A comparison of time domain electromagnetic and surface nuclear magnetic resonance sounding for subsurface water on Mars

Abstract

The time domain electromagnetic (TDEM) method has enjoyed wide success in terrestrial groundwater exploration, and the contrast in electrical conductivity between dry overburden and groundwater containing even a small amount of dissolved solids on Mars will yield a robust response. However, moist clays or even ores (e.g., massive hematite) will also be electrically conductive and could be mistaken for aquifers on Mars if proper geologic context is lacking. Surface nuclear magnetic resonance (SNMR) is the only noninvasive geophysical method that responds nearly uniquely to water. As the measured EMF is proportional to the proton‐precession frequency, which in turn is proportional to the planet's static magnetic field, SNMR signals are comparatively weak. Using small systems of several kilograms and several watts, the exploration depth of SNMR is one to two orders of magnitude smaller than TDEM: the latter can detect water to depths up to a few kilometers, whereas the former is limited to depths of a few tens of meters. There is no improvement in SNMR signal‐to‐noise with increasing static field where penetration is controlled by aquifer salinity (skin depth). As reasonable integration times cannot substantially increase the exploration depth, much larger transmitter current or loop mass (either requiring system masses of tens to hundreds of kilograms) are the only way to implement SNMR for exploration to depths of at least hundreds of meters. In spite of some ambiguity in target identification, TDEM is recommended for the first generation of in situ active‐source EM measurements for groundwater on Mars.