Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
Induced Seismicity Potential in Energy
Technologies
Committee on Induced Seismicity Potential in Energy Technologies
Committee on Earth Resources
Committee on Geological and Geotechnical Engineering
Committee on Seismology and Geodynamics
Board on Earth Sciences and Resources
Division on Earth and Life Studies
Prepublication version – Subject to revision
Prepublicationi
OCR for page R2
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the
National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy
of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of
the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard
for appropriate balance.
This study was supported by DE-PI0000010, TO# 10/DE-DT0001995 between the National
Academy of Sciences and the Department of Energy. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or
recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily
reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
or
International Standard Book Number 0-309-0XXXX-X
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 97-XXXXX
[Availability from program office as desired.]
Additional copies of this report are available for sale from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth
Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313;
http://www.nap.edu/.
Copyright 2012 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
Prepublication version – Subject to revision
ii
OCR for page R3
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished
scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and
technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the
Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on
scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National
Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its
administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the
responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors
engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and
recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National
Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the
services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to
the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of
Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own
initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president
of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to
associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering
knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies
determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National
Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government,
the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both
Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice
chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.
www.national-academies.org
Prepublication version – Subject to revision
iii
OCR for page R4
COMMITTEE ON INDUCED SEISMICITY POTENTIAL IN ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES
MURRAY W. HITZMAN, Chair, Colorado School of Mines, Golden
DONALD D. CLARKE, Geological Consultant, Long Beach, California
EMMANUEL DETOURNAY, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, and CSIRO (Earth Science
and Resource Engineering), Australia
JAMES H. DIETERICH, University of California, Riverside
DAVID K. DILLON, David K. Dillon PE, LLC, Centennial, Colorado
SIDNEY J. GREEN, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
ROBERT M. HABIGER, Spectraseis, Denver, Colorado
ROBIN K. MCGUIRE, Engineering Consultant, Boulder, Colorado
JAMES K. MITCHELL, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and University, Blacksburg
JULIE E. SHEMETA, MEQ Geo, Inc., Highlands Ranch, Colorado
JOHN L. (BILL) SMITH, Geothermal Consultant, Santa Rosa, California
National Research Council Staff
ELIZABETH A. EIDE, Study Director
JASON ORTEGO, Research Associate
COURTNEY R. GIBBS, Program Associate
Prepublication version – Subject to revision
iv
OCR for page R5
BOARD ON EARTH SCIENCES AND RESOURCES
CORALE L. BRIERLEY, Chair, Brierley Consultancy, LLC, Highlands Ranch, Colorado
KEITH C. CLARKE, University of California, Santa Barbara
DAVID J. COWEN, University of South Carolina, Columbia
WILLIAM E. DIETRICH, University of California, Berkeley
ROGER M. DOWNS, Pennsylvania State University, University Park
JEFF DOZIER, University of California, Santa Barbara
WILLIAM L. GRAF, University of South Carolina, Columbia
RUSSELL J. HEMLEY, Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, D.C.
MURRAY W. HITZMAN, Colorado School of Mines, Golden
EDWARD KAVAZANJIAN, JR., Arizona State University, Tempe
ROBERT B. MCMASTER, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
M. MEGHAN MILLER, UNAVCO, Inc., Boulder, Colorado
ISABEL P. MONTAÑEZ, University of California, Davis
CLAUDIA INÉS MORA, Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico
BRIJ M. MOUDGIL, University of Florida, Gainesville
CLAYTON R. NICHOLS, Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office (Retired), Ocean
Park, Washington
HENRY N. POLLACK, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
JOAQUIN RUIZ, University of Arizona, Tucson
PETER M. SHEARER, University of California, San Diego
REGINAL SPILLER, Frontera Resources Corporation (Retired), Houston, Texas
RUSSELL E. STANDS-OVER-BULL, Anadarko Petroleum Corporation, Billings, Montana
TERRY C. WALLACE, JR., Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico
National Research Council Staff
ANTHONY R. DE SOUZA, Director (until April 2012)
ELIZABETH A. EIDE, Director (from April 2012)
DAVID A. FEARY, Senior Program Officer
ANNE M. LINN, Senior Program Officer
SAMMANTHA L. MAGSINO, Senior Program Officer
MARK D. LANGE, Program Officer
JENNIFER T. ESTEP, Financial and Administrative Associate
NICHOLAS D. ROGERS, Financial and Research Associate
COURTNEY R. GIBBS, Program Associate
JASON R. ORTEGO, Research Associate
ERIC J. EDKIN, Senior Program Assistant
CHANDA IJAMES, Program Assistant
Prepublication version – Subject to revision
v
OCR for page R6
Prepublication version – Subject to revision
vi
OCR for page R7
PREFACE
Since the 1920s we have recognized that pumping fluids into or out of the Earth has the
potential to cause seismic events that can be felt. Seismic events in Basel, Switzerland between
2006 and 2008 were felt by local residents and were related to geothermal energy development.
