<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0" article-type="research-article">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">GI</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Geoscientific Instrumentation, Methods and Data Systems</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">GI</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Geosci. Instrum. Method. Data Syst.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2193-0864</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/gi-11-235-2022</article-id><title-group><article-title>Towards a self-sufficient mobile broadband seismological recording system for year-round operation in Antarctica</article-title><alt-title>A seismological recording system for operation in Antarctica</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{A seismological recording system for operation in Antarctica}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{A. Eckstaller et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Eckstaller</surname><given-names>Alfons</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Asseng</surname><given-names>Jölund</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Lippmann</surname><given-names>Erich</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1 aff3">
          <name><surname>Franke</surname><given-names>Steven</given-names></name>
          <email>steven.franke@awi.de</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8462-4379</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine
Research, Bremerhaven, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Lippmann Geophysical Instruments (LGM), Schaufling, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Physics of Ice Climate and Earth, Niels Bohr Institute, University
of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Steven Franke (steven.franke@awi.de)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>14</day><month>July</month><year>2022</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>11</volume>
      <issue>2</issue>
      <fpage>235</fpage><lpage>245</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>7</day><month>March</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>9</day><month>March</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>25</day><month>May</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>19</day><month>June</month><year>2022</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2022 </copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2022</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/.html">This article is available from https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>

      <p id="d1e122">Passive seismic measurements allow the study of the deeper Earth
beneath the thick Antarctic ice sheet cover. Due to logistical and weather
constraints, only a fraction of the area of the Antarctic ice sheet can be
surveyed with long-term or temporary sensors. A fundamental limitation is
the power supply and operation of the instruments during the polar winter.
In addition, there is only a limited time window during the field seasons to
deploy the stations over the year. Here we present a rapidly and simple
deployable self-sufficient mobile seismic station concept. The station
consists of different energy supply modules aligned according to the survey
needs, measuring duration, and survey aim. Parts of the concept are
integrated into an already existing pool of mobile stations and in
the seismological network of the geophysical observatory at Neumayer III
Station. Other concepts and features are still under development. The
overall goal is to use these temporary mobile arrays in regions where little
is known about local and regional tectonic earthquake activity.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e134">A kilometer-thick ice sheet covers more than 98 % of Antarctica's
surface. Therefore, the historical evolution, geological structure, and
tectonic activity underneath the Antarctic ice sheet are in large part
not well known. Continuous, year-round seismic recordings provide a remedy
to overcome the direct inaccessibility of the Antarctic continent. The
recordings of local, regional, and teleseismic earthquakes have been used in
various studies. Thus, our present knowledge of the structure of the Earth's
mantle, lithosphere, and crustal structure underneath the Antarctic ice
cover is based on these records (e.g., Knopoff and Vane, 1978; Danesi and
Morelli, 2001; Ritzwoller et al., 2001; Lawrence et al., 2006; Janik et al.,
2014; An et al., 2015; Lough et al., 2018). However, there is only little
seismic activity originating from the Antarctic plate itself due to a low
level of tectonic activity (Sykes, 1978). Moreover, the low seismic activity
is paired with a sparse distribution of seismic instrumentation in
Antarctica (particularly in East Antarctica; Fig. 1a) and is thus
difficult to verify. Only a few long-term seismic observatories exist. Most
of them are constrained to the coastal region and in direct vicinity to
research infrastructure (Fig. 1).</p>
      <p id="d1e137">Many seismic experiments, both those using active source and those using passive sources, require
numerous seismic stations. The deployments often have to be done in remote
and difficult to access areas with very limited power supply and servicing
infrastructure. In particular, a long-term AC power supply is not available
in most cases. For areas with moderate climatic conditions or when batteries
can easily be changed or replaced in regular intervals, this is not a
problem. Furthermore, state-of-the-art solar panels provide sufficient
electrical power for efficiently charging batteries, enabling instrument
operation throughout almost the entire year. In polar regions, however,
significant challenges arise in terms of the geographical setting,
remoteness, and extreme weather conditions, which require a sophisticated
power supply design. First, long periods of the dark polar winter with no
sunlight available make it necessary to install an additional power supply.
If sufficient backup power cannot be realized, it has to be taken into
account that data acquisition will stop at some point during polar winter.
Second, due to the low temperatures and high discharge of the batteries, it
may occur that data acquisition cannot resume when sufficient sunlight is
available after the winter break. Additionally, almost all types of
batteries show reduced performance at low temperatures and show a
substantially reduced effective capacity. Therefore, energy-efficient and
for low-temperature-adapted renewable systems are required for a
sustainable operation in polar environments (Tin et al., 2010).</p>
      <p id="d1e140">A major step in this direction was realized with the large international POLENET project (Polar Earth Observing Network) within the activities of the
International Polar Year (IPY) 2007–2009. In this project, a large number of
seismic and GPS instruments were installed in remote sites in Antarctica for
several years. The equipment required for POLENET was developed by IRIS
(Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology) PASSCAL (Portable Array
Seismic Studies of the Continental Lithosphere) with a focus on a
cold-resistant power and communication system that is easy to install and that
can withstand Antarctic weather conditions. In this project, large-scale
temporary coverage of West Antarctica up to the Transantarctic Mountains, as
well as central parts of East Antarctica, was realized for the first time
(Fig. 1a).</p>
      <p id="d1e143">To ensure the continuous extension of seismic coverage in the polar regions,
it is essential to find new solutions to the same problems again and again.
