Methodology of Geoecological Assessment of Techno-natural Systems Based on Multifactor Analysis of Fractal Indicators

№2 (2026)

Nasonov A.N.

УДК 574.635 (470.311)
https://doi.org/10.47148/1609-364X-2026-2-52-59

AbstractAbout the AuthorsReferences
The problem of geoecological assessment, including the issues of analyzing the sustainability of techno-natural systems and modeling their self-organization, is a priority in the state strategy of environmental safety of the Russian Federation. The purpose of the study is to assess the environmental safety of techno-natural systems by calculating the sustainability of their development and identifying risk factors under conditions of multifactorial loads. The paper proposes a new methodology for the geoecological assessment of techno-natural processes based on a multifactorial analysis of fractal indicators. Its application will ensure the control and assessment of the environmental safety of techno-natural systems, identify potentially dangerous man-made components that affect their sustainable functioning. For this purpose, it is proposed to use methods of systemic, fractal and factor analysis in the description of techno-natural systems, the synthesis of which allows us to obtain a model of self-organization of techno-natural processes.

Andrey N. Nasonov
Candidate of Technical Sciences
Senior lecturer
Moscow State University of Geodesy and Cartography
4, Gorokhovsky lane, Moscow, 105064, Russia
e-mail: adn22@yandex.ru
ORCID ID: 0000-0001-7201-3407
SCOPUS ID: 56989221000
SPIN-code: 2286-1202
AuthorID: 1012751

1. Podgornykh L.V., Gramberg I.S., Khutorskoi M.D., Leonov Yu.G. A geothermal 3D-model of the Kara sea shelf and forecast for its petroleum potential. Doklady Earth Sciences. 2001;380:782–786.
2. Ollinger D., Baujard C., Kohl T., Moeck I. Distribution of thermal conductivities in the Groß Schönebeck (Germany) test site based on 3D inversion of deep borehole data. Geothermics. 2010;39(1):46–58. DOI: 10.1016/j.geothermics.2009.11.004.
3. Spichak V.V., Zakarova O.K., Rybin A.K. Possibility of realization of contact-free electromagnetic geothermometer. Doklady Earth Sciences. 2007;417(2):1370–1374. DOI: 10.1134/S1028334X07090176.
4. Spichak V.V., Zakharova O.K. Ehlektromagnitnyi geotermometr [Electromgnetic geothermometer]. Moscow : Nauchnii Mir: 2013. 170 p.
5. Spichak V.V., Zakharova O.K. Application of the electromagnetic geothermometer in geothermics and geothermal exploration. Russian Geology and Geophysics. 2022;63(9):1078–1092. DOI: 10.2113/rgg20214284.
6. Spichak V.V., Zakharova O.K. Feasibility study of application of electromagnetic geothermometer for hydrocarbon prospecting. Journal of Geophysics. 2020;(1):56–59.
7. Goes S., Govers R., Vacher P. Shallow mantle temperatures under Europe from P and S wave tomography. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. 2000;105(B5):11153–11169. DOI: 10.1029/1999JB900300.
8. Jaya M.S., Shapiro S., Kristindóttir L., Bruhn D., Milsch H. and Spangenberg E. Temperature-Dependence of Seismic Properties in Geothermal Core Samples at In-Situ Reservoir Conditions. In: Proceedings of World Geothermal Congress (Bali, Indonesia, 25–29 April 2010). 2010. 8 p. Available at: http://www.geothermal-energy.org/pdf/IGAstandard/WGC/2010/1358.pdf (accessed 07.04.2010).
9. Perry H.K.C., Jaupart C., Mareschal J.-C., Shapiro N.M. Upper mantle velocity-temperature conversion and composition determined from seismic refraction and heat flow. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. 2006;11(B7):B07301. DOI: 10.1029/2005JB003921.
10. Poletto F., Farina B., Carcione J.M. Sensitivity of seismic properties to temperature variations in a geothermal reservoir. Geothermics. 2018;76:149–163. DOI: 10.1016/j.geothermics.2018.07.001.
11. Kuskov O.L., Kronrod V.A. Determining the temperature of the Earth’s continental upper mantle from geochemical and seismic data. Geochemistry International. 2006;44(3):232–248. DOI: 10.1134/S0016702906030025.
12. Cammarano F., Goes S., Vacher P., Giardini D. Inferring upper-mantle temperatures from seismic velocities. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors. 2003;138(3-4):197–222. DOI: 10.1016/S0031-9201(03)00156-0.
13. Furlong K.P., Spakman W., Wortel R. Thermal structure of the continental lithosphere: Constraints from seismic tomography. Tectonophysics. 1995;224(1–3):107–117. DOI: 10.1016/0040-1951(94)00220-4.
14. Ryan G.A., Shalev E. Seismic Velocity / Temperature Correlations and a Possible New Geothermometer: Insights from Exploration of a High-Temperature Geothermal System on Montserrat, West Indies. Energies. 2014;7(10):6689–6720. DOI: 10.3390/en7106689.
15. Sobolev S.V., Zeyen H., Stoll G., Werling F., Altherr R., Fuchs K. Upper mantle temperatures from teleseismic tomography of French Massif Central including effects of composition, mineral reactions, anharmonicity, anelasticity, and partial melt. Earth and Planetary Science Letters. 1996;139(1–2):147–163. DOI: 10.1016/0012-821X(95)00238-8.

Key words: system analysis; factor analysis; fractal indicator of ecological footprint; geoecological assessment; techno-natural system; self-organization

Section: Geoecology