USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · 70277402

Opportunities and challenges for incorporating lithium-ion batteries into geophysical power systems

Abstract

Batteries play a critical role at seismic and other geophysical stations in ensuring that the equipment receives uninterrupted power to make continuous observations of the Earth. Often sited in remote environments under a wide range of environmental conditions, these stations have almost ubiquitously used conventional lead‐acid batteries. However, recent advances in rechargeable lithium‐ion battery technology have led to the development of lithium‐iron phosphate (LFP) batteries that can replace lead‐acid batteries in energy storage systems. In the past three years, LFP battery production has grown over an order of magnitude, reducing their cost and increasing their availability. In this article, we examine the benefits and challenges associated with incorporating several types of LFP batteries into the power systems of geophysical stations. We review how fundamental differences in battery chemistry enable LFP batteries to weigh less than half of comparable lead‐acid batteries and may have longer service lives but have the added complexity of being managed by an integrated battery monitoring system (BMS) microcontroller. Through a controlled heat chamber experiment, we demonstrate that LFP batteries can be ideally suited for use in high‐temperature environments by offering longer service lives than lead‐acid batteries. However, for safety reasons, the BMS prevents most LFP batteries from being charged at temperatures <0°C, which complicates their use in colder regions and can lead to equipment damage if the charging system is not appropriately designed for this battery type. Finally, we address some of the unique challenges associated with adopting lithium batteries, including unexpected substantial (≤14 W) power consumption from the BMS, safety concerns, and shipping restrictions. It is our goal to help inform station operators and geophysicists about potential benefits and issues that can arise from using LFP batteries at seismic and geophysical stations in a range of environments.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Robert E. Anthony, Scott Dalton, Jay Helmericks, Douglas Bloomquist, Jeremy Todd De Armond. 2026-04-02. Opportunities and challenges for incorporating lithium-ion batteries into geophysical power systems. https://doi.org/10.1785/0220250122

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Digitizer Suite: The Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory Digitizer Testing Suite

Laboratory testing of digitizers and seismometers helps ensure that prior to deployment the instrumentation can produce high quality data and is operating within specifications. In this work we detail the software package called: the Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory (ASL) Digitizer Test Suite. This Java software package provides several algorithms to verify various performance parameters of digitizers commonly used for recording analog seismic instruments. The goal of these tests is not to be exhaustive, but to identify common failures that could compromise the integrity of seismic data being recorded on the digitizer. For example, Sandia National Laboratories (e.g., Slad and Merchant, 2018) routinely do comprehensive testing of digitizers for various monitoring missions. While these tests reports are valuable for comprehensively characterizing a recording system, it would be resource intensive to conduct such tests on every seismic recorder used in a network. We focus on tests that include ways to estimate the sensitivity, timing, self-noise, and clip-level of the digitizer, as well as the fidelity of the signal being recorded. The software is publicly available and provides a way for the community to verify the integrity of a digitizer using a minimum amount of outside equipment.

Seismological Research Letters

The digital archivist: Automating legacy macroseismic data processing using large language models

Macroseismic data are a key resource to investigate shaking and damage from preinstrumental and early instrumental eras. However, data are often stored as inconsistently formatted reports describing observed shaking and damage, making manually parsing and interpreting accounts labor‐intensive. We introduce a novel workflow using Google’s Gemini 2.5 Pro large language model (LLM) to automate the extraction and structuring of macroseismic observations from summary reports. We apply this workflow to the 22 March 1957 M 5.3 Daly City, California, earthquake as a case study. We used Gemini to extract addresses, originally assigned modified Mercalli intensity values, and descriptions from each report. To address coordinate precision limits, addresses were geocoded via Google’s Geocoding application programming interface. This workflow yielded over 2300 geocoded intensity reports for the Daly City earthquake. We use the geocoded accounts, with the original report intensity assignments, to develop a shaking intensity map that in some respects rivals modern Did You Feel It? Maps. We also extract and present data for the 9 February 1971 M L 6.7 Sylmar, California, earthquake. Our results demonstrate the potential of LLMs for reliably extracting and analyzing large, unstructured macroseismic datasets. LLMs offer a scalable solution for rapidly digitizing macroseismic archives, enabling their broader use to constrain ground‐motion models in modern seismic hazard analysis and to improve our understanding of site effects in urban areas. The concepts explored here may also be applied to the handling of other legacy seismological and earth science data.

Seismological Research Letters