A string of small seismic events in Arkansas, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Texas in the past several
years has been related to waste water disposal associated with oil and gas production. These
seismic events have brought the issue of induced (human-caused) seismicity firmly into public
view.
Ensuring a reliable 21st century energy supply for the United States presents seminal
economic, environmental, and social challenges. A variety of conventional and unconventional
energy technologies are being developed to meet this challenge including new technologies
associated with shale gas production and geothermal energy. Energy technologies may also
produce wastes. “Waste” water is often produced during oil and gas drilling and is generally
managed either by disposal through pumping the fluids back into the subsurface or by storage,
treatment, or reuse. Carbon dioxide may also be generated as a byproduct of energy production
and may be captured and similarly pumped into the ground for storage.
Anticipating public concern about the potential for induced seismicity related to energy
development, Senator Bingaman requested that the Department of Energy conduct study of this
issue through the National Research Council. The study was designed to examine the scale,
scope, and consequences of seismicity induced during the injection of fluids related to energy
production; to identify gaps in knowledge and research needed to advance the understanding of
induced seismicity; to identify gaps in induced seismic hazard assessment methodologies and the
research needed to close those gaps; and to assess options for interim steps toward best practices
with regard to energy development and induced seismicity potential.
The committee (Appendix A) investigated the history and potential for induced
seismicity associated with geothermal energy development; with oil and gas production,
including enhanced oil recovery and shale gas; and with and carbon capture and storage. The
committee examined peer-reviewed literature, documents produced by federal and state agencies,
online databases and resources, and information requested from and submitted by external
sources. We heard from government and industry representatives; from members of the public
familiar with the world’s largest geothermal operation at The Geysers, California at a public
meeting in Berkeley, California; and from people familiar with shale gas development, enhanced
oil recovery, waste water disposal, and CCS at meetings in Dallas, Texas and Irvine, California
(Appendix B). Meetings were also held in Washington, D.C. and Denver, Colorado to explore
induced seismicity in theory and in practice.
During the meeting in northern California, the committee was able to talk with
individuals from Anderson Springs and Cobb, California, who live with induced seismicity
continuously generated by geothermal energy production. Understanding their concerns and the
history of how they have worked with individuals from both industry and local government,
together with technical experts from the federal government, to deal with their very tangible
issue of induced seismicity brought immediacy to the committee’s deliberations. This
knowledge was invaluable as the committee explored the concept of a protocol system for
responding to induced seismicity with some of the individuals who helped devise the proposed
Prepublication version – Subject to revision
vii
OCR for page R8
protocol system for induced seismicity caused by or likely related to enhanced geothermal
energy development.
This study took place during a period in which a number of small, felt seismic events
occurred that been caused by or were likely related to fluid injection for energy development.
Because of their recent occurrence, peer-reviewed publications about most of these events were
generally not available. However, knowing that these events and information about them would
be anticipated in this report, the committee attempted to identify and seek information from as
many sources as possible to gain a sense of the common factual points involved in each instance,
as well as the remaining, unanswered questions about these cases. Through this process, the
committee has engaged scientists and engineers from academia, industry, and government
because each has credible and viable information to add to better understanding of induced
seismicity.
