EGU General Assembly 2020
© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Recent microseismicity observed at Hekla volcano and first velocity inversion results

Martin Möllhoff1, Meysam Rezaeifar1, Christopher J. Bean1, Kristin S. Vogfjörd2, Bergur H. Bergsson2, and Heiko Buxel3
Martin Möllhoff et al.
  • 1Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, Geophysics, Dublin, Ireland (
  • 2Icelandic Meteorological Office, Bustadavegi 7-9, 108 Reykjavik, Iceland
  • 3British Geological Survey, The Lyell Centre, Research Avenue South, Edinburgh, EH14 4AP, Scotland

Hekla is one of the most active and dangerous volcanoes in Iceland presenting a high hazard to air travel and a growing tourist population. Until now the pre-eruption warning time at Hekla is only around one hour.  In 2018 we installed the real-time seismic network HERSK directly on Hekla's edifice. If microseismicity on Hekla increases prior to the next eruption the network could possibly provide a means to improve early warning. In addition it is hoped that HERSK will better our understanding of the processes driving the evolution of pre-eruptive seismicity. The configuration and tuning of a dedicated real-time detection and location system requires the determination of a suitable velocity model and station corrections. We present a catalogue of recently detected local events that we use to invert for a 1-D velocity model. We observe significant variations in station corrections and conclude that it is important to account for these in the real-time detection and location system which we are developing based on the SeisComp3 software.

How to cite: Möllhoff, M., Rezaeifar, M., Bean, C. J., Vogfjörd, K. S., Bergsson, B. H., and Buxel, H.: Recent microseismicity observed at Hekla volcano and first velocity inversion results, EGU General Assembly 2020, Online, 4–8 May 2020, EGU2020-18954,, 2020

Comments on the presentation

AC: Author Comment | CC: Community Comment | Report abuse

Presentation version 2 – uploaded on 07 May 2020 , no comments
added minor improvements and corrections
Presentation version 1 – uploaded on 06 May 2020
  • CC1: Comment on EGU2020-18954, Eva Eibl, 06 May 2020

    Hi Martin,

    is the velocity you are inverting in 3. for P or S waves? And in 6. do you show the same events located by IMO and VELEST or are these different event sets?



    • AC1: Reply to CC1, Martin Möllhoff, 07 May 2020

      Hi Eva,

      The model shown in section 3 is for p-velocity.

      In section 6 we present for the stated time period events from the IMO catalogue and events we detected with SC3 scanloc and located with VELEST. They are not the same event sets, we didn't yet check how much overlap there is between the two.

      Hope that answers your questions.