eisner, 2007, The finite-difference time-domain method for modeling of seismic wave propagation: Advances in geophysics, 48, 421-516. Rim, H., and Y. Li, 2015, Advantages of borehole vector gravity in density imaging, Geophysics, 80, G1-G13. Wainwright, H. M.; Finsterle, S.; Zhou, Q.; Birkholzer, J. T., 2013. Modeling the Performance of Large-Scale CO2 Storage Systems: A Comparison of Different Sensitivity Analysis Methods. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 17, 189205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.05.007, DOI: 10.18141/1603331. Yang, X., Buscheck, T.A., Mansoor, K., Wang, Z., Gao, K., Huang, L., Appriou, D., and Carroll, S.A., 2019. Assessment of geophysical monitoring methods for detection of brine and CO2 leakage in drinking water aquifers, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 90, 102803, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.102803.

CCUS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Field evaluation of semi‐automated moisture estimation from geophysics using machine learning

Geophysical methods can provide three-dimensional (3D), spatially continuous estimates of soil moisture. However, point-to-point comparisons of geophysical properties to measure soil moisture data are frequently unsatisfactory, resulting in geophysics being used for qualitative purposes only. This is because (1) geophysics requires models that relate geophysical signals to soil moisture, (2) geophysical methods have potential uncertainties resulting from smoothing and artifacts introduced from processing and inversion, and (3) results from multiple geophysical methods are not easily combined within a single soil moisture estimation framework. To investigate these potential limitations, an irrigation experiment was performed wherein soil moisture was monitored through time, and several surface geophysical datasets indirectly sensitive to soil moisture were collected before and after irrigation: ground penetrating radar, electrical resistivity tomography (ERT), and frequency domain electromagnetics (FDEM). Data were exported in both raw and processed form, and then snapped to a common 3D grid to facilitate moisture prediction by standard calibration techniques, multivariate regression, and machine learning. A combination of inverted ERT data, raw FDEM, and inverted FDEM data was most informative for predicting soil moisture using a random regression forest model (one-thousand 60/40 training/test cross-validation folds produced root mean squared errors ranging from 0.025–0.046 cm 3 /cm 3 ). This cross-validated model was further supported by a separate evaluation using a test set from a physically separate portion of the study area. Machine learning was conducive to a semi-automated model-selection process that could be used for other sites and datasets to locally improve accuracy.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS1992

Marine Magnetic Data Holdings of World Data Center-a for Marine Geology and Geophysics

The World Data Center-A for Marine Geology and Geophysics is co-located with the Marine Geology & Geophysical Data Center, Boulder, CO. Fifteen million digital marine magnetic trackline measurements are managed within the GEOphysical DAta System (GEODAS). The bulk of these data were collected with proton precision magnetometers under Transit Satellite navigational control. Along-track sampling averages about 1 sample per kilometer, while spatial density, a function of ship's track and survey pattern, range from 4 to 0.02 data points/sq. km. In the near future, the entire geophysical data set will be available on CD-ROM. The Marine Geology and Geophysics Division (World Data Center-A for MGG), of the National Geophysical Data Center, handles a broad spectrum of marine geophysical data, including measurements of bathymetry, magnetics, gravity, seismic reflection subbottom profiles, and side-scan images acquired by ships throughout the world's oceans. Digital data encompass the first three, while the latter two are in analog form, recorded on 35mm microfilm. The marine geophysical digital trackline data are contained in the GEODAS data base which includes 11.6 million nautical miles of cruise trackline coverage contributed by more than 70 organizations worldwide. The inventory includes data from 3206 cruises with 33 million digital records and indexing to 5.3 million track miles of analog data on microfilm.

Sharman, George F.↗

DOE OSTI2024

Geophysical Signatures of Crack Network Coalescence in Rocks at Multiple Length Scales

The main goal of the research project was to identify the geophysical signatures of fracture growth in natural rocks by utilizing novel geophysical techniques. The research objectives were to (a) investigate the potential for geophysical methods to determine when cracks initiate, the types and locations of propagated cracks, and the coalescence of networks of cracks in natural rocks at multiple scales, (b) determine how damage at the microscale evolved into damage at the macroscale and then link the microscopic and macroscopic observations, (c) quantify crack coalescence in rocks under realistic stress conditions using coupled mechanical-geophysical-optical visualization, and (d) identify the precursors in geophysical signals to crack coalescence. The following research thrusts were explored to achieve the research objectives: (1) uniaxial compression testing of rock specimens with and without a set of pre‐existing flaws and (2) triaxial compression testing of natural rock specimens. These thrusts allowed for exploring fracturing in rocks under realistic in situ environments and at multiple scales. This project provided educational opportunities for nine graduate and undergraduate students and resulted in 27 peer-reviewed publications. This first research thrust focused on investigating the micromechanics of fractures in rocks through uniaxial compression testing combined with advanced geophysical and imaging techniques, specifically acoustic emission (AE) monitoring, ultrasonic imaging, and 2-dimensional Digital Image Correlation (2D-DIC). By examining damage processes under time-independent and time-dependent loading conditions, insights into damage localization, crack initiation, and fracturing mechanisms were gained. It was observed that the AE signals and the strain-based measurements directly reflect the state of damage in the rock specimen and could be used to identify the cracking levels, such as the crack initiation (CI) and crack damage (CD), and the mode of deformation. A novel calibration apparatus was developed to enhance the accuracy of AE sensors, allowing for the estimation of key parameters such as magnitude, source dimension, stress drop, and radiated seismic energy associated with the fractures. The findings highlighted significant variations in the temporal evolution of AE source parameters during the primary, secondary, and tertiary stages of creep, identifying tensile cracking as the primary deformation mode. The second research thrust focused on enhancing the understanding of fracturing processes in natural rocks through triaxial compression testing, real-time AE monitoring, and ultrasonic monitoring. We investigated the impact of various factors such as fracture propagation regimes, injection parameters, rock types, and pre-existing conditions on the hydraulic fracture (HF) behavior using scaled true-triaxially loaded specimens of Barre granite and Lyons sandstone. Custom sensor housing facilitated concurrent active and passive monitoring to analyze hydro-mechanical responses and microseismicity associated with different HF scenarios. A coupled investigation of passive microseismicity and active signal attributes permitted a detailed comprehension of the various HF processes (aseismic deformation, fracture initiation and propagation, fluid permeation, and leak-off) and their dependence on the specific rock type. The findings of this research demonstrated the effectiveness of AE monitoring techniques in providing valuable insights into the impact of various factors on the behavior and dynamics of HF processes. The advancements in monitoring techniques, offering a more thorough and precise approach, represent a significant step towards optimizing HF practices and ensuring sustainable resource extraction.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2026

PyHydroGeophysX: An extensible open-source platform for integrating hydrological models with geophysical measurements

Hydrological models and geophysical measurements are widely used tools for understanding subsurface hydrological processes relevant to water resource management, yet they typically remain disconnected due to technical barriers. We present PyHydroGeophysX, an open-source Python platform bridging this gap by providing standardized interfaces between hydrological modeling software (MODFLOW, ParFlow) and geophysical simulation tools (PyGIMLi, SimPEG). The platform implements bidirectional workflows: translating hydrological outputs into simulated geophysical responses through petrophysical models, and extracting hydrological information from geophysical inversions. Key features include bidirectional workflow modules, configurable petrophysical models, time-lapse inversion with temporal regularization, parallel computing, and mesh utilities for property transfer between geophysical and hydrological grids. The modular architecture of PyHydroGeophysX enables researchers to incorporate additional models and methods, fostering broader adoption of integrated hydrogeophysical approaches. The software is freely available on GitHub and is intended for researchers and practitioners working at the intersection of hydrology and geophysics.

Hydrogeophysics↗

DOE OSTI2026

A ModEx Framework for Watershed Subsurface Investigation With Limited Geophysical Data Using Machine Learning and Hydrologic Modeling

Abstract Subsurface heterogeneity influences watershed hydrology strongly but remains difficult to characterize at catchment scales with sparse and costly field data. Geophysical surveys such as electromagnetic induction (EMI) provide local spatial subsurface images yet scaling them to watershed scales and converting EMI‐derived resistivity into hydraulic properties remains a challenge. We present a Model–Experiment (ModEx) framework that integrates limited EMI data with machine learning (ML) and hydrologic modeling to improve process representation and guide field investigations. Sparse EMI surveys were scaled to the catchment scale using a Random Forest model, and the resulting resistivity fields were combined with nearby borehole constraints to parameterize a hydrologic model. The EMI‐informed hydrological simulations improved predictions of streamflow sustained by subsurface flow and shallow saturation patterns. By combining EMI data and ML with hydrologic modeling, the ModEx framework guides future subsurface surveys, providing a transferable and efficient strategy for data–model integration across diverse watersheds. Plain Language Summary Mapping the underground network of soil and rock that controls water is essential for predicting floods and droughts, but seeing underground is difficult and expensive. We cannot drill everywhere, so scientists use geophysical tools to scan broad areas. There are two key challenges: these geophysical scans are often sparse across the whole watershed, and the geophysical data is hard to translate into water‐related properties. We used artificial intelligence to solve these problems. We taught a computer to find patterns linking the limited geophysical data to the land surface properties. This allowed it to fill in the gaps and create a complete, useful subsurface map for the entire watershed. This new map improves hydrologic simulations, leading to more accurate predictions of water movement in the watershed. It also helps scientists build better models with less data and generates a priority map showing where to measure next, making future investigations more efficient. Key Points Limited EMI scaled with ML improves catchment‐scale subsurface parameterization for hydrologic models The framework integrates hydrologic modeling with limited geophysical data to support subsurface investigation design ModEx framework offers a transferable data–model integration strategy that quantifies and reduces uncertainty guiding watershed studies

