Guest post by David Middleton
Wow! I woke up Friday morning to news that a 2.0 Md earthquake struck about a mile and a half from my office. I was sleeping at home, about 7 miles from the epicenter, and it didn’t even wake me up. Thirty years as an exploration geophysicist, and I sleep right through my first earthquake!
That morning, I arrived at work and found my office in total disarray – So the quake didn’t do any damage… 
Now… I have yet to hear any journalists, politicians or college professors link this quake to fracking… But I figure they will. So I’ll just preemptively shoot that bit of junk science down. Fracking can trigger extremely minor earthquakes. A 2.0 Md quake is in the realm of possibilities. However, there aren’t any active wells within a 5 km radius (Davis et al., 1995) of this particular quake.
Now that I’ve preemptively debunked that bit of junk science, let’s go to Ohio. Every morning I like to check the Real Clear Energy website. It’s a nice compendium of energy news and also includes a fair bit of AGW nonsense. So it’s often a good source for blogging material. Well, this bit of nonsense caught my eye…
So, I clicked the link to the Scientific American article and this is what I saw…
At least they had the scientific integrity to mention that the quake was likely triggered by the wastewater injection well and not actually triggered by the fracking.
The Oklahoma Geological Survey recently examined (Holland, 2011) the possible relationship between a swarm of micro-quakes and a fracking operation in Garvin County OK. They concluded that the fracking could have triggered the 1.0 to 2.8 Md temblors. However, the quakes were so insignificant that it was almost impossible to precisely locate the hypocenters. The quakes could have been within 5 km of a fracking operation, they could have been small enough to have been triggered by the fracking operation and they occurred right after one fracking operation. However, the area has frequent seismicity of similar magnitude and no other fracking operations in the field’s 60+ year history have been correlated with induced seismicity.
After a bit of modeling, Holland was able to place the hypocenters of the temblors along a fault, within 5 km of an active fracking operation.
Holland’s conclusion was that there was a 50-50 chance that these micro-quakes were triggered by the fracking operation in the Picket Unit B Well 4-18.
One person reported feeling these quakes. Md 1.0 to 2.8 quakes are Category I on the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale…
You have to get up to more than Md 3.5 before quakes deliver “vibrations similar to the passing of a truck.” The non-palpable seismicity that might result from fracking is less than that of a seismic crew shooting a survey. Fracking can’t cause larger quakes…
Oklahoma Earthquakes Stronger Than Fracking Tremors, Experts Say
By SETH BORENSTEIN and JONATHAN FAHEY 11/ 7/11
WASHINGTON — Thousands of times every day, drilling deep underground causes the earth to tremble. But don’t blame the surprise flurry of earthquakes in Oklahoma on man’s thirst for oil and gas, experts say.
The weekend quakes were far stronger than the puny tremors from drilling – especially the controversial practice of hydraulic fracturing.
[…]
The magnitude-5.6 quake that rocked Oklahoma three miles underground had the power of 3,800 tons of TNT, which is nearly 2,000 times stronger than the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.
The typical energy released in tremors triggered by fracking, “is the equivalent to a gallon of milk falling off the kitchen counter,” said Stanford University geophysicist Mark Zoback.
In Oklahoma, home to 185,000 drilling wells and hundreds of injection wells, the question of man-made seismic activity comes up quickly. But so far, federal, state and academic experts say readings show that the Oklahoma quakes were natural, following the lines of a long-known fault.
“There’s a fault there,” said U.S. Geological Survey seismologist Paul Earle. “You can have an earthquake that size anywhere east of the Rockies. You don’t need a huge fault to produce an earthquake that big. It’s uncommon, but not unexpected.”
[…]
In the past, earthquakes have been linked to energy exploration and production, including from injections of enormous amounts of drilling wastewater or injections of water for geothermal power, experts said. They point to recent earthquakes in the magnitude 3 and 4 range – not big enough to cause much damage, but big enough to be felt – in Arkansas, Texas, California, England, Germany and Switzerland. And back in the 1960s, two Denver quakes in the 5.0 range were traced to deep injection of wastewater.
[…]
Holland, who has documented some of the biggest shaking associated with fracking, compared a man-made earthquake to a mosquito bite. “It’s really quite inconsequential,” he said.
Hydraulic fracturing has been practiced for decades but it has grown rapidly in recent years as drillers have learned to combine it with horizontal drilling to tap enormous reserves of natural gas and oil in the United States.