For polar seismology, it is therefore important to build on previous
experience (e.g., from IRIS PASSCAL) to optimize the use of self-sufficient
seismometer stations and to find flexible solutions for the different survey
areas and deployment lengths. The specifications of the stations must also
be realizable with the available resources and be based on long-term
scientific goals.</p>
      <p id="d1e147">In this article, we describe the concept of an in-house-developed mobile and
self-sufficient seismological broadband station designed for the extreme
demands of the Antarctic ice sheet. A focus lies on (i) the compact modular
design and conception of an energy supply to operate under extreme
temperatures between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C (with slightly
warmer temperatures in summer and colder temperatures in winter on average) and (ii) to
present strategies to get the system through the sunless polar winter. Our
layout makes the system suitable for long-term operations over several years
without regular maintenance and for shorter surveys. Some of the concepts
presented here are already in use at numerous seismological stations in
western Dronning Maud Land (East Antarctica) operated by the geophysical
observatory of Neumayer III Station (Fig. 1). Other concepts presented
here represent extensions for current and future projects.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e181"><bold>(a)</bold> Overview of permanent and temporary seismic station
distribution in Antarctica (station locations obtained from IRIS GMAP,
2022). Panel <bold>(b)</bold> shows the distribution of real-time and offline permanent
stations operated by the Alfred Wegener Institute (AWI) and others in
western Dronning Maud Land. Note that the majority of temporary stations in <bold>(a)</bold> were installed by IRIS PASSCAL and that there are potentially more
seismic stations in Antarctica whose locations are either not published or
for which we do not have access to the coordinates.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/11/235/2022/gi-11-235-2022-f01.jpg"/>

      </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>AWI's regional seismographic network</title>
      <p id="d1e206">The Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research
(AWI), has been operating a local seismographic network for more than 2
decades in the vicinity of its permanent base Neumayer III Station (Fig. 1b). One permanent seismometer is located inside the geophysical observatory
close to the station (VNA1), and two other permanent seismometers (VNA2 and
VNA3) are deployed at ice rises at approximately 45 and 85 km distance off
Neumayer III Station (Eckstaller et al., 2007). The data quality of VNA2 and
VNA3 is substantially better than VNA1 data because the latter is stationed
on the ice shelf and the former two are stationed on grounded ice (Fig. 1b). Data are continuously transmitted to the base in near-real-time quality via
high-speed terrestrial data radio. This local network is supplemented by six
offline remote semi-permanent seismic stations (Fig. 1b; Novolazevskaya,
NVL; Kohnen Station, KOHN; Svea Station, SVEA; Forstefjell Nunatak, DS4; Weigel
Nunatak, WEI; and Utpostane, UPST). In addition, several
temporary single mobile seismic stations or arrays have been deployed in the
vicinity of Neumayer III Station for testing purposes and geophysical
surveys.</p>
      <p id="d1e209">The permanent and mobile temporary seismological stations of the regional
AWI seismographic network are located in different glaciological regimes in
western Dronning Maud Land and thus are affected by different snow
accumulation rates. None of our stations is located in an ablation area.
Snow accumulation on the plateau (e.g., KOHN at Kohnen station; Fig. 1b)
ranges between 15 and 20 cm yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. By contrast, we observe several meters
per year of snow accumulation at the coastal stations (e.g., 3 m yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at
VNA3). Depending on the local snow accumulation, the components of the
seismological stations, as well as the solar panels or masts, must be
relocated to the ice surface, otherwise, they will be buried by the snow
over a longer period. This action is mandatory once a year for VNA3 on
Sörasen and every 3–5 years for the stations on the plateau. Some
stations (e.g., UPST, SVEA, WEI; Fig. 1b) are located on nunataks where we
observe neither significant snow accumulation nor ablation.</p>
      <p id="d1e236">The motivation for developing and optimizing mobile stations is to use them
for temporary regional array studies in Dronning Maud Land. The ambition is
to use a moving array of seismic stations to acquire data for one to two
years and relocate the instruments after that to a new site. Our scientific
interests will focus on the analysis of the regional tectonic seismicity
associated with a potential neotectonic activity and the analysis of
receiver functions to determine the Moho depths and eventually resolve major
structural features in the upper mantle in this region.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Concept and instrument design</title>
      <p id="d1e247">Our requirements for the mobile seismometer stations must allow a rapid
installation and be as modular and compact as possible to enable economic
transport and fast deployment and recovery. A single mobile station
comprises a solar panel (rack included), a seismometer with casing, one
recorder box, and one to two battery boxes (Fig. 2). For the instrument
boxes, we use Peli ISP2 CASES (Inter-Stacking Pattern Cases) boxes because
they are waterproof and mechanically stable at low temperatures (Fig. 3).
A single mobile station in its minimum configuration
(one seismometer with casing, one seismic recorder, two AGM batteries, one
solar charge and iridium controller, two solar panels mounted on one rack,
one GPS, one iridium antenna, and all cables; Fig. 3a–e) weighs
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 140 kg and has <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2–3 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> of storage
space.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e275">Schematic diagram of the instrument layout and power supply
concept of our permanent and mobile seismic stations. Note that the station
design for our mobile stations does not include the wind battery box. The
wind battery box is, however, part of our permanent stations (VNA2, VNA3,
SVEA, KOHN, and UPST; Fig. 1b).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=441.017717pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/11/235/2022/gi-11-235-2022-f02.png"/>

      </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e287">Specifications of instruments deployed with AWI's seismic stations.