Chen, Hang↗

NASA NTRS1990

The 1990 Western Pacific Geophysics meeting

The 1990 Western Pacific Geophysics Meeting was held in Kanazawa, Japan from 15-21 Aug. 1990. This was the first meeting of a new series of meetings for the American Geophysical Union, and it proved to be very successful in terms of the scientific program and attendance, which included over 1,000 participants. The intent of this meeting was an effort on the part of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) and several Japanese geophysical societies to gather individual Earth and space scientists at a major scientific meeting to focus on geophysical problems being studied in the western Pacific rim. The meeting was organized along the lines of a typical AGU annual meeting with some invited talks, many contributed talks, poster sessions, and with emphasis on presentations and informal discussions. The program committee consisted of scientists from both the U.S. and Japan. This meeting provided ample opportunities for U.S. and Japanese scientists to get to know each other and their works on a one-to-one basis. It was also a valuable opportunity for students studying geophysics to get together and interact with each other and with scientists from both the U.S. and Japan. There were 939 abstracts submitted to the conference and a total of 102 sessions designed as a result of the abstracts received. The topics of interest are as follows: space geodetic and observatory measurements for earthquake and tectonic studies; gravity, sea level, and vertical motion; variations in earth rotation and earth dynamics; sedimentary magnetism; global processes and precipitation; subsurface contaminant transport; U.S. Western Pacific Rim initiatives in hydrology; shelf and coastal circulation; tectonics, magmatism, and hydrothermal processes; earthquake prediction and hazard assessment; seismic wave propagation in realistic media; and dynamics and structure of plate boundaries and of the Earth's deep interior.

Source record↗

DOE OSTI2021

Probabilistic Evaluation of Geoscientific Hypotheses with Geophysical Data: Application to Electrical Resistivity Imaging of a Fractured Bedrock Zone

As climate changes and populations grow, groundwater sustainability is becoming increasingly important. Groundwater models, based on a conceptual understanding of the subsurface structure, are crucial tools for making sustainable management decisions. Conceptual models of the subsurface are based on knowledge of geological processes, and, frequently, observations from geophysical data. A frequent problem in groundwater model development occurs when multiple geological phenomena could explain a single subsurface observation. Uncertainty in geophysical data makes it even more difficult to discern which explanations are consistent with the geophysics. Here, we present a framework for testing geological when a geological feature is observed in geophysical data, but its physical characteristics are uncertain. The framework builds on Popper-Bayes methods developed in previous work, and is applied to study a fractured bedrock zone in a mountainous watershed in southwest Colorado. First, we outline six hypotheses based on the geological history of the watershed. Then, using the proposed Popper-Bayes approach, we demonstrate that three of the six hypotheses are inconsistent with measured electrical resistivity data, even after accounting for uncertainty. Finally, we discuss the importance of the prior model, and how this framework for handling geophysical uncertainty can be applied in other settings.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

Steptoe Valley NV Data Compilation: Understanding a Stratigraphic Hydrothermal Resource through Geophysical Imaging

Sandia National Laboratories partnered with a multi-disciplinary group of subject matter experts to evaluate a stratigraphic geothermal resource in Steptoe Valley, Nevada using both established and novel geophysical imaging techniques. Provided here are a compilation of newly acquired data over the area and select modeling efforts. This encompasses a 3D geological model (inclusive of full Leapfrog files, Leapfrog viewer files, and XYZ data for faults and stratigraphy) with embedded geophysical modeling, controlled-source electromagnetic (CSEM) and magnetotelluric (MT) data packages, aqueous spring geochemistry data, seismic reflection interpretations, and a gravity data package. The stratigraphic reservoir in Steptoe Valley was previously discovered during oil and gas exploration. Subsequent studies, such as the Nevada Play Fairway Analysis, added data which further highlighted potential resource targets in the basin. Geophysical surveys, complimented with refined geologic mapping and geochemical sampling, were deployed to further characterize the resource. The resulting 3D geologic interpretation, conceptual model refinements, and reservoir simulations suggest that a power-capable reservoir is economically accessible in the Paleozoic carbonates of the deep/central basin. Additional geophysical characterization and exploration drilling efforts are recommended to calibrate interpretation and determine where/how to potentially develop the Steptoe resource. The geophysical tools, interpretations, lessons learned, and publicly available data generated by this study establish an exploration methodology to inform decisions for successful development of stratigraphic reservoirs.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2021

