The commission examined the tectonic stress conditions, local geology, induced seismicity, drill data and details of the hydraulic stimulations associated with the geothermal project in Pohang, which was intended to construct a heat exchanger 4-5 km down in the crystalline bedrock. A similar petrothermal geothermal energy project was also attempted in Basel in 2006. Projects like this entail pumping fluid into the ground under high pressure. As expected, this triggers numerous minor quakes. Unnoticed by the operators, these injections in Pohang repeatedly set off earthquakes in quite a large previously unknown fault zone. This weakened the apparently tectonically pre-stressed fault line, leading to the magnitude 5.5 earthquake. Now that the causal link has been proved, the expert commission is asking what lessons can be learnt from the occurrence.

Its verdict on the project is far from positive. Indeed, looking back it can pinpoint failings at all stages of the undertaking. Before work began, geological studies had shown that some fractures were critically pre-stressed. Bearing in mind the proximity to a medium-sized city with a major industrial port, this finding should have prompted an adjustment of the project's risk assessment. Then the first hydraulic stimulations began at borehole PX-2. The geological reports state that large quantities of the fluid pumped into PX-2 seeped away. This is unusual, constituting another alarm signal, an indication that the borehole ran through a sizeable interference zone. Locally, the spillage of the injected fluid increased the pressure on the fault zone and already triggered numerous small earthquakes early on. Yet this increased induced seismicity was only analysed after the magnitude 5.5 earthquake.

The commission also looks into the two-month period between the last hydraulic stimulations and the damaging quake. This time lag has repeatedly been interpreted as indicative of no connection between the geothermal project and the earthquake. However, the report invokes findings from other projects which prove that induced seismicity often does not stop when hydraulic stimulations come to an end. The commission recommends involving the respective authorities and all relevant experts in the run-up to future projects, to draw up a comprehensive risk analysis and then keep it constantly updated. Furthermore, a reliable real-time monitoring system has to be set up, the processes and injection strategy must be constantly reviewed and, if need be, corrected, and risk mitigation measures need to be formally noted down and communicated.

Shortly after the earthquake in Pohang, the canton of Jura called for a review of the risk analysis for the planned petrothermal geothermal energy project in Haut-Sorne. The operator, Geo-Energie Suisse, has written an appraisal, which the SED is currently examining on behalf of the canton, taking account of all the known findings from Pohang. The SED is also involved in research work at the Bedretto Underground Laboratory for Geoenergies. There, along with other national and international partners, ETH Zurich, is conducting research to ascertain whether geothermal energy can be exploited safely, efficiently and sustainably using any existing technologies or procedures.

Science article "Managing injection-induced seismic risk"

Report by the commission (in Korean and English – scroll down and click on link to PDF file)

Science article "The November 2017 Mw 5.5 Pohang earthquake: A possible case of induced seismicity in South Korea"

In all, 12 water jets propel the water shoots up to heights of as much as 35 metres. They are arranged in four groups of three, representing the acceleration, speed and path of the transmitted signal respectively. These three parameters are also fundamental for analysing seismological data.

The Aquaretum was gifted to population and visitors of Zurich by the Zurich Insurance Group and made with the support of Fischer Architekten, the sound artist Andres Bosshard and the team from Metallatelier.

Three other signals of likely seismic origin occurred on 14 March, 10 April, and 11 April 2019. These signals are more ambiguous to the InSight team than the one on 6 April, but do not appear to be clearly associated with atmospheric disturbances or other known noise sources. They are smaller than the event on 6 April and were only detected by the more sensitive broadband sensors. The team will continue to study these events to try to determine their origin.

Based on these first records, marsquakes seem to be distinct to earthquakes. According to their size and long duration, they are more similar to quakes recorded on the Moon by the Apollo programme. Whereas on Earth plate tectonics is the dominant process that provokes quakes, on the Moon the cooling and contraction causes tremors. The relevant processes at Mars are not yet fully understood. In any case, stress is built up over time until it is strong enough to break the crust. Different materials can change the speed of seismic waves or reflect them, allowing scientists to use these waves to learn about the interior of a planet and model its formation. The events recorded until now are too small to provide useful data on the deep Martian interior. Nevertheless, they mark a milestone of the InSight mission, proving the efficiency of the data processing and analysis capabilities, both developed at ETH Zurich.