The power drain values represent average values.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="justify" colwidth="3cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="justify" colwidth="3.8cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="justify" colwidth="3.5cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="justify" colwidth="5.3cm"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Instrument type</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Instrument model</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Power drain<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Comment</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Seismometer</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Guralp CMG-3ESP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">50 mA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Metrozet MBB2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">20 mA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Streckeisen STS-2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">46 mA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Lennartz LE-3D/20s</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">50 mA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Seismic recorder</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Reftek RT-130</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">83 mA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Favored for temporary or mobile stations</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Quanterra: Q330 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> baler <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>or Q330S<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">50 mA (3-channels) <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>67 mA (6-channels)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Favored for permanent stations <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>(Fig. 3d), six-channel configuration <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>only used at VNA2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Iridium controller</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">XI-202 (XEOS)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.1 mA (sleep mode) <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>50 mA (transmission <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>mode: 2 min d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Module for Quanterra (Fig. 3d)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">SeiDL (SeismicDataLink by <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>SchwaRTech)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Same power drain as for <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>the Xeos controller</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Custom-made module for RT-130</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">GPS receiver</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">GPS 16xHVS (Garmin)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Power consumption included in the seismic recorder budget</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Solar charge controller</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Blue Sky Solar Boost 3000i</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">30 mA (standby)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Not used anymore</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Morning Star SunSaver <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>SS-MPPT-15L</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">35 mA (standby)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Preferred choice (Fig. 4a)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Solar cells</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Solara S405M36 Ultra 100W</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Mounted on a standard rack <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>(Fig. 3a–c, h)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Solara S300M36 Ultra 75W</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Mounted vertically on a mast <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>(Fig. 3f)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Heating and temperature controller</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Minco CT325 Miniature DC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Wind generator</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Twister KD-VK-10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Rotor blades are shortened to reduce <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>rotation in strong wind regimes</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Batteries (lead–acid)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">AGM GPL31XT <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>(12 V, 125 Ah)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Good capacity <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> weight ratio (30 kg)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Boxes</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Peli ISP2 CASES <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>(EU080060-5010, EU080060-4010)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e290"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> All electrical consumers are supplied with 12 V.</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e642">We can equip our stations with two data logger types: three-channel Reftek
RT-130 and six-channel Quanterra Q330S<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> (or Quanterra Q330 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> baler)
recorders (Table 1). Both logger types can be deployed at permanent or
temporary mobile seismic stations. The power drain of the recorders is
approximately 50–83 mA and depends on the number of active channels,
sample rate, and desired GPS-clock operation. The advantage of the Quanterras
is the lower power consumption and the larger storage space. In addition,
the Quanterra is easier and more versatile to configure (via a web page GUI
from any computer) and has more modern interfaces. However, in contrast to
the Reftek data loggers, they are also more expensive.</p>
      <p id="d1e659">We commonly use Guralp CMG-3ESP and Kinemetrics Metrozet
MBB2 (three-component) broadband seismometers with a lower corner period of 120 s, and in
some cases we also use Lennartz LE-3D/20s seismometers. The only exception
represents UPST station, where we have deployed a Streckeisen STS-2 and a
small short period tripartite array. A relevant disadvantage of the Guralp
seismometer for the mobile stations is that during transport the mass must
be locked to prevent damage. In addition, the instrument must be manually
leveled during installation. The advantage of the Metrozet MBB-2
seismometers is the compact design and the higher transport safety, as it
is self-locking and able to center its mass automatically during
operation. In addition, the power consumption is very low for an active
sensor (20 mA) in comparison to the Guralp or Lennartz (50 mA) seismometers.</p>
      <p id="d1e662">The solar-powered energy supply system consists of 100 W Solara S405M36
Ultra solar cells and a Morning Star SunSaver SS-MPPT-15L charge controller.
Every seismic station is equipped with a state of health (SOH) transmitter
that sends the station's operation status in regular intervals once a day
via iridium satellite radio to AWI. For the Quanterra Q330 recorders, we use
XEOS XI-202 controllers because they have an existing interface. However,
this interface is not available for the newer Q330S<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> recorders. For the
RT-130 we use a custom-made iridium controller (SeiDL – Seismic Data Link)
to influence all parameters and configurations. For example, it gives us the
possibility to transmit data from additional environmental sensors, such as
wind, temperature, solar radiation, current, and voltage (if available). This
controller was developed by Arne Schwab (SchwaRTech, based near Bremen,
Germany) and also uses the iridium short burst data (SBD) transmission
technique. The average power drain of our iridium controllers is very low
with 0.1 mA in sleep mode and 50 mA in transmission mode (2 min d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). The overall power consumption of an entire single mobile station is 4 Ah d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and 1447 Ah yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. The calculation is based on a station
design that comprises a Guralp CMG-3ESP seismometer and a Reftek-130 data
logger. For the wiring of all devices, we have moved away from PVC insulated
cables, as they are too brittle at low temperatures. Now we use almost
exclusively more flexible cables with PE or PU insulation with improved UV
and cold resistance. A complete list of the specifications of the
instruments is provided in Table 1.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>The battery box</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1.SSS1">
  <label>3.1.1</label><title>Battery box configuration</title>
      <p id="d1e722">Each battery box consists of two 125 Ah AGM (Absorbent Glass Mat) lead–acid
batteries, a charging controller, and additional control electronics (Fig. 3e). The advantages of AGM batteries are their good performance at low
temperatures and that they are not categorized as dangerous goods for
transport. The batteries are placed on an aluminum plate with two 10 or 20 W
silicone heating foils attached to its bottom side. The heating foils are
underlaid with a thin heat-resistant layer to prevent the eventual melting
of the insulation foam. The box is connected with one or multiple 100 W
solar panels as input power. The solar panels can be mounted on standardized
aluminum racks for deployment on snow and solid rock, which the AWI workshop
had manufactured (Fig. 3a). The racks are mechanically robust and can
resist high wind speeds (25–50 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) despite their light weight if tied to
anchors buried in the snow or stone bolts. For thermal isolation, we use
Alveobloc panels (produced by Sekisui Alveo) with a thickness of 8–10 cm as
thermal insulators for the box interior. The isolation panels are available
in different densities. We use a denser and harder type (Type 1700; 60 kg m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) for the bottom layer of the box to bear the heavy weight of the
batteries without deformation. For the remaining isolation, we use a lighter
and softer Alveobloc type (Type 3600; 28 kg m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). The material can
easily be cut with a table saw into exactly fitting blocks. All electronic
components, the charging controller, heating electronics, and additional
control electronics are installed inside a compact box (here referred to as
the solar electronic box; Fig. 2) that just fits beside both batteries (Figs. 3e and 4a, c). All necessary electronic units are installed on DIN
rails, which allows for compact and structured cabling.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e763">Photographs of the station design from several deployments in
western Dronning Maud Land (East Antarctica). Panels <bold>(a)</bold>–<bold>(c)</bold> show the setup
of the mobile stations on the ice surface. Panels <bold>(d)</bold> and <bold>(e)</bold> show the
recorder and solar battery boxes from the inside. The permanent real-time
station setup of VNA3 is shown in <bold>(f)</bold> for the ice surface and in <bold>(g)</bold> for the
ice cave. Panel <bold>(h)</bold> shows the station layout of DS4, which is deployed on a
rock base. Photo credits are as follows: <bold>(a, b, d–h)</bold> Jölund Asseng, <bold>(c)</bold> Steven Franke.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=441.017717pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/11/235/2022/gi-11-235-2022-f03.jpg"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1.SSS2">
  <label>3.1.2</label><title>Self-discharge protection</title>
      <p id="d1e808">The key feature in the solar electronic box in our battery boxes are the
special control electronics (solar controller; Fig. 4a, c) included to guarantee
that battery charging will resume after the several week-long breaks during
polar winter. Due to the inevitable self-discharge (if not connected to a
power source), the battery voltage can drop below a critical value of
approximately 8–9 V. A voltage level below this threshold implies the risk
that the charging controller cannot resume operation again. Without the
power supply from batteries, charging controllers cannot operate with the
solar panels' output. Additionally, even in standby mode when the LVD (low-voltage disconnect) control disconnects the recorder and seismometer, the
controller continuously drains current from the batteries, which can cause
additional voltage decrease. Therefore, our control electronics will
disconnect the charge controller from the batteries when dropping below a
critical value, which we set to 11.0 V. At the same time, the solar panels
are directly connected to the batteries (Fig. 2). This enables the
batteries to be charged directly with the electric power of the first
sunlight after the winter break. When the battery voltage rises above the
threshold of 13.0 V, the charge controller is reconnected to the batteries.
