In the absence of drilling, surface-based geophysical methods are necessary to observe fault zones and fault zone physical properties at seismogenic depths. These in situ physical properties can then be used to infer the presence and distribution of fluids along faults, although such observations are by nature indirect and become less exact with greater depth. Multiple observations of a range of such geophysical properties as compressional and shear seismic velocity (Vp and Vs), Vp/Vs ratio (related to Poisson's ratio), resistivity and attenuation in and adjacent to fault zones offer the greatest hope of making inferences of the fault zone geometry, fluids in the fault zone, and fluid reservoirs in the surrounding crust. For simple geometries, fault zone guided waves can provide information on fault zone width and velocities for faults of the order of 200 m wide. To address the question of whether a narrow fault zone can be imaged well enough at depths of seismic rupture to infer the presence of anomalously high fluid/rock ratios, we present synthetic seismic tomography and magnetotelluric examples for an ideal case of a narrow fault zone with a simple geometry, large changes in material properties, and numerous earthquakes within the fault zone.

A synthetic 0.5-km wide fault zone with 20% velocity reduction is well imaged using local earthquake tomography. When sequential velocity inversions are done, the true fault width is found, even to 9 km depth, although the calculated amplitude of the velocity reduction is lower than the actual amplitude. Vp/Vs is as well determined as Vp. Magnetotelluric imaging of a synthetic fault zone shows that a conductive fault zone can be well imaged within the upper 10 km. Further, a narrow (1 km) very low resistivity (3 ohm m) fault core can be imaged within a broad (5 km) low resistivity (10 ohm m) fault zone, illustrating that regions of a fault containing large quantities of interconnected fluids within a broader, conductive fault zone should be detectable. Thus variations in fluid content and fluid pressure can be inferred from electrical and seismic methods but there will always be uncertainty in these inferences due to the trade-off with other factors, such as intrinsic variations in porosity, mineralogy, and pore geometry. The best approach is combined modeling of varied seismic and electrical data. ¿ American Geophysical Union 1995