Seth Borenstein, AP: Risk of earthquake increased for one-third of US

by Seth Borenstein, AP Science Writer, July 17, 2014

WASHINGTON (AP) - A new federal earthquake map dials up the shaking hazard just a bit for about one-third of the United States and lowers it for one-tenth.

The U.S. Geological Survey on Thursday updated its national seismic hazard maps for the first time since 2008, taking into account research from the devastating 2011 earthquake and tsunami off the Japanese coast and the surprise 2011 Virginia temblor.

The maps are used for building codes and insurance purposes and they calculate just how much shaking an area probably will have in the biggest quake likely over a building's lifetime.

The highest risk places have a 2% chance of experiencing "very intense shaking" over a 50-year lifespan, USGS project chief Mark Petersen said. Those with lower hazard ratings would experience less intense swaying measured in gravitational force.

"These maps are refining our views of what the actual shaking is," Petersen said. "Almost any place in the United States can have an earthquake."

Parts of 16 states have the highest risk for earthquakes: Alaska, Hawaii, California, Oregon, Washington, Nevada, Utah, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Missouri, Arkansas, Tennessee, Illinois, Kentucky and South Carolina. With the update, new high-risk areas were added to some of those states.

Also, Colorado and Oklahoma saw increased risk in some parts and moved up to the second of the seven hazard classifications, he said.

There are major faults and quake hazards along the entire west coast, with an increased concern in the Cascadia region around Oregon. Southern Alaska, the big island of Hawaii, the Missouri-Tennessee-Arkansas-Illinois New Madrid fault area and Charleston round out the biggest hazard areas.

But shaking hazards are nearly everywhere.

Much of the country west of the Rockies, along with parts of Oklahoma and Tennessee and sections of central Arkansas, northern Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, Virginia, New York and New England saw an increase in shaking hazards for small buildings like houses.

At the same time much of North Carolina, the northern tip of South Carolina, patches of Texas, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Nebraska, Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, Ohio, Pennsylvania and New York saw hazard levels lower slightly. And using a different type risk analysis for tall buildings the shaking hazard in New York City dropped ever so slightly, Petersen said.

Petersen said the maps sidestep the issue of earthquakes created by injections of wastewater from oil and gas drilling in Oklahoma and other states, saying those extra quakes weren't included in the analysis. So far this year, nearly 250 small to medium quakes have hit Oklahoma.

Much of the research and cataloging was done by the nuclear industry in response to the quake and tsunami that crippled Japan's Fukushima reactor. And researchers at the University of California, Berkeley came up with a better model to simulate shaking, Petersen said.

"I see it as a big improvement," said Cornell University seismologist Rowena Lohman. "They brought in more information."

(AP Photo/USGS). This undated handout image provided by the US Geological Survey (USGS) shows an updated federal earthquake risk map.

 

(AP Photo/USGS). This undated handout image provided by the US Geological Survey (USGS) shows where the earthquake hazard increased and decreased from 2008.

 

(AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File). FILE - This Aug. 23, 2011 file photo shows office workers gathering on the sidewalk in downtown Washington after a 5.9 magnitude tremor shook the nation's capitol.

Online: USGS map: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2014/1091/

http://www.8newsnow.com/story/26046114/risk-of-earthquake-increased-for-one-third-of-us

Frackquakes: Public Opposition Builds As Property Rights Are Endangered in Texas

by Sharon Wilson and Alan Septoff, Earth Island Journal, January 27, 2014

The earthquakes you may have heard about—the 30 tremblers that have struck north central Texas since November 1, 2013, and have damaged many homes. The quakes are most likely being caused by underground disposal wells used to get rid of wastewater generated during fracking operations. “Frackquakes,” some are calling them.

A massive oil field in Texas. The state has always been the heart of the U.S. oil industry, embracing oil and gas development from its earliest years, and pioneering fracking in the Barnett Shale. But public opinion seems to be changing. Photo credit: Dennis Dimick

The quakes you probably haven’t heard about are political. They’re caused in part by the frackquakes, and in part by other environmental, social and public health impacts of fracking-enabled oil and gas development. And they seem to be changing Texans’ opinions about fracking.

The oil and gas boom sweeping through the U.S. is occurring because horizontal hydraulic fracturing makes it possible to extract previously inaccessible oil and gas locked up inside the pores of shale rock thousands of feet underground.

How?

Well, by drilling a well down to the shale deposit; taking a right turn to horizontally extend the well for thousands more feet through the shale layer, and then injecting millions of gallons—two to eight millions gallons, depending upon the area—of water laced with tens of thousands of gallons of toxics at such high pressure that the shale rock breaks (fractures). The water and toxics (called flowback fluid) are then withdrawn back up the well, and the released oil or gas follows.

The oil and gas is cleaned and piped and sold. But what of the toxics-laced flowback fluid and other (briny, and sometimes radioactive) water produced by the well? 

Although some of it is reused, the vast majority of it must be disposed of. The disposal of fracking wastewater (flowback plus produced water) is what causes fracking earthquakes.

Because of the chemicals in fracking wastewater, it cannot be treated at an 

ordinary sewage wastewater treatment plant. Instead, it is injected in another well deep underground. It has long been known that this type of wastewater injection deep underground can lead to earthquakes when it occurs near a fault .

So it is no surprise that as fracking has become near universal—more than 90% of all new oil and gas wells are fracked—that the number of fracking wastewater injection wells and associated earthquakes has soared as well.

Especially damning is that places that are historically seismically inactive, like Oklahoma, Texas and Arkansas, have seen earthquake swarms after fracking wastewater injection wells began in earnest.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has delegated oversight of these fracking wastewater injection wells to the states. Unfortunately, despite the increasingly apparent threat posed by fracking-related earthquakes, many states are actively ignoring the issue. Nine months after a National Academy of Sciences panel said oil and gas regulators should take steps to prevent man-made earthquakes, officials in key states are ignoring quake potential as they rewrite their drilling rules.

Unfortunately, the damages from frackquakes can be considerable. Originally thought to be minor, new research is showing they can be large. A 5.7 magnitude frackquake near Prague, OK, in 2011, damaged 14 homes and other structures in the area. Particularly in parts of the country where earthquakes were previously uncommon and infrastructure was not built to withstand seismic activity, even smaller earthquakes can cause significant, expensive and dangerous damage.

This is turning the frackquake issue into a property rights issue. Because homeowners (and municipalities) must pay for the damages to homes and public infrastructure caused by these quakes. When asked what should be done about the quakes, Oklahoma government recommended homeowners buy earthquake insurance policies.

Communities Have Had Enough, Even in Texas

In oil crazy Texas, in years past, any evidence supporting the need for caution while drilling would have been ignored by affected communities. But no longer.

Earlier this month, almost 1,000 concerned citizens packed a public meeting about frackquakes near Azle/Reno, TX. When the state regulator holding the meeting announced a “study” of the issue but refused to answer questions, there was an uproar. In response, on the spur of the moment, outraged community members rented a bus to make the four-hour trip to the state capital to demand action from the full Texas Railroad Commission (which oversees oil and gas drilling in the state). Here’s a sampling of comments to the commission:

“In other states where fracking wastewater injection wells have been shut down, earthquakes disappear. This isn’t rocket science. Common sense tells you that fracking waste disposal is playing a big role in this. Don’t make us guinea pigs while you study.” — Reno Mayor Lynda Stokes 

“This is a property rights issue, pure and simple. The most profitable industry in the country is damaging our homes. And the Railroad Commission is not only allowing it, they’re forcing homeowners to pay the damages.” — Reno homeowner Barbara Brown

Coupled with a de facto moratorium on fracking that the city of Dallas passed late last year, we are seeing a public opinion sea change regarding fracking in the Lone Star state.

These are not isolated incidents. Across the country, opposition to irresponsible oil and gas development is building to a crescendo:

• De facto moratorium in New York
• De facto moratorium in Maryland
• Pennsylvania State Supreme Court decision allowing local communities control over fracking
• Multiple community fracking moratoriums in drilling-friendly Colorado
• Multiple community fracking bans across the country
• Building opposition to fracking in California

But in some ways, Texas is more important because the state has always been the heart of the U.S. oil industry, embracing oil and gas development from its earliest years, and pioneering fracking in the Barnett Shale. In political terms, Texas is the oil and gas industry’s base.

So when Texans are willing to stand up in open democratic processes—first in Dallas and now in Azle—and say “no” to oil and gas development, it’s a sign that times are a-changin’. If Texans aren’t willing to live with fracking, then it may be impossible for anyone to live in harmony with fracking.

http://ecowatch.com/2014/01/27/frackquakes-opposition-builds-property-rights-endangered/

Fracking and tar sands news roundup from rjs, week of December 15, 2013

Former Chesapeake Energy CEO Aubrey McClendon Buys Fracking Wells In Ohio's Utica Shale --Steve Horn -  Former Chesapeake Energy CEO and Founder Aubrey McClendon is back in thehydraulic fracturing ("fracking") game in Ohio's Utica Shale in a big way, receiving a permit to frack five wells from the Ohio Department of Natural Resources on November 26. "The Ohio Department of Natural Resources awarded McClendon's new company, American Energy Utica LLC, five horizontal well permits November 26 that allows oil and gas exploration on the Jones property in Nottingham Township, Harrison County," a December 6, 2013, article appearing in The Business Journal explained. "In October, American Energy Utica announced it has raised $1.7 billion in capital to secure new leases in the Utica shale play." [think Chinese money here] McClendon is the former CEO of fracking giant Chesapeake Energy and now the owner of American Energy Partners, whose office is located less than a mile away from Chesapeake's corporate headquarters. The $1.7 billion McClendon has received in capital investments for the purchase of 110,000 acres worth of Utica Shale land came from the Energy & Minerals Group, First Reserve Corporation, BlackRock Inc. and Magnetar Capital. McClendon — a central figure in Gregory Zuckerman's recent book "The Frackers" — is currently under investigation by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. He left Chesapeake in January 2013 following a shareholder revolt over his controversial business practices. In departing, he was given a $35 million severance package, access to the company's private jets through 2016 and a 2.5% stake in every well Chesapeake fracks through June 2014 as part of the Founder's Well Participation Program.

West Virginia Landfills Will Now Accept Unlimited Amounts Of Often Radioactive Fracking Waste - A memo released earlier this year in West Virginia gives the state’s landfills the ability to accept unlimited amounts of fracking waste, the AP reports. The memo will create an exception for the state’s natural gas industry to longstanding laws on landfill waste, which stipulate that landfills can only take 10,000 or 30,000 tons of solid waste each month, depending on their classification. Now, fracking operations can send unlimited amounts of their solid waste — known as “drill cuttings” and composed of dirt, water, sand and chemicals — to landfills each month. This exception has environmentalists in the state concerned. The Marcellus shale formation, which sits under much of West Virginia, has been found to have a higher level of radioactivity than other formations — last year, nearly 1,000 trucks hauling Marcellus Shale waste to Pennsylvania landfills were stopped after setting off radioactivity alarms. But unlike Pennsylvania, where waste that is deemed too radioactive is sent to radioactive waste disposal sites out of state, West Virginia doesn’t require waste to be tested for radioactivity. Bill Hughes, chairman of the Wetzel County Solid Waste Authority in West Virginia, told the AP he thinks the state needs to look into the potential health risks of drill cuttings. “Landfills have never seen a ton of waste they don’t want to take,” Hughes said. “Our state just sort of trusts the garbage guys.”

Experts Eye Oil and Gas Industry as Quakes Shake Oklahoma - Even before a magnitude 4.5 quake on Saturday knocked objects off her walls and a stone from above her neighbor’s bay window, Ms. Sexton was on edge.  “People are fed up with the earthquakes,” she said. “Our kids are scared. We’re scared.”  Oklahoma has never been known as earthquake country, with a yearly average of about 50 tremors, almost all of them minor. But in the past three years, the state has had thousands of quakes. This year has been the most active, with more than 2,600 so far, including 87 last week.  While most have been too slight to be felt, some, like the quake on Saturday and a smaller one in November that cracked a bathroom wall in Ms. Sexton’s house, have been sensed over a wide area and caused damage. In 2011, a magnitude 5.6 quake — the biggest ever recorded in the state — injured two people and severely damaged more than a dozen homes, some beyond repair.  State officials say they are concerned, and residents accustomed to tornadoes and hail are now talking about buying earthquake insurance.  Just as unsettling in a state where more than 340,000 jobs are tied to the oil and gas industry is what scientists say may be causing many of the quakes: the widespread industry practice of disposing of billions of gallons of wastewater that is produced along with oil and gas, by injecting it under pressure into wells that reach permeable rock formations.  “Disposal wells pose the biggest risk,” said Austin Holland, a seismologist with the Oklahoma Geological Survey, who is studying the various clusters of quakes around the state.  Oklahoma has more than 4,000 disposal wells for waste from tens of thousands of oil and gas wells. “Could we be looking at some cumulative tipping point? Yes, that’s absolutely possible,” Dr. Holland said.

Man-Made Quakes - Video - NYTimes.com

Fort Worth Shows Why So Many Towns Are Banning Fracking - Several cities and counties in the U.S. have instituted bans or moratoria on the oil and gas extraction technique of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, in recent years and Fort Worth’s experience with urban fracking shows why.“Fort Worth has been fracked to capacity,” resident Don Young told DeSmog Blog. “There is no turning back. Some days the air is so bad you can’t see downtown.”Chesapeake Energy began offering $300 and a pizza party for owners of mineral rights in predominantly poor and working class African American neighborhoods in 2003 and encountered little resistance, DeSmog Blogreported. Now Fort Worth has around 2,000 wells. Residents have been sickened by vapors from drilling operations, found their neighborhoods suddenly ruined by noise and fumes, and had their water sucked up by drilling operations in the middle of severe drought. Five sites were found in 2011 to be emitting pollution above state limits, according to a study commissioned by the Fort Worth City Council, and most of the 388 sites studied released visible emissions. Right next door to Fort Worth, the Dallas city council is considering letting fracking start up in town with a vote likely to come next week, capping a three-year fight over the future of fracking in the city. Until recently, Dallas had rejected attempts to frack in town, but that stance seems to be over. Current debate is over the distance required between wells and homes or wells and other wells: 1,500 feet or 1,000.

Did Dallas Just Ban Fracking? - The Dallas City Council voted Wednesday to require any gas wells to be placed at least 1,500 feet from homes, a move that the gas industry says might as well be a ban on drilling. Combined with the fact that the council would still have to approve any permit for a drilling site, factoring in neighborhood impact, fracking opponents are calling the ordinance a victory as well. A two-thirds council vote would be needed to alter the setback requirement in particular cases. Fossil fuel companies have been trying drill on land leased in Dallas since 2007.  The fossil fuel industry site Energy In Depth quickly called Dallas’ ordinance a dishonest backdoor ban on fracking, noting that in Fort Worth, where the setback requirement is 600 feet, “development has safely occurred for many years.” But a look at Fort Worth residents’ experience with drilling shows why neighboring Dallas would want stricter requirements. Sickening vapors, ruined neighborhoods, and wells as close as 300 feet to homes are the legacy of Fort Worth’s lax approach to fracking regulation. Nearby Arlington, Texas allows fracking inside of city limits, and has attempted to mitigate negative effects on residents by building sound-dampening walls around operations. But much of the danger of fracking comes from what it does to air and water. There’s no evidence that even 1,500 feet is enough to prevent chemical leakage into drinking water. A 2012 Duke University study found that homes within one kilometer, or 3,280 feet, of hydraulic fracturing wells had six times the methane and 23 times the ethane of homes not near wells. And an Earthworks report included video of toxic chemicals like benzene escaping into the air at drilling sites.

US Towns Sued for Illegal Fracking Bans -- Fracking has allowed the US to massively boost its oil and gas production, yet whilst the technology has arguably saved the country’s economy, it has also divided the nation, between those who support the controversial drilling technique and those that oppose it. Several towns and cities around the US have voted to ban all fracking practices within their jurisdiction, and now the oil companies, angry at being denied access to buried shale reserves, have begun to file cases against these cities. This is beginning to raise the question as to whether or not local governments have the power to introduce laws that ban fracking. This week, the Colorado Oil and Gas Association (COGA) filed a lawsuit against two Colorado towns, Lafayette and Fort Collins, after both passed legislation to forbid the practice of fracking.  Laurie Kadrich, a city official from Fort Collins, told Bloomberg that “as a city, we have a responsibility to defend the voter-approved ordinance, so we’ll be looking into the contents of the lawsuit and we’ll respond appropriately.”

The Shale Oil Boom is More "Mirage" than "Miracle": Gail Tverberg -- Gail Tverberg, is a professional actuary who applies classic risk assessment procedures to global resources: studying issues such as oil & natural gas depletion, water shortages, climate change, etc. She is widely known in the Peak Cheap Oil space for her reports issued across energy websites over the years under the penname "GailTheActuary." In this week's podcast, Chris asks Gail to assess the merits of the shale oil "revolution."   Gail quickly begins discounting the underlying economics behind the shale model: We have to ask: At what price is the oil available? Is this shale oil available because prices are high and in fact, because interest rates are low, as well? Or is it available if it were cheap oil with interest rates at more normal levels? I think what we have is a very peculiar situation where it is available ,but it is available only because of this peculiar financial situation we are in right now with very high oil prices and very low interest rates. The shale oil plays are going to be probably much less than a 10-year flash in the pan. They are very dependent on a lot of different things, including low interest rates and the ability to keep borrowing - which could turn around very quickly. Lower oil prices would tend to do the same thing. But even if you hypothesize that we can keep the low interest rates and that the oil price will stay up there, under the best of circumstances, the Barnett data says they probably will not go for very long. Similar to many energy experts Chris has interviewed prior, Gail looks at the math and concludes that humans (especially those in the West) have been living on an energy subsidy that is beginning to run out. We have been living outside of our natural budget, and will be forced to live within what remains going forward. As a result, she expect great changes in store for the next several decades: socially, politically and lifestyle-wise. Click the play button below to listen to Chris's interview with Gail Tverberg (38m:07s): . 