Discovering Blind Geothermal Systems in the Great Basin Region: An Integrated Geologic and Geophysical Approach for Establishing Geothermal Play Fairways: All Phases

Most geothermal resources in the Great Basin region of the western USA are blind, and thus the discovery of new commercial-grade systems requires synthesis of favorable characteristics for geothermal activity. The geothermal play fairway concept involves integration of multiple parameters indicative of geothermal activity to identify promising areas for new development. This project integrated multiple datasets to apply the play fairway concept and assess geothermal potential in a large region of the Great Basin in Nevada. It is therefore referred to as the Nevada play fairway project. This project was a strong collaborative effort between several organizations, led by the Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology at the University of Nevada, Reno, but with key support from the U.S. Geological Survey, ATLAS Geosciences, Inc,, Hi-Q Geophysical, Inc., Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Utah Geological Survey, and Innovative Geothermal Ltd. In Budget Period 1 of this project, available data for nine geologic, geochemical, and geophysical parameters were initially synthesized to produce a new detailed geothermal potential map of 96,000 km2 from west-central to eastern Nevada. These parameters were grouped into subsets and individually weighted to delineate rankings for local permeability, intermediate permeability, regional permeability, and thermal potential, which collectively defined geothermal play fairways (i.e., most likely locations for significant geothermal fluid flow). This initial work was aimed at reducing the risks in regional exploration and therefore facilitating discovery of new commercial-grade systems in blind settings, as well as in areas with surface expressions of geothermal activity. Budget Period 2 of the project involved detailed analysis of some of the most promising areas identified in Phase 1. Twenty-four highly prospective areas, including both known undeveloped systems and previously undiscovered potential blind systems, were identified for further analysis. After reconnaissance of these areas, five of the most promising sites were selected for detailed studies. Multiple techniques were employed in the detailed studies, including geologic mapping, shallow temperature surveys, gravity surveys, Lidar, geochemical studies, seismic reflection analysis, and 3D modeling. The goal of the detailed studies was to identify specific areas with the highest likelihood for high permeability and thermal fluids, such that drill sites could be targeted. Three main sets of predictive maps were generated for each detailed study area: 1) play fairway maps, 2) play fairway error maps, and 3) direct evidence maps. Local- and intermediate-scale permeability models were revised to reflect results of the detailed geologic, geophysical, and geochemical analyses. Budget Period 3 of the project involved more detailed geophysical analyses and temperature-gradient (TG) drilling in southeastern Gabbs Valley and northern Granite Springs Valley, deemed the two most promising sites, with the goal of providing preliminary validation of the play fairway methodology. In southeastern Gabbs Valley, the collocation of a favorable structural setting (displacement transfer zone and fault intersections), Quaternary faults, intersecting and terminating gravity gradients, magnetic low, shallow (2 m) temperature anomaly, low resistivity anomaly, and promising geothermometry from nearby water wells provided evidence for a blind system. Drilling of six TG holes defines an apparent geothermal system at this locality with temperatures as high as 124°C at 152 m. This system is blind, with no surface hot springs, fumaroles, or paleo-geothermal deposits. For northern Granite Springs Valley, a favorable structural setting (termination of a major Quaternary normal fault), terminating gravity gradient, magnetic gradient, newly discovered sinter deposits, nearby warm water wells, previously drilled TG holes in the vicinity, and promising geothermometry suggest a hidden system. Drilling of six new TG holes yields temperatures of ~96°C at ~250 m, suggesting the presence of a geothermal system. Major lessons learned in the course of this project include: 1) initially identified sites commonly include multiple favorable structural settings at a finer scale; 2) promising sites in Cenozoic basins cannot be recognized without detailed geophysical surveys; and 3) play fairway analysis should be refined as the exploration program vectors into the most promising sites and finer-scale data are acquired. In addition to producing copious amounts of data, this project resulted in 16 published papers, 10 abstracts, more than 40 presentations across the U.S. and abroad (including several keynote addresses), 2 Masters theses, and 7 media reports.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

NASA NTRS1982

IDIMS/GEOPAK: Users manual for a geophysical data display and analysis system

The application of an existing image analysis system to the display and analysis of geophysical data is described, the potential for expanding the capabilities of such a system toward more advanced computer analytic and modeling functions is investigated. The major features of the IDIMS (Interactive Display and Image Manipulation System) and its applicability for image type analysis of geophysical data are described. Development of a basic geophysical data processing system to permit the image representation, coloring, interdisplay and comparison of geophysical data sets using existing IDIMS functions and to provide for the production of hard copies of processed images was described. An instruction manual and documentation for the GEOPAK subsystem was produced. A training course for personnel in the use of the IDIMS/GEOPAK was conducted. The effectiveness of the current IDIMS/GEOPAK system for geophysical data analysis was evaluated.

Libert, J. M.↗