Induced seismicity from fracking and carbon storage is focus of study and hearing

Eos ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 93 (27) ◽  
pp. 251-251 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randy Showstack
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Storage ◽  
Induced Seismicity

scholarly journals Recommended Practices for Managing Induced Seismicity Risk Associated with Geologic Carbon Storage

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dennise Templeton ◽  
Martin Schoenball ◽  
Corinne Layland-Bachmann ◽  
William Foxall ◽  
Yves Guglielmi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Storage ◽  
Induced Seismicity ◽  
Geologic Carbon Storage ◽  
Recommended Practices

scholarly journals Induced seismicity in geologic carbon storage

Solid Earth ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 871-892 ◽  
Author(s):  
Víctor Vilarrasa ◽  
Jesus Carrera ◽  
Sebastià Olivella ◽  
Jonny Rutqvist ◽  
Lyesse Laloui
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Storage ◽  
Induced Seismicity ◽  
Public Perception ◽  
Fault Reactivation ◽  
Wellbore Stability ◽  
Rock Properties ◽  
Geologic Carbon Storage ◽  
Stress Changes ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Injection Formation

Abstract. Geologic carbon storage, as well as other geo-energy applications, such as geothermal energy, seasonal natural gas storage and subsurface energy storage imply fluid injection and/or extraction that causes changes in rock stress field and may induce (micro)seismicity. If felt, seismicity has a negative effect on public perception and may jeopardize wellbore stability and damage infrastructure. Thus, induced earthquakes should be minimized to successfully deploy geo-energies. However, numerous processes may trigger induced seismicity, which contribute to making it complex and translates into a limited forecast ability of current predictive models. We review the triggering mechanisms of induced seismicity. Specifically, we analyze (1) the impact of pore pressure evolution and the effect that properties of the injected fluid have on fracture and/or fault stability; (2) non-isothermal effects caused by the fact that the injected fluid usually reaches the injection formation at a lower temperature than that of the rock, inducing rock contraction, thermal stress reduction and stress redistribution around the cooled region; (3) local stress changes induced when low-permeability faults cross the injection formation, which may reduce their stability and eventually cause fault reactivation; (4) stress transfer caused by seismic or aseismic slip; and (5) geochemical effects, which may be especially relevant in carbonate-containing formations. We also review characterization techniques developed by the authors to reduce the uncertainty in rock properties and subsurface heterogeneity both for the screening of injection sites and for the operation of projects. Based on the review, we propose a methodology based on proper site characterization, monitoring and pressure management to minimize induced seismicity.

scholarly journals Geologic carbon storage is unlikely to trigger large earthquakes and reactivate faults through which CO2 could leak

2015 ◽  
Vol 112 (19) ◽  
pp. 5938-5943 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor Vilarrasa ◽  
Jesus Carrera
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Storage ◽  
Induced Seismicity ◽  
Clay Content ◽  
Fault Reactivation ◽  
Induced Earthquakes ◽  
Localized Deformation ◽  
Geologic Carbon Storage ◽  
Entry Pressure ◽  
Deep Underground ◽  
Large Earthquakes

Zoback and Gorelick [(2012) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109(26):10164–10168] have claimed that geologic carbon storage in deep saline formations is very likely to trigger large induced seismicity, which may damage the caprock and ruin the objective of keeping CO2 stored deep underground. We argue that felt induced earthquakes due to geologic CO2 storage are unlikely because (i) sedimentary formations, which are softer than the crystalline basement, are rarely critically stressed; (ii) the least stable situation occurs at the beginning of injection, which makes it easy to control; (iii) CO2 dissolution into brine may help in reducing overpressure; and (iv) CO2 will not flow across the caprock because of capillarity, but brine will, which will reduce overpressure further. The latter two mechanisms ensure that overpressures caused by CO2 injection will dissipate in a moderate time after injection stops, hindering the occurrence of postinjection induced seismicity. Furthermore, even if microseismicity were induced, CO2 leakage through fault reactivation would be unlikely because the high clay content of caprocks ensures a reduced permeability and increased entry pressure along the localized deformation zone. For these reasons, we contend that properly sited and managed geologic carbon storage in deep saline formations remains a safe option to mitigate anthropogenic climate change.

scholarly journals Induced seismicity in geologic carbon storage

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Víctor Vilarrasa ◽  
Jesus Carrera ◽  
Sebastià Olivella ◽  
Jonny Rutqvist ◽  
Lyesse Laloui
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Storage ◽  
Induced Seismicity ◽  
Public Perception ◽  
Fault Reactivation ◽  
Wellbore Stability ◽  
Rock Properties ◽  
Induced Earthquakes ◽  
Geologic Carbon Storage ◽  
Stress Changes ◽  
Injection Formation