At the same time, the solar panels are reconnected to the charge controller.
This principle enables a safe return to the normal operation mode. The solar
control and its electronics were designed and manufactured by Erich Lippmann
(LGM) and inserted in a small green enclosure inside the solar electronics
box (Fig. 4a, c).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e813">Electronic boxes indicated in Figs. 2 and 3d, e. Panel <bold>(a)</bold>
shows the solar electronic box containing the solar charge controller, the
solar controller and additional electronics. Panel <bold>(b)</bold> shows the recorder
electronic box and contains the backup battery management controller (BBat
controller). The schematic wiring of the components for the solar and
recorder electronic boxes is shown in <bold>(c)</bold> and <bold>(d)</bold>, respectively.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/11/235/2022/gi-11-235-2022-f04.jpg"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1.SSS3">
  <label>3.1.3</label><title>Battery heating</title>
      <p id="d1e842">All kinds of batteries show better performance and higher capacity if they
are not exposed to too cold temperatures. Moreover, the electrolyte freezing
point is significantly lower for fully or partly discharged batteries
(Fig. 5). Nonetheless, if the AGM batteries we use were to freeze, they would not be
destroyed but would simply stop providing energy and start working again at
higher temperatures. Therefore, we realized the option for battery heating if sufficient power is available (excess energy from the solar panels).
Battery heating will only be enabled if the battery voltage has exceeded an
upper threshold value of 14.5 V and will be disabled if falling below the
lower threshold value of 13.0 V. This is accomplished by using a voltage
guard relay from MRS Electronic. The threshold voltages can be freely
programmed and set to desired values. The module is designed for automotive
applications and is thus very robust and reliable. For heating control, we
use the Minco CT325 Miniature DC Temperature Controller (Fig. 4a, c), which
permits a heating current of up to 6 A. This implies that the heating plates
have to be configured in a way that no more than 6 A can flow, which
corresponds to a maximum heating power of 66 W at 12 V. Therefore, our
heating plate set includes 2 times 15 W. This is sufficient for the heating
plates under the bottom of the aluminum plate where the batteries are placed. The sensor is a PT-100 element that is mounted on an aluminum bar that
is attached to the aluminum plate for good heat conduction. We set the
desired battery temperature to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C. This temperature may only
be reached during summer, but it will then keep the batteries during this
period relatively warm.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e866">AGM battery performance under cold conditions. The dark blue line
represents the effective usable battery capacity at the indicated
temperature based on a fully (100 %) charged battery at 25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C.
The curve applies to an approximate electrical current flow corresponding to
5 % of the total capacity of the battery (Lifeline Technical Manual,
2019). The orange circles represent the freezing point of the electrolyte.
The freezing point depends on the battery charging level at 25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C.
Thus, a battery charged to 50 % of its total capacity at 25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C
will freeze at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C and at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C if charged to only
25 % (Lifeline Technical Manual, 2019).</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/11/235/2022/gi-11-235-2022-f05.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>The recorder box</title>
      <p id="d1e950">The recorder box is of the same type as the battery box, with a slightly
lower height and is thermally insulated in the same way (Fig. 3d). Besides
the data recorder and the SOH control modem, there is a recorder electronic
box containing a backup battery management controller (BBat controller) for
battery box management (Fig. 4b, d). Two solar rechargeable AGM batteries
and one backup battery can be connected. For two connected solar battery
boxes, the BBat controller acts as two ideal Schottky diodes that are
switched in a way that power comes only from the battery box with the higher
voltage. In case both voltage levels are equal, the two battery boxes
provide the same amount of current. If both solar battery boxes are
disconnected by their internal LVD or both voltages drop below approximately
8.9 V, the power supply will be almost simultaneously switched to the backup
batteries. It will switch back to solar batteries if one of the voltages
rises back again above 10.7 V. These MOSFET (Metal Oxide Semiconductor Field-Effect Transistors)-based switching electronics were
designed and manufactured by Erich Lippmann and utilize the LTC4416
controller chip that is widely used for backup power supply systems.
Furthermore, our circuit design prevents the flow of current from one
battery box to the other. The current drain is max. 0.3 mA, which is extremely
low and does not play any significant role in the total power consumption
considerations. With some additional minor modifications, the total battery
capacity of the system can be extended by additional battery boxes.</p>
      <p id="d1e953">All necessary connecting cables are connected with the connectors on the
rear side of the recorder box. We decided to use the so-called “Reftek standard” for sensor
input, which means that the pin configurations of the sensor connectors
correspond to Reftek specifications. If using a Quanterra Q330, the cable
from the rear sensor connectors needs to be configured appropriately for
this recorder. This will allow for the connection of both of our sensors without
needing an extra connector or adapters for the specific recorder, which
allows higher flexibility and reduces the deployment time and
susceptibility to errors.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Discussion</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <label>4.1</label><title>Overcoming the polar winter gap</title>
      <p id="d1e972">The absence of the sun in the polar winter creates a supply gap of input
energy, which usually leads to a data acquisition gap if solar cells are the
only energy source and the battery capacity is not high enough to provide
energy for several weeks. We have developed a concept for our mobile
stations to reliably restart the data recording after the polar winter.
Beyond this, there are different ways to bridge this period, and the advantages
and disadvantages of these systems are discussed below.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1.SSS1">
  <label>4.1.1</label><title>Backup batteries</title>
      <p id="d1e982">Based on our experience, when considering a usable effective capacity of
30 % at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C (Fig. 5), one 125 Ah AGM battery can provide
power for approximately 14 d at polar winter onset (if solar panels are
the only power source). Hence, using two AGM batteries will not ensure
recording for more than 4 weeks without recharging. This implies an
inevitably long recording break during polar winter unless high-capacity
backup batteries are added. These could either be high-capacity battery
types, such as lithium thionyl chloride (LTC) primary cells or rechargeable
LiFePO4 accumulators. The concept of using Li-based batteries has already
been successfully demonstrated in Antarctic campaigns with the PASSCAL
instruments (e.g., Hansen et al., 2015). Further reasons why we prefer a
Li-based battery with a high energy density to the use of additional AGM
batteries are as follows. First, the number of AGM batteries needed to
last through the polar winter would be very high and add a lot of transport
weight. Theoretically, these could of course be recharged over the summer.