Drilling California: A Reality Check on the Monterey Shale - The March 2013 study from the University of Southern California suggested that the development of the Monterey shale could—by 2020—increase California’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by 14%, provide an additional 2.8 million jobs (a 10% increase), and provide $24.6 billion per year in additional tax revenue (also a 10% increase). This study was based on estimates that development of the Monterey shale could increase total California oil production as much as seven-fold. Given the unrealistic nature of the original EIA/INTEK Monterey shale estimates, such production growth estimates are unfounded. Moreover, an examination of USC’s oil production estimates reveals that they include unrealistic assumptions about the total production growth possible from the Monterey and the number of wells that would be required to increase production to the levels forecast. Hence the economic projections of the USC study must be viewed as extremely suspect. Environmental concerns with development of the Monterey shale are centered around hydraulic fracturing (fracking), the main completion technique used in other tight oil plays. Acidization completions, using hydrofluoric and hydrochloric acid, are also of concern. It is certain that hydraulic fracturing and acidization completions have already been used on the Monterey shale, yet an analysis of production data reveals little discernible effect of these techniques in terms of increased well productivity. Many oil and gas operators and energy analysts suggest that it is only a matter of time before "the code is cracked" and the Monterey produces at rates comparable to the Bakken and Eagle Ford. Owing to the fundamental geological differences between the Monterey and other tight oil plays, and in light of actual Monterey oil production data, this is likely wishful thinking. For all of these reasons, this analysis suggests that California should consider its economic and energy future in the absence of an oil production boom from the Monterey shale.

The U.S. energy independence story: Will anyone be punished if it turns out to be wrong? - Will anyone who is currently predicting U.S. energy independence be punished if the story turns out to be wrong? I ask because the story--and that's all it is right now--appears to be driving public policy and business planning practically worldwide. Often implied with that narrative is a corresponding abundance of oil globally. In fact, some are predicating worldwide abundance on a continuous rise in U.S. oil output. This is despite the fact that even many optimistic forecasts make such ideas seem foolish. The actual data for crude plus condensate (which is the definition of oil) show oil production in the rest of world declining almost as much as the United States has increased its production from 2005 onward. Worldwide crude volumes have barely nudged upward in the last eight years, just 2.7 percent versus 10 percent in the previous eight-year period, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. This is despite record oil prices and record investment! Now, a lot of people stand to get hurt by the energy independence/abundance story--which is, in effect, a forecast--if the story turns out to be wrong. This is because governments, businesses and households will not have prepared themselves for a negative surprise--all because they were assured that the United States and even the world had nothing to worry about when it comes to oil supplies.

U.K. taxpayers to pay for fracking pollution if companies go bust - Taxpayers will pay to clean up any pollution caused by fracking if the companies go bankrupt, after a proposal to make UK operators take out insurance against such damage was ruled out by the government. Energy companies including Centrica-backed Cuadrilla are poised to drill shale gas wells around the country after the Treasury published draft legislation on Tuesday for tax breaks for the industry. Hydraulic fracturing – or fracking – is the controversial technique that involves pumping sand, chemicals and water underground to extract shale gas trapped in rocks. Campaigners and a cross-party group of MPs argue that before operators are granted permits to frack, they should have to take out a bond to pay for potential pollution incidents. Without such a bond, campaigners argued, clean-up costs would have to be paid for with public money if a company went bust.But on Monday, the environment minister Dan Rogerson said that there was no case for an amendment bringing in such proposals to the draft water bill. He told MPs: "We believe that the existing regulatory framework is fit for purpose for the exploration and exploitation of onshore oil and gas activities. There are a great number of checks and controls available to us to ensure that operators comply with the requirements of their permits and deal with the wider pollution risks without adding to existing regulation."The government could not support the new clause, he said, adding that if fracking companies caused pollution they could be fined under existing regulations.

Oilprice Intelligence Report: Japan Burns with "Fire Ice" Momentum - Japan, desperate for new domestic energy sources, is where we now look for research and development that no one else has the patience for—like this week’s revival of talk about “fire ice,” otherwise known as methane hydrates.  After all, methane hydrates—if we are to believe the experts—could be more plentiful than all known reserves of natural gas, while one cubic foot of solid methane hydrate yields about 164 cubic feet of gas. However, there is some disagreement over the actual volume of commercially viable methane hydrate deposits. In March, Japan Oil, Gas & Metals National Corp successfully extracted the first gas from deposits of methane hydrate from the ocean, producing 120,000 cubic meters of gas in six days of testing in the Pacific Ocean, off central Japan. Last week, Japan stumbled upon another source of fire ice in the Sea of Japan, and now the game is on to predict when Japan will start producing commercial quantities of gas from methane hydrates. Those estimations range from two years to 15 years, so we don’t have much to go on. In a November report, the International Energy Agency (IEA) noted that the viability of methane hydrates as a source of gas will depend largely on technological advancements and climate change regulations—the latter because methane is a potent greenhouse gas when leaked into the atmosphere so extracting it requires great care. So, while there is talk of fire ice eventually sidelining shale gas due to the enormity of the resources, there are also some cautionary notes, both technologically and economically. 

Trains From North Dakota Will Now Carry More Crude Oil Than Keystone XL Would - A top official at North Dakota’s Mineral Resources Department said Thursday that as much as 90 percent of the state’s crude will move by freight rail in 2014, just one day before announcing record oil production of almost 1 million barrels per day — or approximately 5 percent of total U.S. oil consumption. A million barrels a day is more than the capacity of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline, which would transport 830,000 barrels per day. The fact, according to Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), has led some in the oil industry to believe that heavy crude oil derived from Canada’s tar sands will find a way to refineries regardless of whether Transcanada’s controversial Keystone XL pipeline is approved. “Even if President Obama rejects the pipeline, it might not matter much,” CRG said, noting that the recent crude-by-rail boom is good news for tar sands advocates. “Tar sands advocates are happy to promote the idea that continued development of the tar sands is inevitable because it implies that opposition to Keystone XL is futile and that Americans should therefore cash in on its jobs and construction expenditures before somebody else does.” 

Ottawa to designate crude oil as highly dangerous - The federal government will, for the first time, designate crude oil a highly dangerous substance and introduce tougher safety and testing measures for shipping oil by rail, Transport Minister Lisa Raitt has told The Globe and Mail. The fundamental shift, in response to mounting concerns about crude safety, comes after a Globe investigation detailed how the oil that exploded in Lac-Mégantic, Que., last summer was far more dangerous than regulators and shippers considered. The investigation found that numerous warning signs about the volatility, corrosiveness and content of the crude were ignored before the disaster. Until now, the government considered crude flammable, but not highly explosive. However, massive fireballs erupted in Lac-Mégantic on July 6 after a train carrying 72 tankers of crude oil derailed, killing 47 people and levelling much of the downtown. It is the worst railway disaster in Canadian history.

