The United States Geological Survey (USGS) issued a press release yesterday indicating that the magnitude 5.7 earthquake that struck Prague, Oklahoma in 2011 was unintentionally human-induced.

The USGS claims that the magnitude 5.0 earthquake triggered by waste-water injection the previous day “trigger[ed] a cascade of earthquakes, including a larger one, [which] has important implications for reducing the seismic risk from waste-water injection.”


U.S. Geological Survey confirms: Human activity caused 5.7 quake in Oklahoma | The Raw Story (http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/03/07/u-s-geological-survey-confirms-human-activity-caused-5-7-quake-in-oklahoma/)

"Despite this risk, authorities in Oklahoma continue to allow waste-water injection near the Wilzetta fault."(from above referenced article)

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) issued a press release yesterday indicating that the magnitude 5.7 earthquake that struck Prague, Oklahoma in 2011 was unintentionally human-induced.

The USGS claims that the magnitude 5.0 earthquake triggered by waste-water injection the previous day “trigger[ed] a cascade of earthquakes, including a larger one, [which] has important implications for reducing the seismic risk from waste-water injection.”


U.S. Geological Survey confirms: Human activity caused 5.7 quake in Oklahoma | The Raw Story (http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/03/07/u-s-geological-survey-confirms-human-activity-caused-5-7-quake-in-oklahoma/)

This story was taken a bit out of context from the original. The original story from USGS said it "may have" caused the quake.

Shocking!

/s

USGS story with "may have" and a link to the paper


PASADENA, Calif. — In a new study involving researchers at the U.S. Geological Survey, scientists observed that a human-induced magnitude 5.0 earthquake near Prague, Oklahoma in November 2011 may have triggered the larger M5.7 earthquake less than a day later. This research suggests that the M5.7 quake was the largest human-caused earthquake associated with wastewater injection.

USGS Release: 2011 Oklahoma Induced Earthquake May Have Triggered Larger Quake (3/6/2014 5:00:00 PM) (http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=3819&from=rss&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter#.UxsvbYV8oWD)

Hmmmmm...so, The Raw Story intentionally omitted the word "may." Wonder why they did that?

So it might have been a fracking earthquake instead of a fricking earth quake? You're all shook up either way I suppose.

Pretty sure Raw Story is not the hot news item but feel free to knock yourself out talking them. Might as well work the USGS are all biased scientists and/or academics too while you're at it. Perhaps even toss in a "Thanks, Obama!" too. It's his watch.

The way I read it, the news is the USGS builds on a previous report expanding the events possibly related to the injection well activity...activity at the well happened, a quake happened, a second larger quake happened. Their opinion after study is they all may have been related, one event leading to the other.

Link to the official report.

USGS Release: 2011 Oklahoma Induced Earthquake May Have Triggered Larger Quake (3/6/2014 5:00:00 PM) (http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=3819&from=rss&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter#.UxticfldVwv)

Edit: My bad, didn't notice it was already posted.

So it might have been a fracking earthquake instead of a fricking earth quake? You're all shook up either way I suppose.

On BSG, yes, it's a fracking earthquake.

Hmmmmm...so, The Raw Story intentionally omitted the word "may." Wonder why they did that?

I was going blame it on an editor coming up with a more exciting title for the article, but then I read the article itself and changed my mind. The author is either pushing an agenda or isn't enough of a hard science person to know the difference between the original report and what he wrote. Then again, you'd think a guy with a Ph.D. in English Literature would know that leaving out "may have" substantially changes the story.

"Despite this risk, authorities in Oklahoma continue to allow waste-water injection near the Wilzetta fault."(from above referenced article)

I wonder what the governor's response will be if an earthquake turns stronger than 5.7 and kills people? Oil companies better work closer with scientists to better figure out what's going on in the earth and make adjustments to what they're doing, if necessary. If not, a more damaging earthquake could happen, and the oil companies could get sued out of existence.

I think Gov. Fallin was in Stillwater this morning when two earthquakes happened nearby. If she was, I wonder if she noticed them. The stronger of the two was 3.4. She is in Stillwater this afternoon to have a private meeting with the Stillwater Chamber of Commerce members and guests, which to me shows what type political interest she wants closer connections. I wonder if she will be asked if the state should do more about the earthquakes.

well, things do move more freely when lubed

Governor Fallin: Let scientist study earthquakes before any drilling decisions are made » Local News » Stillwater NewsPress (http://www.stwnewspress.com/local/x334196237/Governor-Fallin-Let-scientist-study-earthquakes-before-any-drilling-decisions-are-made)

The thing more troubling than the earthquakes is how fast these new wells are drying up. Apparently they don't hold near the reserves as previously believed.

The thing more troubling than the earthquakes is how fast these new wells are drying up. Apparently they don't hold near the reserves as previously believed.

Are these new wells being drilled in existing explored areas?
Are some wells new depths at existing sites?

I used to deal with an oil man named Nelson Guyer with a company called Thermodyne.
He didn't do water injection fracking but rather he collected a field of dribblers then he set off
underground explosions.

He had investors from around the country but his largest partner was Major Riddle, the owner of
the Sands and the Dunes Casino in Las Vegas. Back in the late 70s Riddle would come into Norman
and meet with Guyer at Legends and they would laugh about the capacity of his underground bomb
where they would drill down about 2000' to set off charges. The fields were east and south of OKC.

Are these new wells being drilled in existing explored areas?
Are some wells new depths at existing sites?

I used to deal with an oil man named Nelson Guyer with a company called Thermodyne.
He didn't do water injection fracking but rather he collected a field of dribblers than set off
underground explosions.

He had investors from around the country but his largest partner was Major Riddle, the owner of
the Sands and the Dunes Casino in Las Vegas. Back in the late 70s Riddle would come into Norman
and meet with Guyer at Legends and they would laugh about the capacity of his underground bomb
where they would drill down about 2000' to set off charges. The fields were east and south of OKC.

I think what he is referring to is the wells drilled in the new found shales, (accomplished by fracking) have most of their production occur up front and rapidly deplete in comparison to more traditional wells that produce less up front and more over time (by my understanding.) I don't think that has much to do with the overall reserve estimates contained in the shales as being less, but there is some talk around the web saying all the shale activity constitutes a short lived drilling bubble.

See below

http://comedyempirepress.com/SilliZyk3pic.jpg

I think what he is referring to is the wells drilled in the new found shales, (accomplished by fracking) have most of their production occur up front and rapidly deplete in comparison to more traditional wells that produce less up front and more over time (by my understanding.) I don't think that has much to do with the overall reserve estimates contained in the shales as being less, but there is some talk around the web saying all the shale activity constitutes a short lived drilling bubble.

How I am understanding it is that there is big volume of oil up front but that the wells go dry quickly. Not unlike water rights calculations in the early 20th century, the volume predictions are made during flood stage, not at average flow stage (to use the water analogy). In the end it doesn't matter what the predictions were, it only matters what really happens. When I saw Cramer yesterday hocking the **** out of fracking I suspected something was fishy. I think he has some energy stocks he needs to unload before this revelation hits the masses.

I once had a debate with my buddy about the possibility of fracking causing most of the recent earthquakes in Oklahoma and other areas around the country, needless to say the discussion became a shouting match! My buddy works for a certain large oil and gas company headquartered in dt OKC and He has been with them for 20 years or so, and when I brought up the possibility of fracking causing earthquakes, He lost His mind! Towards the end of the fiery debate He called me a left wing nut job Liberal that wants to see the oil and gas companies fail, also He went on to say that bad mouthing His lively hood and what puts food on His children's table was unacceptable! I have had many debates with many people about this and this was the first that turned very quickly! I thought it was quit funny to see someone so heated over a debate!

To totally dismiss the possibility or even the likelihood of fracking MAYBE causing or triggering earthquakes is asinine!

But are there earthquakes everywhere there's fracking?

I once had a debate with my buddy about the possibility of fracking causing most of the recent earthquakes in Oklahoma and other areas around the country, needless to say the discussion became a shouting match! My buddy works for a certain large oil and gas company headquartered in dt OKC and He has been with them for 20 years or so, and when I brought up the possibility of fracking causing earthquakes, He lost His mind! Towards the end of the fiery debate He called me a left wing nut job Liberal that wants to see the oil and gas companies fail, also He went on to say that bad mouthing His lively hood and what puts food on His children's table was unacceptable! I have had many debates with many people about this and this was the first that turned very quickly! I thought it was quit funny to see someone so heated over a debate!

That sounds about right. I get the same response and I am a right-winger.

But are there earthquakes everywhere there's fracking?

That is a good question and I am sure there are many variable. Not everyone who drives drunk kills a family of 4 on the way home from the movies either, yet we don't let people drive drunk as a precaution anyhow. I guess in the end it comes down to "Is the risk worth the reward". If fracking does cause earthquakes is getting domestic oil worth it?

That is a good question and I am sure there are many variable. Not everyone who drives drunk kills a family of 4 on the way home from the movies either, yet we don't let people drive drunk as a precaution anyhow. I guess in the end it comes down to "Is the risk worth the reward". If fracking does cause earthquakes is getting domestic oil worth it?

The connection was too obvious. But does it do it all the time, probably not. It happens in areas that conditions exist that might be 'stressed' by the addition of the new pressure. What many may not realize is that some of the oldest fault lines in North America run across Oklahoma. East to west along the mountain chains in the south of the state, which are geologically connected. North to South along a fault that roughly parallels I-35.
Why no earthquakes - actually I can remember several small ones, very infrequent. The pressure is there, but is very low compared to younger, active faults. So why now? Add a lot of pressure from several wells - and the addition of the lubricant, and what little pressure is there is released. I doubt that the pressure will ever be enough for a significant earthquake - over 6.0, the faults are too old and really not that active. If it were just the earthquakes, then I would vote yes, it is well worth it for the energy. My real concern is the illusion that what is being pump that deep into the ground is not going to work its way up into the water table - there are too many ways for it to do so. Our only hope is that some of the added extras will 'filter' out as it works it's way up....that is a slim hope. Poisoned water is far worse that a few 'shakes'.

How I am understanding it is that there is big volume of oil up front but that the wells go dry quickly. Not unlike water rights calculations in the early 20th century, the volume predictions are made during flood stage, not at average flow stage (to use the water analogy). In the end it doesn't matter what the predictions were, it only matters what really happens. When I saw Cramer yesterday hocking the **** out of fracking I suspected something was fishy. I think he has some energy stocks he needs to unload before this revelation hits the masses.

Yes, like we both said, the up front volume is high and the wells go dry quickly. A comparison is illustrated here along with a little other discussion. I'm not sure why you think predictions for reserves would be based on long production times and figures of older technology when the current methods with short production/high volume have had some time to have been studied and understood somewhat. Got some information where estimate methodology is fouled up?

http://www.theoildrum.com/files/horizvvertical.jpg

The Oil Drum | Horizontal and Vertical Well Production (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2194)

When I went looking for that link, I tripped across this story too, which is part of the question of the above link from 2007. Are companies getting better at extracting?

Companies drilling in the Marcellus and other shale formations across the country are getting better at what they do, according to a report released today by the federal Energy Information Administration.
"Increasing precision and efficiency of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing" has resulted in each well producing more natural gas, on average, than seven years ago, according to the report.
And that is changing the way production estimates for the United States are being calculated.
According to the government data, the report says: "a Marcellus Shale well completed by a rig in April 2014 can be expected to yield over 6 million cubic feet of natural gas per day more than a well completed by that rig in that formation in 2007."

Fracking efficiently: Government changes how it calculates future oil and gas production because wells are producing more than before | PennLive.com (http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2014/03/fracking_efficient_government.html)

Surely there's someone in the oil and gas business who reads this forum?

Got some information where estimate methodology is fouled up?


I'm not going to post any quotes so as to not derail this thread from earthquakes - but read this.

Fracking is turning the US into a bigger oil producer than Saudi Arabia - Americas - World - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/fracking-is-turning-the-us-into-a-bigger-oil-producer-than-saudi-arabia-9185133.html)

I'm not going to post any quotes so as to not derail this thread from earthquakes - but read this.

Fracking is turning the US into a bigger oil producer than Saudi Arabia - Americas - World - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/fracking-is-turning-the-us-into-a-bigger-oil-producer-than-saudi-arabia-9185133.html)

So we're basically in agreement, there are huge reserves. I thought you were trying to say there aren't.

Unless we end fracking, which is pretty unlikely, no matter how bad an idea it may turn out to be in the end.

I inwardly chuckled and groaned all at the same time this morning when hearing the news report Governor Fallin say she didn't want to ban fracking until all the research was done, but she had no problem banning e-cigs with just the suspicion that they might be hazardous.

That is a good question and I am sure there are many variable. Not everyone who drives drunk kills a family of 4 on the way home from the movies either, yet we don't let people drive drunk as a precaution anyhow. I guess in the end it comes down to "Is the risk worth the reward". If fracking does cause earthquakes is getting domestic oil worth it?As long as they are small tremors like the ones we've been having then yes.

So we're basically in agreement, there are huge reserves. I thought you were trying to say there aren't.

Unless we end fracking, which is pretty unlikely, no matter how bad an idea it may turn out to be in the end.

Okay - I see what you are saying now. Me beef is with the people who think the initial level of production will go on for 20 or 30 years at each well the way a traditional oil well works.

Its only a matter of months now with production on some shallow horizontal wells we have been a part of. huge initial returns

I inwardly chuckled and groaned all at the same time this morning when hearing the news report Governor Fallin say she didn't want to ban fracking until all the research was done, but she had no problem banning e-cigs with just the suspicion that they might be hazardous.

I look forward to NOT voting for her in November.

I read this thread and blew a 7 Up through my nose. It hurt. It hurt very
much.

Who can I sue?

I read this thread and blew a 7 Up through my nose. It hurt. It hurt very
much.

Who can I sue?

Why is that? Because you quite strongly feel only a poorly informed idiot would think Oklahoma oil field operations are causing the earthquakes?

Why is that? Because you quite strongly feel only a poorly informed idiot would think Oklahoma oil field operations are causing the earthquakes?I think it is because he knows all of this is premature and no official results have been finalized and nearly every person conducting any kind of study has a bias and we sit on a very large fault line and earthquakes are NOT foreign to Oklahoma and this report is made to look like it has been decided that earthquakes are the result of fracking when it CLEARLY says it MAY have been the result, yet people are jumping to conclusions.

I think it is because he knows all of this is premature and no official results have been finalized and nearly every person conducting any kind of study has a bias and we sit on a very large fault line and earthquakes are NOT foreign to Oklahoma and this report is made to look like it has been decided that earthquakes are the result of fracking when it CLEARLY says it MAY have been the result, yet people are jumping to conclusions.

The report isn't about fracking. It's about waste-water injection wells.