The problem, however, is that at the end of the polar night there is little
light and thus little current flow available to charge a large total
capacity. This can result in the entire system being very slow to get above
the minimum voltage to start data acquisition, thus extending the data gap
period.</p>
      <p id="d1e1004">The power bridging concept during the polar winter gap with backup batteries
has so far only been applied in a proof-of-concept testing period with AGM
batteries. The usage of Li-based batteries has not been implemented so far.
The main reason for this is that the transport and storage of these
batteries are restricted as they have to be treated as dangerous goods.
Transport by aircraft may sometimes become almost impossible. The
second reason is that they are still very expensive unless they are produced
in higher quantities or if further developments make them more affordable.
However, in principle, all our mobile stations could also be equipped with
Li-based backup batteries. Since the Li-based batteries cannot be
recharged, this solution is suitable for temporary applications designed for
1–2 years.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1.SSS2">
  <label>4.1.2</label><title>Additional wind generator</title>
      <p id="d1e1015">Wind generators are an alternative energy source that is independent of the
light conditions in the polar winter. This option has been implemented for
other non-permanent seismic stations (e.g., Anandakrishnan et al., 2000;
Contrafatto et al., 2018), as well as for long-term seismic stations in our
network (VNA2, VNA3, SVEA, KOHN, UPST; Figs. 1b and 3f). Here, we use
helical horizontal axis wind turbines (HAWT), which consist of three rotor
blades (for further information and a schematic illustration of helical HAWT
wind turbines, see Peng et al., 2021). We modified the smallest available
version (which generates 300 W power) with wings half the length to reduce
the mechanical stress on the system. This reduced generator version produces
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 150 W power. One advantage of this kind of wind generator is
that the bearings do not require regular oiling. The wind generator at VNA3
ran for 5 years without maintenance for instance. However, we still see
potential in the control of the generator when exposed to very strong winds,
especially when the batteries are fully charged. The general principle is
that when the batteries are fully charged and the excess wind energy is
dissipated through resistors (dump load; Figs. 2 and 3g), the rotation is
reduced simultaneously. Principally, this option can be integrated into our
mobile stations and could enable data recording over the entire year.
However, this concept has several disadvantages, especially for the
recording of seismological data. The vibrations caused by the wind
generators are transmitted to the ground or snow and thus recorded by the
seismometer. Depending on the coupling between the wind generator and the
ground and the distance between the wind generator and the seismometer, the
seismological data may be disturbed or even unusable. In addition, wind
generators are mechanically very susceptible to these extreme conditions and
the strong Antarctic winds. However, they are currently indispensable for a
long-term energy supply over many years. In addition, the time required to
set up a seismological station increases significantly with the installation
of a wind generator, considering the short installation time of the solar
panels, seismometer, and instrument boxes. Wind turbines can, in principle,
also be used for effective battery heating during the polar night. However, this
requires additional equipment (and thus cargo) and represents
another source of system failure.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <label>4.2</label><title>Choosing the appropriate solar charge controller</title>
      <p id="d1e1034">In the development stage of the mobile stations, we used two different solar
charging controllers, a Blue Sky Solar Boost 3000i and a Morning Star
SunSaver SS-MPPT-15L. Both controllers are maximum power point trackers
(MPPTs) that show high efficiency and can produce sufficient charging
current even in weak or diffuse daylight conditions. The Blue Sky SB 3000i
offers a variety of features and needs comprehensive programming during the
setup. It can display battery voltage and charging current and the maximum
charging voltage (among other features). The specific temperature coefficient
for AGM batteries can be programmed, and the LVD can be arbitrarily chosen.
However, the variety of available settings and vulnerability to incorrect
programming leading to total system failure is a problem if the mobile
stations are not installed by trained personnel. Moreover, we experienced
during our testing period that some Blue Sky controllers lost their
programming when battery voltage was very low during winter. Therefore, we
have chosen not to use Blue Sky charge controllers for our mobile stations to
minimize the susceptibility to errors during programming, installation,
the polar winter to enable less-trained staff to also deploy the stations.
We therefore use the simpler Morning Star Sunsaver charge controllers for all mobile seismic stations. They offer two LVD voltages to choose from for
recorder shut down at low voltage conditions. Until now, we have had an excellent
experience with these controller types, which have been proven to work properly at
very low temperatures (between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS3">
  <label>4.3</label><title>The electrostatic discharge problem</title>
      <p id="d1e1074">If the mobile stations are placed on the ice and not on the few outcropping
rocks, the system is vulnerable to static charging. Since snow, firn and ice
are very poor electrical conductors, there is almost no possibility to find
a suitable ground to prevent electrostatic discharge of high currents. The
electric charge itself is caused by all station elements positioned outside
the snow pit (solar cells and their racks, GPS and iridium). For the GPS, it
is possible to operate it under a limited snow cover thickness. However, the
solar cells and the iridium must necessarily be installed on the surface. In
our testing period, we attempted to create a mass for the electrical
compensation with large metal elements, which we have buried in the snow,
but only with moderate success. Additionally, by connecting all instruments
and equipment to the same potential (minus), the damage or failure rate of
the system due to electrical discharge was reduced. It should be noted that
this is not possible with all solar charge controllers (for example, it was
not possible with the Blue Sky solar charge controller but possible with the
Morningstar solar charge controller). However, still, the problem currently
generally remains and can cause long-term damage to electrical equipment or,
in rare cases, system failure.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS4">
  <label>4.4</label><title>Comparison to and lessons learned from other seismic surveys</title>
      <p id="d1e1085">The development of self-sufficient seismic stations has been strongly
promoted for the extreme conditions of the polar regions in the last two
decades. The component design and the available resources of various
temporary or long-term year-round seismic measurements in Greenland (e.g.,
Dahl-Jensen et al., 2010) and Antarctica (e.g., Hansen et al., 2015) differ
between surveys. However, some of the concepts have gained acceptance and
many useful recommendations for future campaigns and networks have emerged
from numerous scientific publications and field reports over time. Our
concept of a fast-to-deploy, compact, modular, and self-sufficient mobile seismic
station aims to use the limited time in the field efficiently and is based
on many of the experiences described in the literature, which we discuss in
the following.</p>
      <p id="d1e1088">Since 2009, the GreenLand Ice Sheet monitoring Network (GLISN) has been
initiated to monitor all types of earthquakes with broadband seismometer
stations in Greenland (Dahl-Jensen et al., 2010). A total of 4 of the 33 stations
are deployed on the ice sheet interior (Veitch and Nettles, 2012). Here, the
power system of one of the stations consists of a large number of batteries
and solar cells (26 total 6 V AGM batteries and 9 total 80 W 12 V solar cells) to ensure
long-term operation (Toyokuni et al., 2014). This configuration enables a
year-round operation but requires a large amount of heavy equipment.