Abstract. Geologic carbon storage, as well as other geo-energy applications, such as geothermal energy, seasonal natural gas storage and subsurface energy storage, imply fluid injection/extraction that causes changes in the effective stress field and induces (micro)seismicity. If felt, seismicity has a negative effect on public perception and may jeopardize wellbore stability and damage infrastructure. Thus, induced earthquakes should be minimized to successfully deploy geo-energies. However, the processes that trigger induced seismicity are not fully understood, which translates into a limited forecast ability of current predictive models. We aim at understanding the triggering mechanisms of induced seismicity and to develop methodologies to minimize its occurrence through dimensional and numerical analysis. We find that the properties of the injected fluid, e.g., water or CO2, have a significant effect on pressure buildup evolution and thus, on fracture/fault stability. In addition to pressure changes, the injected fluid usually reaches the injection formation at a lower temperature than that of the rock, inducing rock contraction, thermal stress reduction and stress redistribution around the cooled region. If low-permeable faults cross the injection formation, local stress changes are induced around them which may reduce their stability and eventually cause fault reactivation. To minimize the risk of inducing felt seismicity, we have developed characterization techniques to reduce the uncertainty on rock properties and subsurface heterogeneity both for the screening of injection sites and for the operation of projects. Overall, we contend that felt induced seismicity can be minimized provided that a proper site characterization, monitoring and pressure management are performed.

scholarly journals Fault activation and induced seismicity in geological carbon storage – Lessons learned from recent modeling studies

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 789-804 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonny Rutqvist ◽  
Antonio P. Rinaldi ◽  
Frederic Cappa ◽  
Pierre Jeanne ◽  
Alberto Mazzoldi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Storage ◽  
Induced Seismicity ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Fault Activation ◽  
Modeling Studies

scholarly journals Induced seismicity and carbon storage: Risk assessment and mitigation strategies

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua A. White ◽  
William Foxall ◽  
Corinne Bachmann ◽  
Laura Chiaramonte ◽  
Thomas M. Daley
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Carbon Storage ◽  
Induced Seismicity ◽  
Mitigation Strategies

Preliminary Evaluation of Potential Induced Seismicity Risk at a Nearshore Carbon Storage Candidate Site

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bieng-Zih Hsieh ◽  
Yuan-Heng Li ◽  
Hsin-Tse Lin ◽  
Chi-wen Liao ◽  
Ya-Mei Yang
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Storage ◽  
Induced Seismicity ◽  
Preliminary Evaluation ◽  
Candidate Site

Site Quality, Disturbance, and Vegetation Effects on Carbon Storage and Accumulation in Old, Mixed-Species Stands in Central Maine, USA

2019 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua J. Puhlick ◽  
Shawn Fraver ◽  
Ivan J. Fernandez ◽  
Aaron Teets ◽  
Aaron R. Weiskittel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Storage ◽  
Site Quality ◽  
Mixed Species ◽  
Vegetation Effects

Varied Responses to Human-Induced Seismicity in the City of Azle, Texas

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Sarmistha R. Majumdar
Keyword(s):  
State Government ◽  
Induced Seismicity ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
Prior History ◽  
Small Community ◽  
Regulatory Policies ◽  
The Status

Fracking has helped to usher in an era of energy abundance in the United States. This advanced drilling procedure has helped the nation to attain the status of the largest producer of crude oil and natural gas in the world, but some of its negative externalities, such as human-induced seismicity, can no longer be ignored. The occurrence of earthquakes in communities located at proximity to disposal wells with no prior history of seismicity has shocked residents and have caused damages to properties. It has evoked individuals’ resentment against the practice of injection of fracking’s wastewater under pressure into underground disposal wells. Though the oil and gas companies have denied the existence of a link between such a practice and earthquakes and the local and state governments have delayed their responses to the unforeseen seismic events, the issue has gained in prominence among researchers, affected community residents, and the media. This case study has offered a glimpse into the varied responses of stakeholders to human-induced seismicity in a small city in the state of Texas. It is evident from this case study that although individuals’ complaints and protests from a small community may not be successful in bringing about statewide changes in regulatory policies on disposal of fracking’s wastewater, they can add to the public pressure on the state government to do something to address the problem in a state that supports fracking.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document