Seismicity associated with 2018 and 2020 hydraulic stimulations at EGS in Helsinki, Finland, shows limited earthquake interaction: Implication for seismic hazard assessment

<p>In this study we investigate the statistical spatio-temporal characteristics induced seismicity associated with two stimulation campaigns performed in 2018 and 2020 in a 6.1 km deep geothermal well near Helsinki, Finland as part of the St1 Deep Heat project. We aim to find out whether the seismic activity is passively responding to injection operations, or whether we observe signatures of significant stress transfer and strong interactions between events. The former suggests stable relaxation of seismic energy proportional to hydraulic energy input, while the latter includes stress transfer as an additional source of stress perturbation, hence implying larger seismic hazard.</p><p>The selected catalogs from 2018 and 2020 stimulation contained in total 60,814 and 4,368 seismic events, respectively, recorded during and after stimulation campaigns and above the local magnitude of M -1.5. The analyzed parameters include magnitude-frequency b-value, correlation integral (c-value), fractal dimension (D-value), interevent time statistics, magnitude correlation, interevent time ratio and generalized spatio-temporal distance between earthquakes. The initial observations suggest significant time-invariance of the magnitude-frequency b-value, and increased D and c-values only at high injection rates, the latter also guiding the rate of seismicity. The seismicity covering the stimulation period neither provide signatures of magnitude correlations, nor temporal clustering or anticlustering. The interevent time statistics are generally characterized with Gamma distribution (close to Poissonian distribution), and the generalized spatio-temporal distance suggest very limited triggering (90% of the catalog was classified as background seismicity). The observable parameters suggest the seismicity passively respond to hydraulic energy input rate with little to no time delay, and the total seismic moment is proportional to total hydraulic energy input. The performed study provides the base for implementation of time-dependent probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for the site.</p>

Download Full-text

Regionally Optimized Background Earthquake Rates from ETAS (ROBERE) for Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America ◽

10.1785/0120190279 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 110 (3) ◽

pp. 1172-1190 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Andrea L. Llenos ◽

Andrew J. Michael

Keyword(s):

Seismic Hazard ◽

San Francisco ◽

Hazard Assessment ◽

Seismic Hazard Assessment ◽

B Value ◽

Tectonic Activity ◽

Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment ◽

Probabilistic Seismic Hazard ◽

Background Rate ◽

Aftershock Sequences

ABSTRACT We use an epidemic-type aftershock sequence (ETAS) based approach to develop a regionally optimized background earthquake rates from ETAS (ROBERE) method for probabilistic seismic hazard assessment. ROBERE fits parameters to the full seismicity catalog for a region with maximum-likelihood estimation, including uncertainty. It then averages the earthquake rates over a suite of catalogs from which foreshocks and aftershocks have been removed using stochastic declustering while maintaining the same Gaussian smoothing currently used for the U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM). The NSHM currently determines these rates by smoothing a single catalog from which foreshocks and aftershocks have been removed using the method of Gardner and Knopoff (1974; hereafter, GK74). The parameters used in GK74 were determined from subjectively identified aftershock sequences, unlike ROBERE, in which both background rate and aftershock triggering parameters are objectively fitted. A major difference between the impacts of the two methods is GK74 significantly reduces the b-value, a critical value for seismic hazard analysis, whereas ROBERE maintains the original b-value from the full catalog. We apply these methods to the induced seismicity in Oklahoma and Kansas and tectonic activity in the San Francisco Bay Region. Using GK74 gives lower overall earthquake rates but estimates higher hazard due to the reduction in the b-value. ROBERE provides higher earthquake rates, at the magnitude of completeness, but lower hazard because it does not alter the b-value. We test two other declustering methods that produce results closer to ROBERE but do not use objectively fit parameters, include uncertainty, and may not work as well in other areas. We suggest adopting ROBERE for the NSHM so that our hazard estimates are based on an objective analysis, including uncertainty, and do not depend strongly on potentially biased b-values, which was never the goal of the existing methodology.

Download Full-text