4 ms·

They mention the retrieval method as fracking. Is this a good idea along a fault line near large population centers?

by jqm 12y ago

chc 12y ago
AFAIK we don't know enough to say, really.
001sky 12y ago
No, you're mis-reading the article. (1) They say expressly say fracking is not suited to the geographic topology in CA; and (2) They compare and contrast the monterey geology in CA to texas and ND where is it better suited. Basically, fracking is better in areas with flat-sediment-shale-beds. CA has dedformed rock strata. Similarly, much of the formation is not in heavily populated areas. They mention Kern county, for example, which is not considered a part of metro LA (it is seperated by a massive desert/mountain range). http://gen.usc.edu/news/monterey-shale.htm http://gen.usc.edu/news/monterey-shale.htm
ArkyBeagle 12y ago
It depends. Minor quakes in Oklahoma are believed attributable to fracking but it's hardly conclusive. Oklahoma hasn't had people who could read living on it for much more than a hundred years now. There's no data base; the people who lived there before didn't leave a record. As hard as it may be to believe, there's not that much material doing downhole. It's usually as much-ish as a middling stock tank - a few million gallons - tennish or so acre-feet. Determining cause and effect will be a mighty task. http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/07/01/water-for-fracking-in-context/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/07/01/water-f... goes to the water use, with awater always being the big item. David Blackmon is a bit of an oil industry flack, but his logic and numbers marry up to other sources well. Given California's politics, the geology ( fault lines ) and the way prices are working out, it's probably better left alone for now. The rate of innovation in fracking is staggering. The technology will be there sooner or later. I have a friend who's roughly from the general Kern County area and its a brittle place environmentally. This being said, the LA Times is not exactly an oil/gas friendly publication - the quotes were all from professional anti-frackers. Sadly, since the Enron fiasco, we have to watch for that sort of thing. Claiofornia also has had "oil people" and "water people" and "oil and water don't mix."
- ahnick 12y ago
  There is strong evidence that indicates that recent fracking activity(2009 and onwards) in Oklahoma is solely responsible for the earthquake activity they are seeing -> http://www.decodedscience.com/increasing-earthquake-frequency-oklahoma-signals-potential-damaging-future-quakes/45963 http://www.decodedscience.com/increasing-earthquake-frequenc... To indicate anything otherwise is disingenuous.
  - jessriedel 12y ago
    From your link: > Another USGS analysis shows recent earthquake rate changes are likely not due to normal fluctuations in natural seismicity rates. Instead, the most likely cause is from wastewater being injected into deep geologic formations and causing faults to fail in a process called injection-induced seismicity. (Did I miss a stronger statement in there?) So random fluctuations are unlikely to be the explanation and, of the remaining explanations, the most likely one is fracking. As I read your articles, it does not claim strong evidence of fracking as the sole cause.
    - fjarlq 12y ago
      This is my understanding as well. During the drilling and analysis process, a lot of saltwater is extracted. The recent earthquakes in Oklahoma are believed to be caused by pumping this saltwater back into the ground. The pressures involved are very high. Source: my uncle is a senior log analyst for an oil & energy company in Oklahoma, and this was his explanation to me last week.
      - ArkyBeagle 12y ago
        One hair to split - saltwater isn't a result of fracking - it's a byproduct of drilling. A small point ( they're simply stages in a larger process ) but ... with fracking, material is pushed down the hole. The opposite is true of drilling. Second, the case for increased seismic activity being caused by fracking is some where between "maybe" and "we dunno." It needs work. It will be hard because we can't observe it directly. I imagine your uncle sees ( or knows those who see ) nonlinearities in the data and fracking is just a darn good candidate for root cause.
badman_ting 12y ago
If the causation can't be proven, will it matter?
justin66 12y ago
Someone mentioned Oklahoma but it's certainly not the only place: http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2014/04/ohio_acknowledges_connection_b.html http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2014/04/ohio_ack... There's actually a lot of news out of that area regarding fracking and earthquakes, going back a few years. The data have improved over time and we've moved past the "correlation isn't causation so come on and have another cigarette" stage. An earthquake happening right under a fracking well is considered scientifically significant. I don't know if the drilling is on the same scale in CA but I just assume that the eventual rules for avoiding faultlines will be even more strict in a state with a history of serious earthquakes.