Fracking waste water disposal injection wells cause 5000% increase in earthquakes in Oklahoma

Experts Eye Oil and Gas Industry as Quakes Shake Oklahoma

Man-made quakes: Scientists see a link between earthquakes and the disposal of wastewater from oil and gas wells, including those that use the production method known as hydraulic fracturing.

by Henry Fountain, The New York Times, December 12, 2013

OKLAHOMA CITY — Mary Catherine Sexton has been rattled enough.

This fall her neighborhood in the northeastern part of this city has been shaken by dozens of minor earthquakes. “We would just have little trembles all the time,” she said.

Even before a magnitude 4.5 quake on Saturday knocked objects off her walls and a stone from above her neighbor’s bay window, Ms. Sexton was on edge.

“People are fed up with the earthquakes,” she said. “Our kids are scared. We’re scared.”

Interactive Map

Oklahoma Quakes

Oklahoma has never been known as earthquake country, with a yearly average of about 50 tremors, almost all of them minor. But in the past three years, the state has had thousands of quakes. This year has been the most active, with more than 2,600 so far, including 87 last week.

While most have been too slight to be felt, some, like the quake on Saturday and a smaller one in November that cracked a bathroom wall in Ms. Sexton’s house, have been sensed over a wide area and caused damage. In 2011, a magnitude 5.6 quake — the biggest ever recorded in the state — injured two people and severely damaged more than a dozen homes, some beyond repair.

State officials say they are concerned, and residents accustomed to tornadoes and hail are now talking about buying earthquake insurance.

“I’m scared there’s going to be a bigger one,” Ms. Sexton said.

Enlarge This Image

A drilling rig near Calumet, Okla. More than 300,000 jobs in the state are tied to the oil and gas industry. Sue Ogrocki/Associated Press

Just as unsettling in a state where more than 340,000 jobs are tied to the oil and gas industry is what scientists say may be causing many of the quakes: the widespread industry practice of disposing of billions of gallons of wastewater that is produced along with oil and gas, by injecting it under pressure into wells that reach permeable rock formations.

Austin Holland, a research seismologist at the Oklahoma Geological Survey in Norman, has been studying the increase in seismic activity in the state for several years. Nick Oxford for The New York Times

“Disposal wells pose the biggest risk,” said Austin Holland, a seismologist with the Oklahoma Geological Survey, who is studying the various clusters of quakes around the state.

Oklahoma has more than 4,000 disposal wells for waste from tens of thousands of oil and gas wells. “Could we be looking at some cumulative tipping point? Yes, that’s absolutely possible,” Dr. Holland said. But there could be other explanations for the increase in earthquakes, he added.

Scientists have known for years that injection wells and other human activities can induce earthquakes by changing pressures underground. That can have the effect of “unclamping” old stressed faults so the rocks can slip past each other and cause the ground to shake.

The weight of water behind a new dam in China, for example, is thought to have induced a 2008 quake in Sichuan Province that killed 80,000 people. In Australia, a 1989 quake that killed 13 people was attributed in part to the opposite effect — the removal of millions of tons of coal during more than two centuries of mining.

In other places, including California and Switzerland, enhanced geothermal projects, in which water is pumped into hot rocks deep underground to produce energy, have caused quakes.

In Texas, some earthquakes have been connected to the industry practice of “water flooding,” increasing the yield of older oil wells by pumping water into nearby wells to force the oil out, said Cliff Frohlich, a University of Texas scientist. In other cases, Dr. Frohlich said, just the extraction of oil and gas from a long-producing field has been seen to induce quakes.

The practice of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking — injecting liquid at high pressures into shale rock — causes very small tremors as the rocks break, releasing trapped oil or gas. The technique has also been linked to a few minor earthquakes — in Oklahoma about a year ago, and in England and British Columbia. Yet unlike the continuing clusters of quakes elsewhere, the fracking-related earthquakes occurred only over short time periods, scientists say.

Of greater potential concern, scientists say, is wastewater disposal — from fracked or more conventional wells. Disposal wells linked to quakes have been shut down in a few states, including Arkansas and Ohio.

Along with oil and gas, water comes out of wells, often in enormous amounts, and must be disposed of continuously. Because transporting water, usually by truck, is costly, disposal wells are commonly located near producing wells.

The oil and gas industry points out that many of Oklahoma’s disposal wells are in areas with no earthquake activity, and that the practice of injecting wastewater has been going on for years.

“We’ve been doing this for a long time and it hasn’t been an issue before,” said Chad Warmington, president of the Oklahoma Oil and Gas Association.

But Dr. Frohlich said that what had changed was where the disposal was occurring. With the boom in production of oil and gas from shale formations, he said, “People are disposing of fluids in places they haven’t before.”

Still, it is difficult to show a definitive link between a group of quakes and nearby disposal wells, and Dr. Holland thinks there may be other explanations for some of the recent quakes, including the largest one, which occurred on a known fault line about 50 miles east of Oklahoma City.

Oklahoma does have natural seismic activity, he noted, and has had a few powerful quakes in the past, including one with a magnitude of 5.5 in 1952 and one estimated at about a magnitude of 7 that the geological record shows occurred 1,300 years ago. He also thinks changes in the water level of a large nearby lake may be responsible for some of the quakes around Oklahoma City, although he says this is not the most likely explanation.

The swarm of quakes has state regulators concerned, but cautious.

“We have to look at what data and scientific evidence supports some connection,” before deciding on steps to manage the risk, said Dana L. Murphy, a commissioner with the Oklahoma Corporation Commission. Theoretically, at least, the commission could order some wells to be shut.

Already the commission has reached an agreement with a disposal well operator in Love County, about 100 miles south of Oklahoma City, to reduce the amount of wastewater injected into his well. The facility had been operating for only two weeks, injecting up to 400,000 gallons of water a day from nearby fracking operations, when earthquakes started occurring in September, including one that toppled a chimney and caused other damage.

