The Bedretto Underground Laboratory for Geosciences and Geoenergies (BULGG) allows the implementation of hectometer (>100 m) scale in situ experiments to study ambitious research questions. The first experiment on hectometer scale is the Bedretto Reservoir Project (BRP), which studies geothermal exploration. Compared with decameter scale experiments, the financial and organizational costs are significantly increased in hectometer scale experiments and the implementation of high-resolution monitoring comes with considerable risks. We discuss in detail risks for monitoring equipment in hectometer scale experiments and introduce the BRP monitoring network, a multi-component monitoring system combining sensors from seismology, applied geophysics, hydrology, and geomechanics. The multi-sensor network is installed inside long boreholes (up to 300 m length), drilled from the Bedretto tunnel. Boreholes are sealed with a purpose-made cementing system to reach (as far as possible) rock integrity within the experiment volume. The approach incorporates different sensor types, namely, piezoelectric accelerometers, in situ acoustic emission (AE) sensors, fiber-optic cables for distributed acoustic sensing (DAS), distributed strain sensing (DSS) and distributed temperature sensing (DTS), fiber Bragg grating (FBG) sensors, geophones, ultrasonic transmitters, and pore pressure sensors. The network was realized after intense technical development, including the development of the following key elements: rotatable centralizer with integrated cable clamp, multi-sensor in situ AE sensor chain, and cementable tube pore pressure sensor.

We performed a series of hydraulic stimulations at 1.1 km depth in the Bedretto underground laboratory, Switzerland, as part of an overall research strategy attempting to understand induced seismicity on different scales. Using an ultra‐high frequency seismic network we detect seismic events as small as M_w < −4, revealing intricate details of a complex fracture network extending over 100 m from the injection sites. Here, we outline the experimental approach and present seismic catalogs as well as a comparative analysis of event number per injection, magnitudes, b‐values, seismogenic index and reactivation pressures. In our first‐order seismicity analysis, we could make the following observations: The rock volume impacted by the stimulations in different intervals differs significantly with a lateral extent from a few meters to more than 150 m. In most intervals multiple fractures were reactivated. The seismicity typically propagates upwards toward shallower depth on parallel oriented planes that are consistent with the stress field and seem to a large extent associated with preexisting open fractures. This experiment confirms the diversity in seismic behavior independent from the injection protocol. The overall seismicity patterns demonstrate that multi‐stage stimulations using zonal isolation allow developing an extended fracture network in a 3D rock volume, which is necessary for enhanced geothermal systems. Our stimulations covering two orders of magnitude in terms of injected volume will give insights into upscaling of induced seismicity from underground laboratory scale to field scale.

The in situ stress state within fault zones is technically challenging to characterize. At the Bedretto Underground Laboratory in the Swiss Alps, the breakouts observed in an array of eight inclined boreholes penetrating a fault zone offer a unique opportunity to characterize the fault‐associated spatial stress variations. Synthesizing multiple geophysical logs, natural geologic structures intersecting these boreholes are identified, revealing a hierarchy of a major fault zone along with secondary structures. Within the boreholes, breakout rotations occur over multiple scales, spanning individual fractures and the entire major fault zone. We first estimate and rule out the effect of the fracture‐induced anisotropy on the breakout rotations, which are attributed mainly to the stress variations. Based on the stress field around a circular borehole and Mohr‐Coulomb failure criterion, the observed breakout azimuths are used to invert the stress information. Results show that the stress field outside the fault zone features a stress ratio (quantifying the relative stress magnitude) of about 0.9, an inclined overburden stress (inclination: 12°∼18°), and a maximum horizontal principal stress (S_Hmax) oriented N100∼120°E. Within the fault zone, a substantial reduction of the stress ratio and complicated stress rotations are constrained, likely induced by the stress drop on local fractures. As a result, less critical stress state inside the major fault zone is expected. Our work provides a semi‐quantitative estimation of the in‐situ stress variations around fault zones in the absence of direct stress measurements, which is beneficial to a number of scientific and engineering applications.

The Bedretto Underground Laboratory for Geoenergies and Geosciences (BULGG) is located in south-central Switzerland in the middle of a 5.2-km-long tunnel, which connects the Bedretto valley to the Furka railway tunnel. BULGG is a multidisciplinary laboratory that facilitates experiments and research across various fields. From a seismological perspective, a dense seismic network is deployed that allows real-time monitoring of both natural and induced seismicity occurring in the tunnel and the surroundings. In addition, a multilevel monitoring approach during experiments leads to the generation of real-time high-resolution earthquake catalogs issuing event-based alerts and is the input for a simple traffic light system (magnitude and/or ground-motion based), which provides essential information for the advanced traffic-light system (probabilistic approach). We have set up two separate real-time monitoring systems that monitor the background seismicity, as well as injection experiments, with both systems built on the SeisComP framework. The background monitoring, serving as the backbone network, includes broadband sensors at the surface and along the tunnel, as well as strong-motion sensors and high-frequency geophones along the tunnel and in boreholes. The sampling rate is divergent and depends on sensor type and proximity to faults (200–2000 Hz). Acoustic emission sensors and high-frequency accelerometers sampled at 200 kHz constitute the experimental setup that locates in multiple experimental volumes, which include fluid injections, extractions, and tunneling activities. All sensors transmit real-time data to a common server (SeedLink), which serves multiple clients for processing, real-time visualization, archiving via SeisComP, and risk control via dedicated software. A standardized workflow is applied to both background and experimental monitoring, encompassing automatic picking, automatic phase association and location, and magnitude estimation. Advanced methods are implemented in real time that include double-difference relocation and earthquake detection based on waveform cross correlation. BULGG provides a unique environment to implement novel methods in observational and network seismology across scales.

One major hurdle for understanding earthquake mechanics are observational limitations. Important phenomena like strain localisation, fault dilation, and fault healing are readily studied in rock mechanical laboratory experiments and with numerical models. At the scale of natural earthquakes, however, these phenomena are often unresolvable, even by state-of-the-art observatories. To overcome this limitation, we are currently building the Earthquake Physics Testbed at the Bedretto Underground Laboratory for Geosciences and Geoenergies (BedrettoLab), an experimental testbed where we can activate an extensively instrumented natural fault zone via hydraulic stimulation. The goal of the Fault Activation and Earthquake Rupture (FEAR) project is to induce earthquakes of up to Mw~1.0 on this exceptionally well characterised and instrumented fault zone. Here we summarize the main scientific goals and current FEAR project status, and present first results from conducted experiments. We discuss how this large-scale experimental approach may allow us to tackle both fundamental science as well as practical questions on earthquake physics, induced seismicity and seismic hazard.