Underground Eruptions Could Cause Quakes Months Later

When the Nyiragongo volcano erupted in January 2002, it set the geologic stage for earthquakes nine months later. Julia Rosen reports.

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

2002 was a tough year for the people who live along the shores of Lake Kivu in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. It started off with a bang, when the Nyiragongo volcano erupted in January. And it tailed off with a shudder, when a magnitude 6.2 earthquake struck the region in October. Both events devastated local communities—and their close timing struck some scientists as suspicious.

“We were wondering if there was a link—so, a causality—between those two major geological events.”

Christelle Wauthier, a geologist at Pennsylvania State University.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


From studying radar images of the ground taken before and after the January eruption, Wauthier knew that lava didn’t just spew out of the volcano. It also wedged itself into cracks in the crust, forming what geologists call a dike. 

“You can think of it as like a blade-shaped type of magma intrusion, moving from depth toward the surface. It’s very fast, a few hours, a few days, and it can penetrate tens of kilometers of crust.”

Dikes are common in rift zones, like east Africa and Iceland, where tectonic forces are slowly ripping Earth’s crust apart. And they’re known to cause small earthquakes right when they happen. But Wauthier wondered if dikes might also be capable of triggering large earthquakes by pushing the ground apart and affecting nearby faults. 

“You will add more stress on a weakness surface, which is a fault. And so if you add enough stress on it, you can trigger failure on the fault.”

Now, Wauthier and her colleagues have used a model to show that the stress changes caused by the January dike event made the October earthquake much more likely to occur. The results are in the journal Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems. [C. Wauthier, et al, Diking‐induced moderate‐magnitude earthquakes on a youthful rift border fault: The 2002 Nyiragongo‐Kalehe sequence, D.R. Congo]

This study marks the first time scientists have linked dike formation to large, damaging earthquakes, and Wauthier is looking back through history for more examples. She says researchers will never be able to predict exactly when an earthquake might strike after a dike intrusion. But at least now, researchers and rift zone residents know they’re not just in for bangs—they may also be in for shudders.

—Julia Rosen

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe