USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 70212872

Minimal clustering of injection-induced earthquakes observed with a large-n seismic array

Abstract

The clustering behavior of injection‐induced earthquakes is examined using one month of data recorded by the LArge‐ n Seismic Survey in Oklahoma (LASSO) array. The 1829‐node seismic array was deployed in a 25 km×32 km area of active saltwater disposal in northern Oklahoma between 14 April and 10 May 2016. Injection rates in the study area are nearly constant around the time of the deployment. We develop a local magnitude ( ⁠ M L ