Astonishing new evidence linking 'fracking' to earthquakes

[DearAbby]

Arkansas Earthquakes Decline After 'Fracking' Injection Well Closures

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. -- The number and strength of earthquakes in central Arkansas have noticeably dropped since the shutdown of two injection wells in the area, although a state researcher says it's too early to draw any conclusions.

"We have definitely noticed a reduction in the number of earthquakes, especially the larger ones," said Scott Ausbrooks, geohazards supervisor for the Arkansas Geological Survey. "It's definitely worth noting."

The Center for Earthquake Research and Information recorded around 100 earthquakes in the seven days preceding the shutdown earlier this month, including the largest quake to hit the state in 35 years – a magnitude 4.7 on Feb. 27. A dozen of the quakes had magnitudes greater than 3.0. In the days since the shutdown, there have been around 60 recorded quakes, with only one higher than a magnitude 3.0. The majority were between magnitudes 1.2 and 2.8.

The two injection wells are used to dispose of wastewater from natural-gas production. One is owned by Chesapeake Energy, and the other by Clarita Operating. They agreed March 4 to temporarily cease injection operations at the request of the Arkansas Oil and Gas Commission.


More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/15/arkansas-earthquakes-2011-fracking_n_835868.html

[liberal N proud]

1. Duh

Pump pressure into something, something else is going to give.

[DearAbby]

2. Yeah you would think...

problem is, greed usually doesn't.

[liberal N proud]

11. Nailed it

[DCBob]

3. If this is true then it could be a major breakthrough in earthquake "management"..

Perhaps we could develop the technology to utilize a "fracking-type" technique to inject fluids into risky fault zones to relieve the pressure a little at a time thus avoiding the devastation of monster quakes.

[Geostudent]

6. Kinda...

We have know for a while the effects of something called pore fluid pressure. I am going to copy a post I made elsewhere.

The basic idea is that water( or any fluid) in open pockets (pore fluid pressure) lowers the stress required for "failure" to occur along a fault.
Look at this picture: Draw a circle so that it doesn't touch the red lines. By adding fluids, you move the entire circle to the left. If you touch the red line, hello earthquake . There is an "experiment" you can do at home to show this. Step 1 involves drinking a beer. Well it used to. Have a look under "the beer can experiment ": http://www.geo.cornell.edu/geology/classes/Geo101/structure/structure_s00.pdf


Edited to fix links

[DCBob]

8. Cool.. I guess the trick is to make sure you dont trigger a "big one" by mistaken calculations..

A bit like the "butterfly effect".

[Geostudent]

9. One thing I am not sure about...

I am not sure if the triggered quake would lower the actual stress. I assume it would, but I am not entirely confident about that.

[Cleita]

10. Actually this has been talked about for decades

regarding the San Andreas fault in California, yet I don't think anything has been done about it.

[TBF]

4. Astonishing? Only if you have a negative IQ. nt

[Geostudent]

5. Not quite the same thing

The stopped using a deep injection well. The fracking fluid is removed from the layers they are fracking, and then put down deep injection wells. The fracking fluid was being disposed here, nothing else.

[Pale Blue Dot]

7. They shut it down March 4th? They're reporting this after 11 DAYS?

Sorry, I call bullshit. I'm in no way a proponent of fracking, but it's way, WAY too soon to be drawing conclusions.

[Boswell]

13. relly? you think it's too soon to draw conclusions?

you mean exactly like they said way way up there in the article?

[Pale Blue Dot]

14. Yes. Which is a point being ignored by many in this thread.

If the HuffPo had any knowledge of the scientific process, they wouldn't have printed this article.

[TheKentuckian]

15. These are not new concerns.

[Pale Blue Dot]

16. Yes, and it might turn out to mean something.

But no reputable scientist would EVER draw a conclusion from 11 days of earthquake data. That's so ridiculous it makes this whole thread laughable.

Stop the fracking now, but then come back to us in a year, or better yet 5 years, with data. Data after 11 days is meaningless.

[shraby]

12. They knew that way back in the 1980s. I read articles

in Scientific American discussing the fact that injecting liquid in wells in Texas caused small quakes. It was considered that might be a way to avoid large devastating quakes in California, but it was decided against doing anything like that because they had no control over how large the quake they might trigger.

[LiberalEsto]

17. Was there any fracking going on in Japan?

Just curious.