About 5 million gallons of fluid is used to fracture a typical well. That’s typically not nearly enough weight and pressure to cause more than a tiny tremor.
Earlier this year, Holland wrote a report about a different flurry of Oklahoma quakes last January – the strongest a 2.8 magnitude – that seemed to occur with hydraulic fracturing. Holland said it was a 50-50 chance that the gas drilling technique caused the tremors
[…]
So… Fracking can’t cause significant earthquakes and Seth Borenstein can actually write an article without parroting the alarmists.
References and Further Reading
Davis, S.D., P.A. Nyffenegger & C. Frolich. The 9 April 1993 Earthquake in South-Central Texas: Was It Induced by Fluid Withdrawal? Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. Vol. 85, No, 6. pp. 1888-1895, December 1995.
Frolich, C. & E. Potter. Dallas-Forth Worth earthquakes coincident with activity associated with natural gas production. The Leading Edge. Vol. 29, No. 3. pp. 270-275, March 2010.
Holland, A. Examination of Possibly Induced Seismicity from Hydraulic Fracturing in the Eola Field, Garvin County, Oklahoma. Oklahoma Geological Survey Open-File Report OF1-2011. August 2011.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Well, I guess I will have to go with the real scientists. In general fracking does not cause significant quakes, but it is new and has not been well studied and in certain geologic formations it may, and probably does.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/05/us/05fracking.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/06/us/06earthquake.html?pagewanted=all
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/03/01/fracking-earthquakes-arkansas-man-experts-warn/
Cool.
If you please… one question. (Of sorts)
The Guy AR swarm is the reason that the AOGC restricted disposal well operations in that area. The majority of these quakes form a beautiful fan dropping down below 10 km, and the majority of them are about 8 to 9 km deep, well below (no pun) the operating depth of the sites in that area.
Any idea why? (Or is it just a PR move… in your opinion)
Another balanced article from a good right wing publication, Forbes.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2012/01/10/should-we-freak-out-about-fracking-induced-earthquakes/?commentId=comment_blogAndPostId/blog/comment/912-1971-1786
A study showing Barnett Shale waste injection wells as a “plausible cause” for earthquakes:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100310134158.htm
I recall that at one time people were considering ‘drilling and lubricting’ major fault lines so that there would be a lot of small movements (no damage) rather than a few, or one, large movement (massive damage).
The earth is going to move no matter what, the only question is how often, not how far over time.
Even if there are many small movements that are facilitated by drilling and lubrication, is that a bad thing?
Perhaps one should point out that multiple minor movements are a good thing in the long term.
Very interesting. We have the occasional quake in the UK and the last, 4,2, was from a completely unknown fault about 5km below the surface according to BGS. We obviously can’t know every fault and earthquake forecasting is not yet possible so quakes will happen with no notice. It is also possible that seismic monitoring has improved over the years and the number of monitoring stations increased so these small quakes have nowhere to hide.
David,
I’m not sure what the maps of the Eola field wells or even the Ohio Barnett
Shale wells has to do with the 4.0 Youngstown/Warren quake we had a few
weeks ago.
This area of Northeastern Ohio has a modern history of minor quakes
associated with the faults around the edge of the NE Ohio block that’s
still undergoing rebound “lifting” from the last glaciation.
These small faults are only partially mapped out… but their trend and
extentions are fairly “well” known.
The Ohio quake was attributed not directly to “fracking” wells, but to not quite-
so-deep deep brine and drilling waste wells in the immediate waste-well area in
the poorly defined fault zone.
We’ve had shakes along this series of small faults since I was a kid here in Ohio
in the 1950s.
Our little 4.0 quake says nothing one way or the other about the practice
of fracking.
It must have been caused by frakking. Just like the one I felt this morning http://www.geonet.org.nz/earthquake/quakes/3640598g.html. Oh, hang on, there is no frakking in New Zealand. It must then have been caused by the geothermal steam extraction for the power station, or perhaps by the requirement for the reinjection of geothermal condensate. Horrible things these carbon free energy stations.
Of course it is most likely that being in a seismically active area has something to do with the quake. It is time for the government to start taxing us heavily to prevent earthquakes, after-all we have seen how destructive they can be recently e.g. Christchurch and Japan.
Very interesting post, educational & informative, thank you!
However, when you have the warmista mentallity of Agenda 21, any quake, regardless of how small, that might, just, possibly, potentially, may, could be linked in any way whatsoever to fracking, is a no no! Gaia was scratched & you hurt her! It’s a lose lose situation in many ways.