Moreover, a large portion of the batteries are not required for summer
operation but consume high logistical capacities. A smaller number of
batteries, in combination with solar cells, wind generators (and a dump load
for excess energy if the batteries are fully charged), and
low-voltage disconnector to protect the batteries from deep discharge, was
used in a survey with six broadband seismic stations in West Antarctica
in 1998 (Anandakrishnan et al., 2000). Although during the first year of
deployment the total time of data recording was only 50 %, some of the
stations were able to operate throughout the year. The authors suggest that
longer uptimes can be achieved by improving the insolation of the battery
boxes, which is a concept that we have implemented in our system. A similar
approach in system design is introduced by Contrafatto et al. (2018). A
major advancement in continuous seismic recordings in Antarctica came with
the deployment of the 30-station Gamburtsev Antarctic Mountains Seismic
Experiment (GAMSEIS) array on the East Antarctic plateau (Hansen et al.,
2015). The novel station design was developed by IRIS-PASSCAL for polar
applications (Johns et al., 2006) and enabled the deployed stations to
operate year-round with the usage of lithium backup batteries in the winter.
IRIS's successful continuous development strategies regarding winter data
collecting capability have increased the data recovery rate from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % to more than 90 % within 5 years. The setup was used by
Heeszel et al. (2013) and enabled a total data recovery rate of 93 %.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5">
  <label>5</label><title>Future visions</title>
      <p id="d1e1111">In addition to the concepts currently under development, we also have ideas
for subsequent developments. Above all, we see much potential in optimizing
battery management and input energy management. For example, a
multiple-battery option would be desirable, in which individual batteries
are charged step by step after the polar winter when the current flow is low
so that a high voltage is available quickly. It would also be desirable to
disconnect deeply discharged batteries from the overall system. In terms of
input energy management, a variant is conceivable in which a wind generator
is switched on exclusively in the polar winter. This would close the energy
gap in the polar winter (with the acceptance of increased noise in the data)
and generate no noise during the summer season while recording data. Another
possibility to reduce the noise influence and material stress of the wind
generators would be to switch on the wind generator only for a particular
time when the total voltage of the batteries drops below a certain range.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>6</label><title>Summary and conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e1122">We have presented a fast and easy to deploy modular, compact, mobile and
self-sufficient seismometer station concept for the polar regions. Due to
its modular design, it can be used in various ways, for example, for
short-term deployment as an array over 1–2 years or as a long-lasting
permanent station. The energy supply can be adapted as required using the
modular cascading of battery boxes, wind generators, solar cells, or backup
batteries, which enables optimum use of limited resources. The stations'
modules are designed so that only the cables have to be connected in the
field. Parts of the concepts presented here are already in use as part of
the extended seismology network of the Neumayer III Station. Our system
concept is not specifically limited to the application to seismology
stations (except for noise suppression) and can also be extended by
additional instruments with low power consumption (e.g., to monitor
environmental parameters). Moreover, it is a suitable system for managing
the power supply for all types of self-sufficient measuring systems in polar
regions.</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e1130">Seismological data from the Geophysical Observatory of Neumayer III Station (station codes: VNA1, VNA2, and VNA3; network code: AW) can be obtained from the GEOFON data centre of the German Research Centre for Geosciences (GFZ):
<uri>https://geofon.gfz-potsdam.de/</uri> (GFZ Seismological Data Archive, 2022).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e1139">AE, JA, and EL led the development of the energy management concept and
mainly manufactured the mobile seismic stations. AE, JA, and SF wrote the
manuscript.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e1145">The contact author has declared that none of the authors has any competing interests.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="disclaimer"><title>Disclaimer</title>

      <p id="d1e1151">Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e1157">We especially thank Ulrike Windhoevel for her editorial contribution to the
manuscript. Moreover, we would like to thank the scientific workshop of the
Alfred Wegener Institute for their support in the production of custom-made
components, such as cable connectors, racks for solar cells, and wind
generators, and the supply of special tools for the field. We would like to
note that many of the concepts presented here are inspired by the
long-standing and intensive efforts of IRIS (Incorporated Research
Institutions for Seismology) PASSCAL's (Portable Array Seismic Studies of
the Continental Lithosphere) engagement in the polar regions (<uri>https://www.passcal.nmt.edu/content/polar</uri>, last access: 1 May 2022). The icons used in Fig. 2
were downloaded from the Noun Project (<uri>https://thenounproject.com/</uri>, last access: 1 May 2022), and we
acknowledge the following creators: solar cell by monkik, heater by lastpark, extra
battery by Irman, AGM battery by Rusmaniah, seismometer by faisalovers, stove by hasanudin, GPS receiver by
Arthur Shlain, data logger by icons mind, antenna by iconpixel, control unit by Delta. For more information about
the geophysical observatory at Neumayer III Station, please refer to
<uri>https://www.awi.de/en/science/geosciences/geophysics/research-focus/observatories-long-term-measurements.html</uri> (last access: 11 July 2022).</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e1171">Steven Franke was funded by the AWI Strategy fund and the German Academic
Exchange Service (DAAD) program “Forschungsstipendien für promovierte
Nachwuchswissenschaftlerinnen und -wissenschaftler (Kurzstipendien)”.<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>The article processing charges for this open-access<?xmltex \notforhtml{\newline}?> publication were covered by the Alfred Wegener Institute, <?xmltex \notforhtml{\newline}?> Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research (AWI).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e1184">This paper was edited by David Barclay and reviewed by Fabian Walter, Alex Brisbourne, and one anonymous referee.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>An, M., Wiens, D. A., Zhao, Y., Feng, M., Nyblade, A. A., Kanao, M., Li, Y.,
Maggi, A., and Lévêque, J.-J.: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-velocity model and inferred Moho
topography beneath the Antarctic Plate from Rayleigh waves, J. Geophys. Res.-Sol. Ea., 120, 359–383, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JB011332" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2014JB011332</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Anandakrishnan, A., Voigt, D. E., Burkett, P. G., and Henry, R.: Deployment of a