This report describes what we know about the potential for induced seismicity related to
energy development. It highlights areas where our knowledge is weak and discusses inherent
difficulties in dealing with an issue that does not have a well-defined regulatory “home.” The
committee hopes this report will inform both the public and the decision-making process with
respect to an important issue that will undoubtedly become more widely recognized as additional
induced seismic events occur.
As chair, I would like to thank the committee members for their dedication and hard
work. The committee commends Dr. Elizabeth Eide, the project study director, for helping to
make this an exciting learning experience for us all. The committee also benefitted from the
dedication and excellence of research associate Jason Ortego and program associate Courtney
Gibbs.
Murray W. Hitzman, Chair
Prepublication version – Subject to revision
viii
OCR for page R9
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
In addition to its own expertise, the study committee relied on input from numerous
external professionals and members of the public with extensive experience in addressing the
range of issues related to induced seismicity. These individuals were very generous in sharing
their research knowledge from the laboratory and the field, their direct experiences from industry
settings and with energy development in the private sector and in government, and their personal
experiences in dealing with induced seismic events. We gratefully acknowledge their
contributions to help us with this work. In particular, the committee would like to thank the
following people: Scott Ausbrooks, Joe Beall, Lisa Block, Jay Braitsch, Mike Bruno, Linda
Christian, David Coleman, Tim Conant, Kevin Cunningham, Mark Dellinger, Philip Dellinger,
Nancy Dorsey, Ola Eiken, Leo Eisner, Bill Ellsworth, Cheryl Engels, Rob Finley, Cliff Frohlich,
Julio Garcia, Domenico Giardini, Jeffrey Gospe, George Guthrie, Craig Hartline, Werner Heigl,
Hamilton Hess, Austin Holland, Steve Horton, Ernst Huenges, John Jeffers, Doug Johnson, Don
Juckett, Bill Leith, Ernie Majer, Shawn Maxwell, Steve Melzer, Meriel Medrano, Alexander
Nagelhout, Jay Nathwani, David Oppenheimer, Susan Petty, Bruce Presgrave, Philip Ringrose,
Jim Rutledge, Jean Savy, Alexander Schriener , Serge Shapiro, Karl Urbank, Mark Walters,
Charlene Wardlow, Norm Warpinski, Stefan Wiemer, Colin Williams, Melinda Wright, Bob
Young, and Mark Zoback.
The helpful assistance we received with regard to planning and executing the field trip
and workshop for the committee’s meeting in northern California was also very important. We
recognize the contributions from Calpine, the Northern California Power Agency, the Lawrence
Berkeley National Laboratory, and the communities of Anderson Springs and Cobb, California,
for their excellent cooperation and efforts to provide us with access to necessary information and
localities that greatly informed the committee’s work.
The committee gratefully acknowledges the support of three standing committees under
the Board on Earth Sciences and Resources for their guidance and oversight during the study
process: the Committee on Earth Resources, the Committee on Geological and Geotechnical
Engineering, and the Committee on Seismology and Geodynamics (Appendix M). This report
has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and
technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s
(NRC) Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid
and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as
possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and
responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain
confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following
individuals for their participation in the review of this report:
Jon Ake, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Rockville, Maryland
Dan Arthur, ALL Consulting, Tulsa, Oklahoma
John Bredehoeft, The Hydrodynamics Group, Sausalito, California
Brian Clark, Schlumberger Companies, Sugar Land, Texas
Peter Malin, University of Auckland, New Zealand
Prepublication version – Subject to revision
ix
OCR for page R10
W. Allen Marr, Jr., Geocomp Corporation, Acton, Massachusetts
Shawn Maxwell, Schlumberger Canada, Calgary
J. R. Anthony Pearson, Schlumberger Cambridge Research, United Kingdom
Ed Przybylowicz, Eastman Kodak Company (retired), Webster, New York
Carlos Santamarina, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia
Mark Zoback, Stanford University, Stanford, California
Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and
suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations nor did they
see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by
William L. Fisher, The University of Texas at Austin, and R. Stephen Berry, The University of
Chicago, Illinois. Appointed by the NRC, they were responsible for making certain that an
independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional
procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final
content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.
