Year and years ago it was suggested to plant small nukes along the San Andres fault where it sticks to cause ruptures that would lead to small earth quakes before the stressed built up to large ruptures.
The idea was to keep the fault active with minor quakes never allowing it to build up to a 7.+ quake again.
Those would be deep wells right at/in/on the fault at key locations (where the fault “sticks” and doesn’t let the plates slide pass each other). I imagine the idea was tossed out as a bad one since nobody knows were the radiation would go, if striking a sticking point wouldn’t result in setting off a chain of quakes or an “unzipping” of the fault, or if it would actually work at all.
That would require precise placement on the fault in question.
Hawaii is home to the most active persistent Volcanoes on earth. On above sea level, Mt. Kilauea which has been erupting and spewing lava for quite some time and is under constant study. The other being the future isle of Loihi:
http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/GG/HCV/loihi.html Due to that we can easily assume that the geo-activity means that Hawaii will rock and roll occasionally. My link to the bab island site shows that earthquakes have been taking place.
=======
Nuclear testing was (way back in the 50's) above ground, but the politicians of the world got together and decided that tests could be done underground to keep the radioactivity in the local area.
Tests above and beneath the ocean were run basically not to test the hydrogen bombs, but to test their affects on naval vessels. Bikini Isles Tests:
http://www.bikiniatoll.com/ also on people and the environment – but hey the government is usually the last to know unimportant aspects of things, for instance, while every American knew that the Civic Centre of New Orleans was under siege from refugees, the Feds had no clue…..
Today's tests are below ground, they are in place to test to see if the bomb works as planned - The above ground tests (first ones) were test of bombs, later ones were test of affects on people, buildings, vehicles etc.
N.K’s Test was a test of the theory and design of their bomb and the nuclear test could be testing the purity of the material used as well.
Nuclear bombs are rather simple devices to make, the theory is readily available everywhere. However some of those designs require very precise measurements, while others require very “pure” fissile material. Thus the phrase “Weapons Grade ___” (Plutonium/Uranium/whatever). This reflects on the refined quality of the end product.
Why “how to make a nuclear bomb” is free information and not a top secret science project is because of the purity of material needed – thus all the fuss over Iran’s owning a reactor and now having the potential to refine an produce weapons grade uranium and/or plutonium. Thus it is still problematic for me to become the first nuclear power on my block.
The Atomic Bomb is strictly fissile (like the ones dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki). Those are “pure” fission –meaning Plutonium or Uranium only. Hydrogen bombs take it up as step and by using a fission bomb to start a fusion reaction (Hydrogen compressed until is fuses together to form heavier atoms which also spits out excess protons/electrons and other particles). I’m assuming that N. Korea tested an atomic (pure fission) bomb and not a hydrogen bomb.
Early above ground tests in Nevada (as example) were fission bombs, later tests in the Pacific where Hydrogen bombs.
Today’s testing of a bomb is one of two things. A test of a new design/material purity, strength blah – or a test of an older war head that has been sitting around on top of a missile. The electronics and other parts of war heads degrade rather quickly under bombardment of radiation from the fissile material of a nuclear bomb. Thus old Nuclear powers (like the USA and USSR) test war heads from their stock pile to make certain that their nukes actually work. Imagine the embarrassment on Judgment day if all of the nukes just didn’t work, we would all just die from the shame.
