How Big is Too Big? Assessing Seismic Hazard and Hydraulic Fracture-Induced Seismicity

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheri Bowman-Young ◽  
Ted Urbancic ◽  
Gisela Viegas ◽  
Lindsey Meighan ◽  
Eric VonLunen ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 110 (5) ◽  
pp. 2380-2397 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gemma Cremen ◽  
Maximilian J. Werner ◽  
Brian Baptie

ABSTRACT An essential component of seismic hazard analysis is the prediction of ground shaking (and its uncertainty), using ground-motion models (GMMs). This article proposes a new method to evaluate (i.e., rank) the suitability of GMMs for modeling ground motions in a given region. The method leverages a statistical tool from sensitivity analysis to quantitatively compare predictions of a GMM with underlying observations. We demonstrate the performance of the proposed method relative to several other popular GMM ranking procedures and highlight its advantages, which include its intuitive scoring system and its ability to account for the hierarchical structure of GMMs. We use the proposed method to evaluate the applicability of several GMMs for modeling ground motions from induced earthquakes due to U.K. shale gas development. The data consist of 195 recordings at hypocentral distances (R) less than 10 km for 29 events with local magnitude (ML) greater than 0 that relate to 2018/2019 hydraulic-fracture operations at the Preston New Road shale gas site in Lancashire and 192 R<10  km recordings for 48 ML>0 events induced—within the same geologic formation—by coal mining near New Ollerton, North Nottinghamshire. We examine: (1) the Akkar, Sandikkaya, and Bommer (2014) models for European seismicity; (2) the Douglas et al. (2013) model for geothermal-induced seismicity; and (3) the Atkinson (2015) model for central and eastern North America induced seismicity. We find the Douglas et al. (2013) model to be the most suitable for almost all of the considered ground-motion intensity measures. We modify this model by recomputing its coefficients in line with the observed data, to further improve its accuracy for future analyses of the seismic hazard of interest. This study both advances the state of the art in GMM evaluation and enhances understanding of the seismic hazard related to U.K. shale gas development.


Author(s):  
S. Bowman-Young ◽  
T.I. Urbancic ◽  
A.M. Baig ◽  
G. Viegas ◽  
E. von Lunen ◽  
...  

First Break ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Baig ◽  
Gisela Viegas ◽  
Ted Urbancic ◽  
Eric von Lunen ◽  
Jason Hendrick

2018 ◽  
Vol 45 (20) ◽  
Author(s):  
Honn Kao ◽  
Roy Hyndman ◽  
Yan Jiang ◽  
Ryan Visser ◽  
Brindley Smith ◽  
...  

SPE Journal ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Gang Hui ◽  
Shengnan Chen ◽  
Zhangxin Chen ◽  
Fei Gu ◽  
Mathab Ghoroori ◽  
...  

Summary The relationships among formation properties, fracturing operations, and induced earthquakes nucleated at distinctive moments and positions remain unclear. In this study, a complete data set on formations, seismicity, and fracturing treatments is collected in Fox Creek, Alberta, Canada. The data set is then used to characterize the induced seismicity and evaluate its susceptibility toward fracturing stimulations via integration of geology, geomechanics, and hydrology. Five mechanisms are identified to account for spatiotemporal activation of the nearby faults in Fox Creek, where all major events [with a moment magnitude (Mw) greater than 2.5] are caused by the increase in pore pressure and poroelastic stress during the fracturing operation. In addition, an integrated geological index (IGI) and a combined geomechanical index (CGI) are first proposed to indicate seismicity susceptibility, which is consistent with the spatial distribution of induced earthquakes. Finally, mitigation strategy results suggest that enlarging a hydraulic fracture-fault distance and decreasing a fracturing job size can reduce the risk of potential seismic activities.


Author(s):  
Ali Fatehi ◽  
Richard Quittmeyer ◽  
Melih Demirkan ◽  
Jose Blanco ◽  
Jeffrey Kimball

2012 ◽  
Vol 102 (6) ◽  
pp. 2563-2573 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Convertito ◽  
N. Maercklin ◽  
N. Sharma ◽  
A. Zollo

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document