They mention the retrieval method as fracking. Is this a good idea along a fault line near large population centers?

by jqm 12y ago

They mention the retrieval method as fracking. Is this a good idea along a fault line near large population centers?

chc 12y ago

AFAIK we don't know enough to say, really.

001sky 12y ago

No, you're mis-reading the article. (1) They say expressly say fracking is not suited to the geographic topology in CA; and (2) They compare and contrast the monterey geology in CA to texas and ND where is it better suited. Basically, fracking is better in areas with flat-sediment-shale-beds. CA has dedformed rock strata. Similarly, much of the formation is not in heavily populated areas. They mention Kern county, for example, which is not considered a part of metro LA (it is seperated by a massive desert/mountain range). http://gen.usc.edu/news/monterey-shale.htm http://gen.usc.edu/news/monterey-shale.htm

ArkyBeagle 12y ago

It depends. Minor quakes in Oklahoma are believed attributable to fracking but it's hardly conclusive. Oklahoma hasn't had people who could read living on it for much more than a hundred years now. There's no data base; the people who lived there before didn't leave a record. As hard as it may be to believe, there's not that much material doing downhole. It's usually as much-ish as a middling stock tank - a few million gallons - tennish or so acre-feet. Determining cause and effect will be a mighty task. http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/07/01/water-for-fracking-in-context/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/07/01/water-f... goes to the water use, with awater always being the big item. David Blackmon is a bit of an oil industry flack, but his logic and numbers marry up to other sources well. Given California's politics, the geology ( fault lines ) and the way prices are working out, it's probably better left alone for now. The rate of innovation in fracking is staggering. The technology will be there sooner or later. I have a friend who's roughly from the general Kern County area and its a brittle place environmentally. This being said, the LA Times is not exactly an oil/gas friendly publication - the quotes were all from professional anti-frackers. Sadly, since the Enron fiasco, we have to watch for that sort of thing. Claiofornia also has had "oil people" and "water people" and "oil and water don't mix."

ahnick 12y ago
There is strong evidence that indicates that recent fracking activity(2009 and onwards) in Oklahoma is solely responsible for the earthquake activity they are seeing -> http://www.decodedscience.com/increasing-earthquake-frequency-oklahoma-signals-potential-damaging-future-quakes/45963 http://www.decodedscience.com/increasing-earthquake-frequenc... To indicate anything otherwise is disingenuous.
- jessriedel 12y ago
  From your link: > Another USGS analysis shows recent earthquake rate changes are likely not due to normal fluctuations in natural seismicity rates. Instead, the most likely cause is from wastewater being injected into deep geologic formations and causing faults to fail in a process called injection-induced seismicity. (Did I miss a stronger statement in there?) So random fluctuations are unlikely to be the explanation and, of the remaining explanations, the most likely one is fracking. As I read your articles, it does not claim strong evidence of fracking as the sole cause.
  - fjarlq 12y ago
    This is my understanding as well. During the drilling and analysis process, a lot of saltwater is extracted. The recent earthquakes in Oklahoma are believed to be caused by pumping this saltwater back into the ground. The pressures involved are very high. Source: my uncle is a senior log analyst for an oil & energy company in Oklahoma, and this was his explanation to me last week.
    - ArkyBeagle 12y ago
      One hair to split - saltwater isn't a result of fracking - it's a byproduct of drilling. A small point ( they're simply stages in a larger process ) but ... with fracking, material is pushed down the hole. The opposite is true of drilling. Second, the case for increased seismic activity being caused by fracking is some where between "maybe" and "we dunno." It needs work. It will be hard because we can't observe it directly. I imagine your uncle sees ( or knows those who see ) nonlinearities in the data and fracking is just a darn good candidate for root cause.

badman_ting 12y ago

If the causation can't be proven, will it matter?

justin66 12y ago

Someone mentioned Oklahoma but it's certainly not the only place: http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2014/04/ohio_acknowledges_connection_b.html http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2014/04/ohio_ack... There's actually a lot of news out of that area regarding fracking and earthquakes, going back a few years. The data have improved over time and we've moved past the "correlation isn't causation so come on and have another cigarette" stage. An earthquake happening right under a fracking well is considered scientifically significant. I don't know if the drilling is on the same scale in CA but I just assume that the eventual rules for avoiding faultlines will be even more strict in a state with a history of serious earthquakes.