And, I was sure Global Warming caused those earthquakes…
Surely a series of micro quakes will relieve pressure buildup that would oterwise generate a larger quake later?
So fracking reduces the occurrence of quakes that mightv actually cause damage?
Congrats on your first shaking. It can be quite an experience!
I’ve never understood why the technique of fracking is more likely to cause quakes than traditional oil drilling. After all, the traditional method involves a considerable exchange of fluids and pressures between the surface and the sands. Lots of mud and water goes down, and hopefully lots of oil comes up. When you consider the THOUSANDS of wells that have been drilled, pumped and abandoned in Oklahoma and Texas over the last hundred years, and the scarcity of even small quakes during those years, it’s not a very good correlation.
That won’t stop the dipstick we’ve got in charge of UK energy policy from using it as an excuse to ban fracking in favour of windmills.
Great article: factual, informative, and unbiased (despite your evil oil connection). These kinds of articles help the general public see that anti-fracking misinformation (like the ‘Gasland’ mockumentary) is just a scare tactic put out by people who dislike all forms of carbon based energy.
You have probably slept through a few 0.1 M earthquakes. Magnitude 2 earthquake- who cares- it’ll have to get up 3 to noticeable- they probably do some good by releasing some earth stresses. Humans can’t cause real earthquakes (the surface equivalents happen all the time during construction and traffic accidents etc) maybe initiate earthquakes but not induce massive stresses in massive pieces of rock kilometres underground. The oil and gas search industry during better geoscience than the all the deep earth researchers put together (they know remote sensing isn’t worth anything by itself).
An EXCELLENT example of how sound judgement and reasonable science can triumph after all. Well written, sir.
http://starwarsawakening.wordpress.com
Quite a few of minor (under 4.5) quakes have happened in the last couple of years, in the Snyder, Texas, and Ralls, Texas areas, and there are oil wells in BOTH AREAS! O Noes! Oh wait, they aren’t using fraking near there…never mind. 😀
Boy its nice to hear some Geo trained people speak up about this issue. The alarmists seem to be the ones getting most of the media and public’s attention up to now.
“and Seth Borenstein can actually write an article without parroting the alarmists.”
Wow! Maybe Santa Claus does exist after all! 🙂
One point that I find interesting is the question of whether the process of fracking can itself create geological stress that is released through quakes or if it just facilitates the release of pre-existing stress energy. The latter would seem to be a good thing as it would in fact prevent a further build-up that could cause (more) damage.
and Seth Borenstein can actually write an article without parroting the alarmists.
The most shocking conclusion of this post! But fear not, Mr Borenstein will self correct this one time slip of non-alarmism within a week.
It’s probably worth pointing out as well that fracking/water injection itself isn’t potentially creating these earthquakes but would be allowing stress/strain to be relieved from naturally occuring tectonic forces. I think much of the public isn’t aware of this.
For people interested in real earthquakes, check this link to the ongoing earthquakes in Christchurch New Zealand. They have real issues to deal with, not fracking related complaints about earthquakes no one feels and that have probably been happening all their lives.
http://www.christchurchquakemap.co.nz/
Fracking does, of course, cause swarms of micro-earthquakes. That’s what happens when rock breaks. The vast majority are less than magnitude 1. Careful monitoring of the microearthquakes is how the extent of the frack is measured, and also how it’s documented that the fractures never get anywhere near freshwater aquifers.
There was a special session at last year’s SEG on environmental concerns related to fracking. It is possible for a frack to intersect an existing fault and cause a small earthquake, but the volume of water used is too small to lubricate enough fault area to produce an earthquake bigger than 2.0 or so. Wastewater disposal wells inject larger volumes over longer times and have indeed triggered earthquakes of magnitude 4.0, causing minor damage. The best known example was at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal back in the 60’s, IIRC.
The following was sent to me by a geologist in Oklahoma:
“I heard the rumble that actually did turn out to be the earthquake,but needed ten seconds to figure out which it was. Not a big deal. The newskeeps trying to blame it on fracs.
No, it isn’t a frac, but we did notice that they arepumping mind boggling amounts of water (over 10,000 barrels water per day perwell) in hundreds of wells near epicenter/fault (huge water reinjection sweepof
old watered-out field recovering about 2% oil cut). Somebodyfrom the USGS did say that this type of water injection could cause up to a 5magnitude quake, however, nobody seems to be listening to him
as long as the misinformed public keeps blaming it on fracs, theindustry can continue to categorically deny fracs are the cause.”