Prepublication version – Subject to revision
x
OCR for page R11
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ 1
SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................. 3
1 INDUCED SEISMICITY AND ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES.................................................... 17
Introduction to Induced Seismicity and Study Background .......................................................... 17
Earthquakes and their Measurement .............................................................................................. 24
Energy Technologies and Induced Seismicity ............................................................................... 26
Historical Induced Seismicity Related to Energy Activities .......................................................... 27
Concluding Remarks...................................................................................................................... 28
References ...................................................................................................................................... 29
2 TYPES AND CAUSES OF INDUCED SEISMICITY .................................................................. 31
Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 31
Factors Affecting Initiation and Magnitude of a Seismic Event .................................................... 31
Seismicity Induced by Fluid Injection ........................................................................................... 38
Seismicity Induced by Fluid Withdrawal....................................................................................... 44
Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 47
References ...................................................................................................................................... 48
3 ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES: HOW THEY WORK AND THEIR INDUCED SEISMICITY
POTENTIAL ..................................................................................................................................... 51
Geothermal Energy ........................................................................................................................ 51
Conventional Oil and Gas Production Including Enhanced Oil Recovery .................................... 67
Unconventional Oil and Gas Production Including Shale Reservoirs ........................................... 73
Injection Wells Used for the Disposal of Water Associated with Energy Extraction.................... 77
Carbon Capture and Storage .......................................................................................................... 81
Discussion ...................................................................................................................................... 90
References ...................................................................................................................................... 97
4 GOVERNMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES RELATED TO UNDERGROUND
INJECTION AND INDUCED SEISMICITY .............................................................................. 105
Federal Authorities....................................................................................................................... 106
State Efforts ................................................................................................................................. 119
Existing Regulatory Framework for Fluid Withdrawal ............................................................... 122
Concluding Remarks.................................................................................................................... 123
References .................................................................................................................................... 124
5 PATHS FORWARD TO UNDERSTANDING AND MANAGING INDUCED SEISMICITY
HAZARD AND RISK IN ENERGY TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT ............................... 127
Hazards and Risks Associated with Induced Seismicity.............................................................. 127
Quantifying Hazard and Risk....................................................................................................... 134
References .................................................................................................................................... 138
6 STEPS TOWARD A “BEST PRACTICES” PROTOCOL ........................................................ 139
The Importance of Considering the Adoption of Best Practices.................................................. 139
Existing Induced Seismicity Checklists and Protocols ................................................................ 140
The Use of a Traffic Light Control System ................................................................................. 147
Prepublication version – Subject to revision
xi
OCR for page R12
Mitigating the Effects of Induced Seismicity on Public and Private Facilities ............................ 148
References .................................................................................................................................... 149
7 ADDRESSING INDUCED SEISMICITY: FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, RESEARCH,
AND PROPOSED ACTIONS ........................................................................................................ 151
Types and Causes of Induced Seismicity ..................................................................................... 152
Energy Technologies: How They Work ...................................................................................... 154
Oversight, Monitoring, and Coordination of Underground Injection Activities for
Mitigating Induced Seismicity .............................................................................................. 158
Hazards and Risk Assessment ..................................................................................................... 159
Best Practices ............................................................................................................................... 160
APPENDIXES
A Committee and Staff Biographies ......................................................................................... 163
B Meeting Agendas ................................................................................................................... 169
C Observations of Induced Seismicity ...................................................................................... 177
D Letters Between Senator Bingamin and Secretary Chu......................................................... 187
E Earthquake Size Estimates and Negative Earthquake Magnitudes ....................................... 191
F The Failure of the Baldwin Hills Reservoir Dam .................................................................. 197
G Seismic Event Due to Fluid Injection or Withdrawal............................................................ 199
H Pore Pressure Induced by Fluid Injection .............................................................................. 205
I Hydraulic Fracture Microseismic Monitoring ....................................................................... 209
J Hydraulic Fracturing in Eola Field, Garvin County, Oklahoma and Potential Link to
Induced Seismicity ........................................................................................................ 213
K Paradox Valley Unit Salt Water Injection Project ................................................................. 217
L Estimated Injected Fluid Volumes ........................................................................................ 221
M Additional Acknowledgments ............................................................................................... 225
Prepublication version – Subject to revision
xii