All the shaking in the state has people talking about what to do if a bigger one were to hit. “I’ve been through a lot of tornadoes — you can go hide from them,” said Bill Hediger, whose home in Edmond, just north of Oklahoma City, shows cracks in the walls from the magnitude 5.6 quake. “But you can’t hide from an earthquake.”

Dr. Holland said that given the geological record, he could not rule out the possibility that a larger quake may occur in the state.

Ms. Sexton said she was not against the oil and gas industry, but added that if the quakes in her area were definitively linked to disposal wells, they should be shut down.

“It would hurt oil and gas,” she said. “But it’s oil and gas hurting homeowners and making people fearful.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/13/science/earth/as-quakes-shake-oklahoma-scientists-eye-oil-and-gas-industry.html

USGS Earthquake Map Site

Dear Readers,

I must admit that I had preferred the old, un-upgraded site, but after some missteps the USGS has finally arrived at a design upgrade that is more workable than it was last year.

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/map/

[The link to this site has also been placed in the list in the left column of this blog.]

When you hit this page, go to the rotary wheel in the upper right and then choose "7 Days, All Magnitudes Worldwide," then click on "Search Earthquake Archives."

That is to say, if you want to see all the induced quakes caused by fracking flowback water waste injection wells, like the ones in Oklahoma, where the number of quakes has increased over normal background levels by 5,000%.  Here is the interactive map in The New York Times: 

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/12/13/science/earth/oklahoma-quakes.html

News on ALEC, fracking, earthquakes, carbon sequestration projects, oil & gas subsidies, coal gasification, msnbc fossil fuel "journalism"

from RJ Sigmund:

Study Shows Carbon Sequestration Can Cause Quakes - Two scientists have found evidence that underground carbon dioxide injection in oil and gas fields may cause earthquakes, a finding that suggests carbon sequestration projects could shake the earth, too. Carbon sequestration projects, also called carbon capture and storage, or CCS, projects, are thought to be one solution to reducing climate change-fueling carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants and other sources. Several such projects are currently being studied across the country. Though scientists have speculated that it's possible that injecting gas underground could cause seismic activity, there had been no hard evidence, until now. Seismologists Wei Gan of China University of Geosciences and Cliff Frohlich of the University of Texas-Austin investigated why a West Texas oil field experienced 93 earthquakes in 2009 and 2010, some of which were Magnitude 3 or greater, and they were surprised by what they found. Frohlich said he originally thought the earthquakes were caused by an oil production process called “waterflooding,” which involves the injection of large amounts of water into the ground to help move oil deposits into wells, increasing crude oil production.“I was surprised when I found the quakes in West Texas appear to be caused by carbon injection,” he said.

Carbon Capture and Storage Can Cause Earthquakes, Making It ‘A Risky And Likely Unsuccessful Strategy’ - New research suggests that carbon capture and storage (CCS) may be a far more limited climate solution than previously thought because it can induce earthquakes, which can cause CO2 leakage. We’ve known for a long time that underground injection of massive quantities of liquids or high-pressure gases can induce earthquakes. Indeed, recent research finds that fracking wastewater reinjection has caused “a rise in small to mid-sized earthquakes in the United States.” As Stanford researchers made clear in 2012: We argue here that there is a high probability that earthquakes will be triggered by injection of large volumes of CO2 into the brittle rocks commonly found in continental interiors. Because even small- to moderate-sized earthquakes threaten the seal integrity of CO2 repositories, in this context, large-scale CCS is a risky, and likely unsuccessful, strategy for significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Even a very small leakage rate of well under 1% a year would render the storage system all but useless as a “permanent repository”. Seismologists studied why a Texas oil field had “93 well-recorded earthquakes occurring between March 2009 and December 2010,” some of which exceeded Magnitude 3. They found a close correlation between these quakes and large-scale CO2 injections into the field.  One expert who reviewed the study before publication said: “The bottom line here is … carbon dioxide injection under high enough pressures and with high enough volume could induce seismicity just like any other fluid at high enough pressures and with high enough volume. We see (quakes) fairly often with water injection. We know that that can often trigger seismic events and sometimes those can be quite large. So, it isn’t really a surprise that carbon dioxide injection does the same thing.”

Obama Administration Just Invested $84M In A Clean Coal Technology That Might Cause Earthquakes - The Obama Administration announced on Thursday that it has invested $84 million to reduce the cost of carbon capture and storage (CSS), a method of gobbling up carbon dioxide emissions from coal plants before they enter the atmosphere and storing the emissions underground. On the one hand, U.S. Department of Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz purports that CSS will help control climate change by allowing the country “to use our abundant fossil fuel resources as cleanly as possible.” On the other hand, the technology “hasn’t yet proven to be practical, affordable, scalable, and ready to be ramped up rapidly,” according to Climate Progress’ Joe Romm, citing a Businessweek report claiming the emissions from just one coal-fired plant would require an underground storage space the size of a major oil field.  What’s more, a report released just three days before DOE’s investment announcement found a correlation between 93 earthquakes at a Texas oil field and the fact that there had been large-scale CO2 injections there. The earthquakes generally had Richter scale magnitudes of three and larger.  The findings compliment 2012 research from the U.S. Geological Survey which found a strong link between earthquakes and injections of wastewater into deep underground wells. In addition, research by Stanford University in 2012 warned of a “high probability” of earthquakes triggered by large-scale CSS, calling it a “risky, and likely unsuccessful, strategy for significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions.”

11/4/2013 — Fracking Earthquake SWARM in Central Oklahoma - Over the past 7 days, we’ve seen a large increase in movement across the South to Northwest edge of the North American Craton. The transferred pressure (coming from the WEST), is having a ‘spillover’ effect, cascading small to moderate earthquakes across the defined edge of the North American plate.Oklahoma, already a weak spot, now further weakened by literally thousands of deep injection / extraction wells, which penetrate the cratons edge — attempting to extract natural gas from the shale deposits, also DISPOSING of waste water via old oil wells.   Add in a bit of carbon capture into the mix as well, all combining to form a “perfect geo-seismic storm”. We’ve seen this activity before, in Oklahoma, Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois, and Texas.  First, we see single, moderate earthquakes in the 3.0M to 4.0M range occur at the fracking operations in OK, and AR.  Then, following the moderate movement, we usually see a series of individual smaller 2.0M quakes, subsequently followed by a swarm as we’re seeing now.  Ultimately, following the frack quake swarms, we usually see a few borderline 5.0M events occur anywhere along the edge of the plate, from the East coast through the south-midwest (OK and AR), all the way Northwest.

