Fracking and Earthquakes

Forums › Off topic › Fracking and Earthquakes

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#147384 17-Jun-2014 21:57

For people who believe that it's all "conspiracy theory", three images below.
EQ > M2.5, 30 days

Increase in EQ activity:

Very interesting IMO. Coincidence - perhaps. The "official" position from USGS seem to be changing.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

4431 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1067941 17-Jun-2014 21:59

Are they actually "earthquakes" or seismometers reading unnatural movement due to fracking?

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1067943 17-Jun-2014 22:05

blakamin: Are they actually "earthquakes" or seismometers reading unnatural movement due to fracking?

They are real earthquakes. Shallow and quite strong, yesterday for example a M4.5 quake produced peak ground shaking in excess of 25%/g. That's enough to cause some building damage.
They are shallow EQs, but hypocentre still 5km or so, well below the depth of fluid injection. But still...

Batwing

672 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#1067944 17-Jun-2014 22:06

Whether they're true earthquakes or unnatural movement, is the net result the same and reasons for concern still valid?

oxnsox

1923 posts

Uber Geek

#1067972 17-Jun-2014 22:47

So which are, or where were, the fracking sites?

And

If you made up a similar image set for say Taranaki (where I'm guessing we frack) would it look similar?

Canterbury?

johnr

19282 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1067975 17-Jun-2014 22:51

Not this topic again

MikeSkyrme

272 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#1067978 17-Jun-2014 22:54

Is there any way to show earthquake / seismic activity for the same timeframe, but in areas where no fracking is done?

Michael Skyrme - Instrumentation & Controls

michaelmurfy

meow
13240 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1067986 17-Jun-2014 23:05

Just an automated system picking up the ground acceleration of tornadoes, move along, nothing to see here.

Michael Murphy | https://murfy.nz
Referral Links: Quic Broadband (use R122101E7CV7Q for free setup)

Are you happy with what you get from Geekzone? Please consider supporting us by subscribing.
Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1067988 17-Jun-2014 23:09

MikeSkyrme: Is there any way to show earthquake / seismic activity for the same timeframe, but in areas where no fracking is done?

Yes. Use USGS archives / maps.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1068005 17-Jun-2014 23:16

michaelmurfy: Just an automated system picking up the ground acceleration of tornadoes, move along, nothing to see here.

Ummm...
They are earthquakes - nothing at all to do with tornadoes, the reports are reviewed by USGS seismologists - so it's not "just an automated system" and if there was nothing to see, I wouldn't have started this thread - which included in my original post three images which are absolutely something to see.

Now that you're wrong on all three points, what's your theory? Are you suggesting that the huge increase in >M3 earthquakes in that area is due to something causing more tornadoes?

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1068019 17-Jun-2014 23:23

johnr: Not this topic again

Yes - sorry about that. The topic may be the same, but there is some new information.

michaelmurfy

meow
13240 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1068023 17-Jun-2014 23:30

Fred99:
michaelmurfy: Just an automated system picking up the ground acceleration of tornadoes, move along, nothing to see here.

Ummm...
They are earthquakes - nothing at all to do with tornadoes, the reports are reviewed by USGS seismologists - so it's not "just an automated system" and if there was nothing to see, I wouldn't have started this thread - which included in my original post three images which are absolutely something to see.

Now that you're wrong on all three points, what's your theory? Or is your post political?

Geonet records tonnes of fake Earthquakes too however we are a much smaller country and these are quickly removed.

I was actually serious, the USGS automated system records quite a bit of fake positives and swarms of earthquakes happen, it is how the earth moves. Not all events happen like the Christchurch or Wellington ones with the earth shifting that much. I honestly don't believe this is caused by what you say it is and think you're being purely skeptical.

It is on the same level of taking the Lake Taupo swarm of 2011 (Link) and blaming somebody fishing on top of the lake for the whole event. Yes there will be a small amount of ground movement caused by Fracking and I think you're getting mistaken with the normal ground movement as in less than 2mag quakes (unnoticeable) with a bigger event.

Honestly, nothing to see here.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1068024 17-Jun-2014 23:30

oxnsox: So which are, or where were, the fracking sites?

And

If you made up a similar image set for say Taranaki (where I'm guessing we frack) would it look similar?

Canterbury?

There are fracking sites all over the state. Almost all of the quakes are close to fracking sites. However, as there are fracking sites all over the state, then almost all of Oklahoma is close to a fracking site...
So there's not a simple answer to that.

No, I don't recall a similar swarm of EQ in Taranaki. The geology is completely different. As far as I'm aware there's never been any fracking in Canterbury.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1068034 17-Jun-2014 23:37

michaelmurfy: I think you're getting mistaken with the normal ground movement as in less than 2mag quakes (unnoticeable) with a bigger event.

Honestly, nothing to see here.

No I'm not. The quakes on the map are all > M 2.5. The chart is based on only > M 3 events. They are not "fake" earthquakes, or tornadoes, or whatever else. They are "real" seismic earthquake events, a point of interest is that they may be induced by fracking.

It's also nothing like the Taupo swarm, the duration and rate of increase in frequency is a whole different league.
Please also don't disingenuously suggest that I am claiming causation from fracking - at least please give me the respect to read what I'm saying, then argue against that if you feel the need - rather than revert to straw-man arguments to discredit me. I'm presenting some information, which might be of interest to some people.

michaelmurfy

meow
13240 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1068038 17-Jun-2014 23:40

Fred99:
michaelmurfy: I think you're getting mistaken with the normal ground movement as in less than 2mag quakes (unnoticeable) with a bigger event.

Honestly, nothing to see here.

No I'm not. The quakes on the map are all > M 2.5. The chart is based on only > M 3 events.

It's also nothing like the Taupo swarm, the duration and rate of increase in frequency is a whole different league.
Please also don't disingenuously suggest that I am claiming causation from fracking - at least please give me the respect to read what I'm saying, then argue against that if you feel the need - rather than revert to straw-man arguments to discredit me. I'm presenting some information, which might be of interest to some people.

The west coast gets quite a bit of quakes...

Sorry couldn't resist - not trying to discredit you, I just don't think your information is sound to suggest Frackling is causing this. I honestly think it is overreacting but anyway, that is my opinion.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1068042 17-Jun-2014 23:48

michaelmurfy:
Fred99:
michaelmurfy: I think you're getting mistaken with the normal ground movement as in less than 2mag quakes (unnoticeable) with a bigger event.

Honestly, nothing to see here.

No I'm not. The quakes on the map are all > M 2.5. The chart is based on only > M 3 events.

It's also nothing like the Taupo swarm, the duration and rate of increase in frequency is a whole different league.
Please also don't disingenuously suggest that I am claiming causation from fracking - at least please give me the respect to read what I'm saying, then argue against that if you feel the need - rather than revert to straw-man arguments to discredit me. I'm presenting some information, which might be of interest to some people.

The west coast gets quite a bit of quakes...

Sorry couldn't resist - not trying to discredit you, I just don't think your information is sound to suggest Frackling is causing this. I honestly think it is overreacting but anyway, that is my opinion.

"My" information is from USGS:

USGS statistically analyzed the recent earthquake rate changes and found that they do not seem to be due to
typical, random fluctuations in natural seismicity rates. Significant changes in both the background rate of
events and earthquake triggers needed to have occurred in order to explain the increases in seismicity, which is
not typically observed when modeling natural earthquakes.

The analysis suggests that a likely contributing factor to the increase in earthquakes is triggering by wastewater
injected into deep geologic formations.

I politely suggest that you need to learn not to shoot the messenger, and when discussing any science topic, try to keep an open mind.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5