Are Earthquakes Hiding Secret Nuclear Tests? New Study Raises Concerns

A recent review by seismologists at Los Alamos National Laboratory suggests that some earthquakes might actually be covert underground nuclear tests. The study, led by Joshua Carmichael and published in the Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, highlights the challenges in distinguishing between natural seismic events and clandestine nuclear explosions.

According to a new review article published in the Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America that contradicts the conventional wisdom about explosion "masking."

Underground nuclear tests can produce seismic signals similar to those of natural earthquakes, making detection difficult. However, advancements in seismic monitoring techniques, such as analyzing the ratio of compressional (P) waves to shear (S) waves, have improved the ability to differentiate between the two. Explosions typically generate more P-waves relative to S-waves compared to earthquakes.

The new analysis by Joshua Carmichael and colleagues at Los Alamos National Laboratory found that advanced signal detector technology that can identify a 1.7-ton buried explosion with a 97% success rate only has a 37% success rate when seismic signals from that explosion are hidden within the seismic waveforms of an earthquake that happens within 100 seconds and about 250 kilometers away from the explosion.

The overlapping waveforms of explosion and earthquake "obfuscate the ability of even the most sensitive digital signal detectors we have to identify that explosion," said Carmichael.

The findings could lead experts to reconsider a 2012 report that concluded earthquake signals could not cover up explosion signals. Potential explosion masking by natural seismic signals is a concern for the community of scientists charged with nuclear test monitoring around the globe.

In North Korea, which has held six nuclear tests over the past 20 years, an increase in regional seismic instruments shows that "there's been a lot more low-magnitude seismicity in the vicinity of test sites than we initially realized," Carmichael noted.

The new findings suggest that "background seismicity in regions where there's any sort of seismicity at all is going to measurably and substantially reduce the probability that we can detect signals from an underground explosion at a test site," he added.

The researchers also found that natural signals from earthquake swarms or other repeating seismic events could be similarly hidden by overlapping waveforms. In this case, the masking effect dropped detection from a 92% to a 16% detection rate.

"This may mean that we probably underestimate a lot of the low magnitude seismicity that is sourced during a swarm or an aftershock sequence," Carmichael said. "In other words, we could be largely undercounting the number of earthquakes that occur in these swarms or in certain aftershock sequences."

Explosion masking has been difficult to test because there are so few explosions to examine, and very few data sets that contain both explosion and natural seismic signals.

Trending News