WSJ's Zuckerman: Fracking May Be Bigger than Housing Bubble, Tech Boom: Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, is helping the United States surpass Russia as the world's biggest producer of oil and gas and its importance can't be understated, says Wall Street Journal reporter Gregory Zuckerman, author of the new book, "The Frackers: The Outrageous Inside Story of the New Billionaire Wildcatters." "Fracking is the biggest boom since the housing bubble and even maybe the tech boom," he tells Yahoo. "It's affecting all kinds of cities and industries. It's changing geopolitics," giving the United States more freedom in its Mideast policy from Saudi Arabia, for example. While fracking may not be able to make the United States energy dependent, it can make us "energy secure," Zuckerman contends. He acknowledges there are safety issues surrounding fracking, but says it can be good for the environment, as it enables industry to shift from coal. To be sure, "it's only good if we're not emitting too much methane along with the natural gas," Zuckerman adds. "When done properly, it's really a benefit. But often they make mistakes."

this post is from economist Menzie Chinn, worth reading in its entirety for details on fracking employment and economic impacts: Great Expectations, Deferred - Still waiting for large, economy-wide job increases from the "shale revolution" From Goldman Sachs, "Is the Economy Gaining 'Fracktion?' ” (not online): There is little evidence of significant “induced” employment growth in downstream manufacturing industries. Similarly, cap-ex in energy intensive sectors that might be expected to benefit most from the shale boom has not outperformed cap-ex in other sectors during the recovery, although it did decline by less during the recession. On top of fears that the surge in unconventional oil and natural gas will not be enduring [1] [2] [3], there remains some doubt that the development of fracking will be the game-changer that many have claimed – at least with respect to macroeconomics. (Prominent studies include IHS (2012), McKinsey (2013).) Below I turn first to a discussion of employment growth in core oil and gas extraction. Then I discuss the extent (or non-extent) of spillover effects to the rest of the economy.

Pennsylvania: State Dirty Energy Money Analysis -  In recent years, the oil and gas industry has been on the march in Pennsylvania. Home of the Marcellus Shale formation and a historically productive coal state, Pennsylvania is a true battleground in the expansion of the fossil fuel industry. Analysis by Oil Change International shows that, since 2006, the fossil fuel industry has provided over $4.4 million in direct campaign contributions to members of the Pennsylvania General Assembly. In that time, overall contributions have doubled, from roughly $800,000 during the 2006 cycle, to over $1.6 million in total giving during the 2012 election cycle. As you can see in the graph below, there is a large partisan split in contributions and it’s currently increasing. The oil and gas sector, in particular, has seen a marked and steady increase in political spending in recent years, more than doubling between 2006 and 2012. At the same time, Pennsylvania has seen a boom in natural gas production thanks to the controversial practice of hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”). 

CASE STUDY: Senate Bill 259: Senate Bill 259 was a massive legislative win for the fracking industry. The bill, introduced by Senator Gene Yaw (R) (who has received $41,650 in money from the oil and gas industry since 2006) passed unanimously in the Senate and by a vote of 167-33 in the House. The bill guts decades-old law that helped protect landowners from predatory oil and gas lease practices. Analysis of the vote shows how successful the oil and gas industry’s investments in the Pennsylvania legislature have been. Senators and Representatives voting in favor of this bill have accepted a total of $4,137,533 in dirty energy money contributions since 2006. On average, each member of the Assembly and Senate that voted in favor of fossil interests received 5x more than those who voted against.

Handouts For Frackers: The Pennsylvania Plan To Give Drillers $1 Billion - Supporters of the fossil fuel industry like to portray expanded drilling as a free market triumph. But in Pennsylvania, taxpayers could have to pick up the tab for gas drillers to extract highly-valuable natural gas, to the tune of $1 billion over a decade.Pennsylvania’s Republican controlled legislature is considering bills to pay for a processing project, pipeline construction, compressed natural gas vehicles, and fueling stations, in addition to subsidies to convince a huge Royal Dutch Shell refinery to set up shop. The refinery alone could cost over $1 billion over 25 years. About one-fifth of the money handed out to energy companies would come from a $200 million-a-year drilling tax on the industry, but the other four-fifths would come out of taxpayers’ pockets. Of course, these welfare-for-drillers policies are nothing compared to the costs that the government and society bear from CO2 emissions and other pollutants emitted by burning fossil fuels. But none of this means drillers are going to stop whining about the government “picking winners and losers” when it subsidizes clean fuels without the negative externalities of burning hydrocarbons.

Oil Lobbyists Treated California Lawmakers To A $13,000 Dinner The Week Before A Major Fracking Vote - A major oil lobbying group spent $13,000 on a dinner for California lawmakers just one week before the state’s watered-down fracking regulatory bill passed the state Legislature, according to the state’s quarterly reports.  The Sacramento Bee outlined the heft of the oil and gas industry’s spending leading up to the bill’s vote, which was signed into law by Gov. Jerry Brown on September 20. From July 1 to September 30, three oil and gas groups spent the most money lobbying out of all the interest groups in the state. Chevron spent $1,696,477; Aera Energy LLC spent $1,015,534; and the Western States Petroleum Association spent $1,269,478, $13,000 of which went towards a dinner for 12 state lawmakers and two staff members at “one of Sacramento’s poshest venues,” according to the Bee.

Texas Homeowner Battles $3 Million Defamation Lawsuit For Exposing Fracking Company’s Pollution - Steve Lipsky, a Texas homeowner, has found himself at the center of a $3 million lawsuit for defamation from an oil and gas company, after he exposed the company for contaminating his water supply with methane and benzene. Despite his attempts to avert the expensive legal entanglement, Julie Dermansky reports at DeSmogBlog that last month the Fort Worth Court of Appeals allowed the defamation case to move forward. Lipsky sued Range Resources originally in 2011, prompted by an Environmental Protection Agency order that Range Resources endangered Texas residents’ health. His case was dismissed, because the presiding judge claimed there was no jurisdiction, but Range Resources took the unusual step of countersuing Lipsky for libel. It alleged that Lipsky and others conspired to get “the EPA and the media to wrongly label and prosecute Range as a polluter of the environment.” The company said that his public video of Lipsky lighting on fire a methane-filled hose escaping from his water well was an unfair portrayal, even though Lipsky maintains he can still set the water on fire in a video from October.  “The hose was used in the interest of safety, not to deceive anyone,” Lipsky told DeSmogBlog, before lighting fire at the end of the hose again. But according to Range Resources and the judge who dismissed Lipsky’s lawsuit in 2012, Lipsky could not possibly light his water on fire. The video “was not done for scientific study but to provide local and national news media with a deceptive video, calculated to alarm the public into believing the water was burning,” the judge wrote at the time.