broadband seismic network in west Antarctica, Geophys. Res. Lett., 27, 2053–2056,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1999GL011189" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/1999GL011189</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Contrafatto, D., Fasone, R., Ferro, A., Larocca, G., Laudani, G., Rapisarda,
S., Scuderi, L., Zuccarello, L., Privitera, E., and Cannata, A.: Design of a
seismo-acoustic station for Antarctica, Rev. Sci. Instrum., 89, 044502,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5023481" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1063/1.5023481</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Dahl-Jensen, T., Larsen, T. B., and Voss, P.: Greenland ice sheet monitoring
network (GLISN): A seismological approach, Geol. Surv. Den. Greenl., 20, 55–58, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Danesi, S. and Morelli, A.: Structure of the upper mantle under the Antarctic plate from surface wave tomography, Geophys. Res. Lett., 28, 4395–4398, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001GL013431" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2001GL013431</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Eckstaller, A., Müller, C., Ceranna, L., and Hartmann, G.: The
Geophysics Observatory at Neumayer Stations (GvN and NM-II) Antarctica, Polarforschung, 76, 3–24, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2312/polarforschung.76.1-2.3" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2312/polarforschung.76.1-2.3</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>GFZ Seismological Data Archive: Seismological data of the Geophysical Observatory of Neumayer III Station (Station codes: VNA1, VNA2, and VNA3; Network code: AW) archived at the GEOFON data centre [data set], <uri>https://geofon.gfz-potsdam.de/</uri>, last access: 9 July 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hansen, S. E., Reusch, A. M., Parker, T., Bloomquist, D. K., Carpenter, P., Graw, J. H., and
Brenn, G. R.: The Transantarctic Mountains Northern Network (TAMNNET):
Deployment and Performance of a Seismic Array in Antarctica, Seismol. Res. Lett., 86, 1636–44,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1785/0220150117" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1785/0220150117</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Heeszel, D. S., Wiens, D. A., Nyblade, A. A., Hansen, S. E., Kanao, M., An, M., and Zhao, Y.: Rayleigh wave constraints on the structure and tectonic history of the Gamburtsev Subglacial Mountains, East Antarctica, J. Geophys. Res.-Sol. Ea., 118, 2138–2153, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrb.50171" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/jgrb.50171</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>IRIS GMAP: Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS) Google
Map Service, <uri>http://ds.iris.edu/gmap/</uri>, last access: 1 May 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Janik, T., Grad, M., Guterch, A., and Środa, P.: The deep seismic structure of the Earth’s crust along the Antarctic Peninsula – A summary of the results from Polish geodynamical expeditions, Glob. Planet. Change, 123, 213–222, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2014.08.018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.gloplacha.2014.08.018</ext-link>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Johns, B., Anderson, K. R., Beaudoin, B. C., Fowler, J., Parker, T., and
White, S.: Development of a power and communications system for remote
autonomous polar observations, EOS T. Am. Geophys. Un., 87, Fall Meet. Suppl., Abstract
S41A-1314, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1785/0220150117" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1785/0220150117</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Knopoff, L. and Vane, G.: Age of East Antarctica from surface wave dispersion, PAGEOPH, 117, 806–815, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00879981" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/BF00879981</ext-link>, 1978.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lawrence, J. F., Wiens, D. A., Nyblade, A. A., Anandakrishnan, S., Shore, P.
J., and Voigt, D.: Crust and upper mantle structure of the Transantarctic
Mountains and surrounding regions from receiver functions, surface waves,
and gravity: Implications for uplift models, Geochem. Geophy. Geosy., 7, Q10011,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GC001282" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2006GC001282</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lifeline Technical Manual: For Lifeline Batteries, Concorde Battery
Corporation, <uri>https://lifelinebatteries.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/6-0101F-Lifeline-Technical-Manual-Final-5-06-19.pdf</uri> (last access: 1 May 2022),
2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lough, A. C., Wiens, D. A., and Nyblade, A. Reactivation of ancient Antarctic
rift zones by intraplate seismicity, Nat. Geosci., 11, 515–519,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-018-0140-6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41561-018-0140-6</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Peng, H. Y., Liu, H. J., and Yang, J. H.: A review on the wake aerodynamics of
H-rotor vertical axis wind turbines, Energy, 232, 121003,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.121003" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.energy.2021.121003</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ritzwoller, M. H., Shapiro, N. M., Levshin, A. L., and Leahy, G. M.: Crustal
and upper mantle structure beneath Antarctica and surrounding oceans, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 30645–30670, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JB000179" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2001JB000179</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sykes, L. R.: Intraplate seismicity, reactivation of pre-existing zones of
weakness, alkaline magmatism, and other tectonism postdating continental
fragmentation, Rev. Geophys., 16, 621–688, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/RG016i004p00621" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/RG016i004p00621</ext-link>,
1978.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tin, T., Sovacool, B. K., Blake, D., Magill, P., El Naggar, S., Lidstrom,
S., Ishizawa, K., and Berte, J.: Energy efficiency and renewable energy under
extreme conditions: Case studies from Antarctica, Renew. Energ., 35, 1715–1723,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2009.10.020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.renene.2009.10.020</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Toyokuni, G., Kanao, M., Tono, Y., Himeno, T., Tsuboi, S., Childs, D., Anderson, K., and
Takenaka, H.: Monitoring of the Greenland ice sheet using a broadband
seismometer network: the GLISN project, Antarct. Rec., 58, 1–18, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.15094/00009722" ext-link-type="DOI">10.15094/00009722</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Veitch, S. A. and Nettles, M.: Spatial and temporal variations in Greenland
glacial-earthquake activity, 1993–2010, J. Geophys. Res., 117, F04007,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JF002412" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2012JF002412</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Towards a self-sufficient mobile broadband seismological recording system for year-round operation in Antarctica</article-title-html>
<abstract-html/>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
An, M., Wiens, D. A., Zhao, Y., Feng, M., Nyblade, A. A., Kanao, M., Li, Y.,
Maggi, A., and Lévêque, J.-J.: <i>S</i>-velocity model and inferred Moho
