Oklahoma’s Earthquake Problem
With the recent 5.8 Richter scale quake the state moved
quickly to shut down 37 disposal wells in the Cambro-Ordovician Arbuckle
formation. They also reduced water volumes in others. This zone near basement
has long been known to have hydraulic links to basement faults due to its
proximity to the Precambrian basement rocks. It has also long been known that
fluid injection can make such faults slip causing tremors. Although most of
those quakes have been relatively small and non-damaging, as we can see from
the magnitude of this quake there is real reason for concern. As more fluid is
injected into these zones the fluid injection pressures rise causing the fluid
to move out further from the wellbore and toward potential contact with faults.
If other quakes of this magnitude were to occur with more damage and human
injury or even death there would be a humongous public outcry. The time to
redesign fluid management and change well injection zones in Oklahoma, Kansas,
Ohio, and other areas is NOW. This is not a sustainable situation. While oil
& gas spokespeople and regulators can go on insisting the quakes are small
and there is no cause for concern – clearly a 5.6 quake is a cause for concern.
The current situation is not sustainable. Studies by the USGS and Stanford
conclude that these deep injection reservoirs should be abandoned for shallower
injection reservoirs. These areas also need to better maximize frack water
reuse, although it is not only frack flow-back water but also produced water
that is the issue. The current high volume production plays in the area –
SCOOP, STACK (Merimac), Granite Wash, Cleveland, and others – apparently all produce
significant amounts of water. Ohio has not had an injection well derived quake
since the ones in 2011 in the Youngstown area – also associated with Cambro-Ordovician
injection zones.
What is happening underground is now fairly well understood
and can be mitigated. Unfortunately the deep near-basement injection zones are
a big part of the problem. Seismic cannot image all faults and all areas are
not covered with seismic anyway. The
history of the reaction to these quakes is also at issue: First the industry
and state regulators denied that the quakes were even associated with injection
wells. Although some may not be it is now quite obvious to all without a doubt that
the wells are the cause. Next it has been pointed out repeatedly by the
industry and regulators that the quakes small, shallow, and insignificant in
terms of the damage they can cause. While that may be the case for the vast
majority of them, no one really knows when a bigger one could occur causing
real damage. Quakes caused by injection can cause significant damage and loss
of life such as one the 7.9 earthquake in Sichuan province China that was
attributed to a large reservoir and dam. Although there is some argument about
reservoir-induced earthquakes, over 100 quakes worldwide have been attributed
to hydropower dam reservoirs. The mechanism responsible for the Sichuan quake –
increased fluid pressures in fissures and micro-cracks leading to deeper faults
and lubricating them to slip – is basically the same mechanism as in the deep
injection wells. That quake killed 80,000 people. With recent concern that the
oil hub infrastructure in nearby Cushing, Oklahoma could be at risk, there is also
reason to act quickly and decisively to alter water disposal practices in the
area.
Oddly, though Oklahoma has long acknowledged the obvious
cause of the quakes, Texas has been reluctant to do so in the quakes, though
much smaller, that have increased there as drilling and water injection has
increased. In 2012 71% of produced water came from four states: Texas at 35%,
California, Oklahoma, and Wyoming. The produced water comes mostly from
conventional formations. In the northeast areas were the Marcellus and the
Utica is produced, over 90% of frack flow-back and produced water is treated
and recycled, to be used in subsequent frack jobs. Some companies recycle 100%.
This is the highest area for frack water recycling in the U.S. There is no reason this cannot also occur in
in greater measure in the higher water producing states. According to consultant
John Veil between 2007 and 2012 oil and gas production due to fracking
increased by 20% but overall water production remained fairly flat.
Conventional wells tend to produce more water over time but wells that produce
from shale and other “tight” reservoirs tend to produce far less water and in
contrast to conventional wells the ratio of water to gas and oil tends to drop
over time. However, the initial flow back does produce a lot of water and so
there have been more waste water injection wells drilled and more water
injected since fracking vastly increased the amount of wells drilled overall.
But the increase has been modest and future projections show only a modest
further increase in injection. Recycling frack water and produced water costs
money so operators in some areas have been reluctant to do it. Regulations could
change that but would not be popular in the current downturn happening in the
industry although that downturn may be winding down at present.
References:
Search is On for Ways to Use Fracked Well Water, and Texas May Have an
Answer – by Jeffrey Weiss, in Dallas Daily News, Sept. 7, 2016
Earthquakes Triggered By Dams – by International Rivers
A Fault Line Runs Through It – Exposing the Hidden Dangers of
Dam-Induced Earthquakes – Factsheet by International Rivers