Is Fracking All We Have To Worry About? -- As demonstrations grow against “fracking” in the UK, another controversial gas extraction method has quietly been licensed. Underground Coal Gasification, or UCG, is the drilling of wells to set fire to underground coal seams and the channelling of the mixture of gas by-products including hydrogen, carbon monoxide, methane and large volumes of carbon dioxide up to the surface. Two well heads are required in the UCG process, one to inject air or oxygen down to the coal chamber and another to extract the resulting mix of gases produced by burning the coal underground. Water taken either from the surface, or from below the ground is also required for the UCG process (over and above the water private companies already want to use for “fracking”). Once the gas runs out in the initial well location, the well heads are moved to follow the coal seam. This process leaves behind underground caverns contaminated with toxic waste, as well as scarring the countryside further as the wellheads creep along. But scarring the countryside is the least of the environmental risks caused as a direct result of UCG gas extraction methods. Reports on onshore UCG trials from America in 1993, Australia in 2011 and India in 2012 state UCG onshore trials had to be halted after groundwater was contaminated.  Contaminants included benzene – which can cause leukaemia and bone marrow abnormalities in humans and animals – and toluene, which can affect the kidneys, nervous system, liver, brain and heart as well as causing miscarriages.

Billion litres of coal-mine muck leaks into Athabasca River - Geotechnical engineers remained at the Obed Mountain coal mine Sunday trying to determine how one billion litres of murky water leaked from a containment pond into the Athabasca River. A barrier gave way on Halloween, allowing liquid containing coal dust, sand and dirt to flow through two creeks into the Athabasca, said Darin Barter, a spokesman for the Alberta Energy Regulator. “I haven’t seen this happen. Coal mine incidents and pit leak incidents are really rare,” he said. “I was surprised this could happen.” The Obed Mountain mine, owned by Sherritt International and now undergoing reclamation since operations were suspended last November, is about 30 kilometres northeast of Hinton. The dirty water travelled 25 kilometres to the Athabasca, forming a muddy plume now floating downstream, Alberta Environment spokeswoman Jessica Potter said. Department staff and Alberta Health Services were analyzing water samples to determine if anything in the sediment could cause environmental or health problems, she said. “There’s actually quite a noticeable change of colour (in the river),” she said. “It’s like muddy water … murky, muddy water.”

What You Read On MSNBC.com Might Be Written By The Fossil Fuel Industry - MSNBC relaunched on October 30 with a pretty new website, an impressive slate of newly-hired progressive reporters, plus a couple of questionable “launch partners,” corporate sponsors who will write content for the site. General Electric (GE) and America’s Natural Gas Alliance (ANGA) will contribute “native advertisements,” meaning ads branded as MSNBC stories, to the news site in exchange for sponsorship.  GE owns 49 percent of NBC Universal, parent company of MSNBC. ANGA is a natural gas industry group that promotes increased natural gas exploration and drilling and discourages regulation. An ANGA spokesperson recently told the Los Angeles Times that using more natural gas “can substantially reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” which is not true over the long term. It is as yet unclear what America’s Natural Gas Alliance will cover, though it will be featured in sponsored polls housed in a section focused on facts about natural gas. It is unknown whether that entire section will be an advertisement. GE’s will focus on the “Industrial Internet,” the “Brilliant Machines Innovation,” and how they are impacting our world.

Fossil Fuels Receive $500 Billion A Year In Government Subsidies Worldwide - Producers of oil, gas and coal received more than $500 billion in government subsidies around the world in 2011, with the richest nations collectively spending more than $70 billion every year to support fossil fuels.Those are the findings of a recent report by the Overseas Development Institute, a think tank based in the United Kingdom.  “If their aim is to avoid dangerous climate change, governments are shooting themselves in both feet,” the report, headed by ODI research fellow Shelagh Whitley, said. “They are subsidizing the very activities that are pushing the world towards dangerous climate change, and creating barriers to investment in low-carbon development and subsidy incentives that encourage investment in carbon-intensive energy.” While the report acknowledges there is currently no globally agreed definition of what constitutes a subsidy, it cites the World Trade Organization’s approach: “a subsidy is any financial contribution by a government, or agent of a government, that confers a benefit on its recipient.”

Fossil fuel subsidies 'reckless use of public funds': The world is spending half a trillion dollars on fossil fuel subsidies every year, according to a new report. The Overseas Development Institute (ODI) says rich countries are spending seven times more supporting coal, oil and gas than they are on helping poorer nations fight climate change. Some countries including Egypt, Morocco and Pakistan, have subsidies bigger than the national fiscal deficit. The new report calls on the G20 to phase out the payments by 2020. While there is no globally agreed definition of what a fossil fuel subsidy actually is, the report draws on a range of sources from the International Monetary Fund to the International Energy Agency. It details the range of financial help given to oil, coal and gas producers and consumers from national governments and through international development. What emerges is a complicated web of different types of payments in different countries. 

ALEC Agenda Reveals Anti-Renewable Energy Strategies for December Summit | EcoWatch: ALEC notes on the agenda that model policies are not official until passing its Commerce Task Force and national board of directors. Both groups have sessions scheduled before the EEA meets.  ALEC will introduce a new member on the final day of the event, America’s Natural Gas Alliance, which was partly founded by former Chesapeake Energy CEO Aubrey McClendon. Chesapeake Energy is also an ALEC member and known as one of the country’s largest fracking companies.

The Efficient Allocation of Rural Land in Upstate New York (portrays fracking opponents as upper class snobs and beneficiaries of fracking as hard working but dirt poor farmers).