Yes—but as a way to study small earthquakes and the rocks they travel through, not as a system that predicts damaging earthquakes. In a 2026 study at Utah’s Cape Modern geothermal site, researchers used a fiber-optic cable in a 3,000-meter borehole to record seismic waves from thousands of microearthquakes. The measurements revealed how seismic signals weakened with depth, while also showing why the cable’s orientation and measurement settings matter when interpreting earthquake sources.
How can a fiber-optic cable measure earthquakes?
Distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) sends light pulses along a fiber-optic cable and analyzes changes in light reflected back from points along it. Those changes let the system measure vibration-related strain along the cable. Instead of relying only on a small number of separate sensors, the method can make measurements at many points along a fiber installed in a borehole.
| # | Preview | Product | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
Introduction to Seismology | $46.09 | Buy on Amazon |
| 2 |
|
An Introduction to Seismology, Earthquakes, and Earth Structure | $85.25 | Buy on Amazon |
| 3 |
|
Computational Seismology: A Practical Introduction | $63.00 | Buy on Amazon |
| 4 |
|
Introduction to Seismology | $89.99 | Buy on Amazon |
| 5 |
|
Exploration Seismology | $76.78 | Buy on Amazon |
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
At Cape Modern in Utah, the reported array extended 3,000 meters down a borehole. It had 1,600 channels spaced about 2 meters apart and recorded seismic waves from thousands of microearthquakes within a few kilometers. These are deployment and observation figures, not evidence that the system improved earthquake prediction.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →What did the Cape Modern measurements show?
Seismic waves weakened differently with depth
The study reported high attenuation—loss of seismic-wave energy—near the surface, with attenuation generally decreasing deeper underground. The pattern varied with differences in rock type. Mapping such changes can help scientists understand how the local subsurface affects seismic signals, a factor that matters when interpreting small earthquakes recorded there.
#1 Best Overall
Reported stress drop did not vary with magnitude
The researchers reported that spectral stress drop did not depend on earthquake magnitude in their observations. Stress drop is an estimate of how much stress is released during a rupture. The observed variation could reflect real differences among faults or ruptures, but measurement error is another possible explanation. The result therefore does not by itself establish how stress release changes across earthquakes more broadly.
Why do cable layout and settings affect the result?
Cable directivity changes sensitivity
A fiber-optic cable is more sensitive to seismic phases whose particle motions align with the cable. That directional sensitivity can shape which parts of a seismic signal are captured most clearly, so measurements from one cable layout may not represent every motion equally.
Rank #2
Gauge length trades signal clarity against high frequencies
Gauge length is the length of cable over which a DAS measurement is averaged. A larger gauge length raises the signal-to-noise ratio, but suppresses more high-frequency amplitudes. That trade-off matters because estimates of earthquake magnitude and corner frequency—the frequency associated with the transition in a source spectrum—can be affected by the measured signal.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
The study’s authors identify comparison with another method, such as empirical Green’s functions, as one way to investigate and account for possible bias in source-parameter estimates. The appropriate gauge length or cable orientation depends on the measurement goal; the reported deployment does not establish a universally best configuration.
Does this make DAS an earthquake-warning system?
No. The report concerns one deployment at one geothermal site and describes a research method for observing microearthquakes and subsurface attenuation. It does not demonstrate a product that forecasts earthquakes, predicts damaging events, or provides operational warnings. Its potential contribution is more limited: detailed measurements may help scientists investigate earthquake sources and the shallow geological conditions through which seismic waves travel.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What the study can—and cannot—establish
The findings are reported by AGU’s Eos in its 6 October 2026 coverage of the study. The underlying paper is identified as Hilary Chang et al., “Characterizing Shallow Attenuation and Microearthquake Source Parameters Using a Downhole DAS Array at the Cape Modern Geothermal Field,” in Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth (2026), DOI 10.1029/2026JB034276. The detailed methods, uncertainty estimates, and quantitative results beyond the reported coverage are not established here, so the findings should be understood within that scope.
Quick Recap
Best Value
Rank #4
- Used Book in Good Condition
- AGU Eos coverage of the Cape Modern DAS study
- Phys.org identification of the journal article and DOI
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
