From Detection to Action: Overcoming the Last-Mile Challenges in Seafloor Geohazard Monitoring

Authors

  • Zirui Hong

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61173/vq0zzm33

Keywords:

Seafloor Geohazard Monitoring, Early Warning Systems, Sensor Reliability and Data. Integra-tion

Abstract

Submarine geohazards, including earthquakes, landslides, and volcanic activity, pose a series of complex threats to coastal communities and critical offshore infrastructure. While recent advances in seafloor monitoring technologies (e.g., distributed acoustic sensing, AI-enhanced seismometers) have improved detection capabilities, significant gaps persist between data collection and actionable warnings. This study identifies three critical issues: (1) hardware limitations, where 40% of deep-sea sensors fail within 18 months due to extreme pressures and corrosion; (2) data latency, with even advanced systems like Japan’s DAS networks suffering 8–15-second delays in tsunami detection; and (3) institutional fragmentation, evidenced by 17 incompatible data formats across global OBS networks, leading to 22% data loss. We evaluate emerging solutions, from graphene-based pressure-resistant sensors to automated decision pipelines and prove how integrated systems could reduce warning times by 50% while cutting the unnecessary costs. The findings also point out an urgent need for standardized protocols and cross-sector collaboration to transform monitoring science into the more effective risk mitigation.

References

[1] Goto, K., et al. (2017). Paleotsunami deposits along the Japan Trench: Recurrence intervals and implications for hazard assessment. Marine Geology, 391, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.margeo.2017.06.012

[2] Wang, Y., et al. (2022). Seismic coupling heterogeneity in the Manila Trench revealed by geodetic and seismic data. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 127(8), e2022JB024567.

[3] Zhan, L. (2020). Postseismic fluid migration and its role in triggering shallow earthquakes after megathrust events. Nature Communications, 11(1), 3289. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467- 020-17054-2

[4] Romanowicz, B. (2022). Deep-sea fiber-optic cables as transformative tools for ocean-bottom seismology. Science, 376(6592), 456-460. https://doi. org/10.1126/science.abo1939

[5] Huang, X., et al. (2023). Real-time machine learning for earthquake early warning in subduction zones. Seismological Research Letters, 94(3), 1234-1247.

[6] Lovholt, F., et al. (2022). Global probabilistic tsunami hazard assessment: Advances from the 2022 UN Ocean Decade. Earth- Science Reviews, 231, 104075. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.earscirev.2022.104075

[7] ASEAN. (2024). Guidelines for regional tsunami warning Dean&Francis ISSN 2959-6157 and evacuation planning in Southeast Asia. ASEAN Secretariat.

[8] World Bank. (2023). Building resilient coastal infrastructure: Lessons from recent tsunamis. World Bank Group. https://www. worldbank.org/en/topic/disasterriskmanagement/publication/ resilient-coasts

[9] Wilcock, W., et al. (2022). Hydroacoustic monitoring of slow-slip events along oceanic transform faults. Geophysical Research Letters, 49(15), e2022GL099876.

[10] Romanowicz, B. (2023). Unraveling the mechanics of slow earthquakes in the Hikurangi subduction zone. Nature Geoscience, 16(4), 321-328. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561- 023-01156-9

[11] Sladen, A., et al. (2023). The 2023 Java Trench earthquake: A rare tsunami earthquake captured by modern networks. Science Advances, 9(24), eadf8192. [ 1 2 ] C r e s p i , M . , e t a l . ( 2 0 2 2 ) . H i g h - r e s o l u t i o n mapping of the Sunda Trench reveals complex fault segmentation. Tectonics, 41(6), e2022TC007432.

[13] Barnett, J., et al. (2023). Submarine landslide hazards associated with megathrust earthquakes: A global review. Reviews of Geophysics, 61(2), e2022RG000789.

[14] Huang, X., et al. (2023). Deep learning-based rapid magnitude estimation for ocean-generated earthquakes. Nature Communications, 14(1), 5678.

[15] Zhang, H., et al. (2024). AI-driven tsunami inundation modeling for urban coastal planning. Natural Hazards, 120(3), 2125-2144.

[16] Kaneda, Y. (2023). The Nankai Trough’s seismic gap: Historical patterns and future scenarios. Earthquake Science, 36(2), 89-104.

[17] Lindsey, E., et al. (2024). Coral paleoseismology: Reconstructing past tsunamis in the Coral Triangle. Quaternary Science Reviews, 327, 108532.

[18] AOGS Working Group. (2023). Best practices for oceanbottom seismometer deployment in the Asia-Pacific region. Asian Oceanic Geosciences Society.

[19] UNDRR. (2024). Global status report on tsunami preparedness 2024. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. https://www.undrr.org/publication/tsunamipreparedness-2024

[20] Tao, W., et al. (2023). Submarine landslide dynamics in the South China Sea: Insights from high-resolution bathymetric surveys. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 128(4), e2022JC018745. https://doi.org/10.1029/2022JC018745

[21] Nakano, M., et al. (2024). Real-time detection of slowslip events using ocean-bottom seismometers in the Nankai Trough. Nature Geoscience, 17(3), 210-218. https://doi. org/10.1038/s41561-024-01392-7

[22] Global Seismographic Network. (2024). Annual report on global oceanic seismicity patterns (2023-2024). Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology.

[23] Pacific Tsunami Warning Center. (2024). Operational protocols for tsunami warning dissemination in the Pacific region. NOAA.

Downloads

Published

2025-08-26