topography beneath the Antarctic Plate from Rayleigh waves, J. Geophys. Res.-Sol. Ea., 120, 359–383, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JB011332" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JB011332</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Anandakrishnan, A., Voigt, D. E., Burkett, P. G., and Henry, R.: Deployment of a
broadband seismic network in west Antarctica, Geophys. Res. Lett., 27, 2053–2056,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1999GL011189" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/1999GL011189</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Contrafatto, D., Fasone, R., Ferro, A., Larocca, G., Laudani, G., Rapisarda,
S., Scuderi, L., Zuccarello, L., Privitera, E., and Cannata, A.: Design of a
seismo-acoustic station for Antarctica, Rev. Sci. Instrum., 89, 044502,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5023481" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5023481</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Dahl-Jensen, T., Larsen, T. B., and Voss, P.: Greenland ice sheet monitoring
network (GLISN): A seismological approach, Geol. Surv. Den. Greenl., 20, 55–58, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Danesi, S. and Morelli, A.: Structure of the upper mantle under the Antarctic plate from surface wave tomography, Geophys. Res. Lett., 28, 4395–4398, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001GL013431" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2001GL013431</a>, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Eckstaller, A., Müller, C., Ceranna, L., and Hartmann, G.: The
Geophysics Observatory at Neumayer Stations (GvN and NM-II) Antarctica, Polarforschung, 76, 3–24, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2312/polarforschung.76.1-2.3" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2312/polarforschung.76.1-2.3</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
GFZ Seismological Data Archive: Seismological data of the Geophysical Observatory of Neumayer III Station (Station codes: VNA1, VNA2, and VNA3; Network code: AW) archived at the GEOFON data centre [data set], <a href="https://geofon.gfz-potsdam.de/" target="_blank"/>, last access: 9 July 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Hansen, S. E., Reusch, A. M., Parker, T., Bloomquist, D. K., Carpenter, P., Graw, J. H., and
Brenn, G. R.: The Transantarctic Mountains Northern Network (TAMNNET):
Deployment and Performance of a Seismic Array in Antarctica, Seismol. Res. Lett., 86, 1636–44,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1785/0220150117" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1785/0220150117</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Heeszel, D. S., Wiens, D. A., Nyblade, A. A., Hansen, S. E., Kanao, M., An, M., and Zhao, Y.: Rayleigh wave constraints on the structure and tectonic history of the Gamburtsev Subglacial Mountains, East Antarctica, J. Geophys. Res.-Sol. Ea., 118, 2138–2153, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrb.50171" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrb.50171</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
IRIS GMAP: Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS) Google
Map Service, <a href="http://ds.iris.edu/gmap/" target="_blank"/>, last access: 1 May 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Janik, T., Grad, M., Guterch, A., and Środa, P.: The deep seismic structure of the Earth’s crust along the Antarctic Peninsula – A summary of the results from Polish geodynamical expeditions, Glob. Planet. Change, 123, 213–222, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2014.08.018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2014.08.018</a>, 2014.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Johns, B., Anderson, K. R., Beaudoin, B. C., Fowler, J., Parker, T., and
White, S.: Development of a power and communications system for remote
autonomous polar observations, EOS T. Am. Geophys. Un., 87, Fall Meet. Suppl., Abstract
S41A-1314, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1785/0220150117" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1785/0220150117</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Knopoff, L. and Vane, G.: Age of East Antarctica from surface wave dispersion, PAGEOPH, 117, 806–815, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00879981" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00879981</a>, 1978.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Lawrence, J. F., Wiens, D. A., Nyblade, A. A., Anandakrishnan, S., Shore, P.
J., and Voigt, D.: Crust and upper mantle structure of the Transantarctic
Mountains and surrounding regions from receiver functions, surface waves,
and gravity: Implications for uplift models, Geochem. Geophy. Geosy., 7, Q10011,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GC001282" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GC001282</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Lifeline Technical Manual: For Lifeline Batteries, Concorde Battery
Corporation, <a href="https://lifelinebatteries.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/6-0101F-Lifeline-Technical-Manual-Final-5-06-19.pdf" target="_blank"/> (last access: 1 May 2022),
2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Lough, A. C., Wiens, D. A., and Nyblade, A. Reactivation of ancient Antarctic
rift zones by intraplate seismicity, Nat. Geosci., 11, 515–519,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-018-0140-6" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-018-0140-6</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Peng, H. Y., Liu, H. J., and Yang, J. H.: A review on the wake aerodynamics of
H-rotor vertical axis wind turbines, Energy, 232, 121003,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.121003" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.121003</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Ritzwoller, M. H., Shapiro, N. M., Levshin, A. L., and Leahy, G. M.: Crustal
and upper mantle structure beneath Antarctica and surrounding oceans, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 30645–30670, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JB000179" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JB000179</a>, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Sykes, L. R.: Intraplate seismicity, reactivation of pre-existing zones of
weakness, alkaline magmatism, and other tectonism postdating continental
fragmentation, Rev. Geophys., 16, 621–688, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/RG016i004p00621" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/RG016i004p00621</a>,
1978.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Tin, T., Sovacool, B. K., Blake, D., Magill, P., El Naggar, S., Lidstrom,
S., Ishizawa, K., and Berte, J.: Energy efficiency and renewable energy under
extreme conditions: Case studies from Antarctica, Renew. Energ., 35, 1715–1723,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2009.10.020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2009.10.020</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Toyokuni, G., Kanao, M., Tono, Y., Himeno, T., Tsuboi, S., Childs, D., Anderson, K., and
Takenaka, H.: Monitoring of the Greenland ice sheet using a broadband
seismometer network: the GLISN project, Antarct. Rec., 58, 1–18, <a href="https://doi.org/10.15094/00009722" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.15094/00009722</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Veitch, S. A. and Nettles, M.: Spatial and temporal variations in Greenland
glacial-earthquake activity, 1993–2010, J. Geophys. Res., 117, F04007,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JF002412" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JF002412</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
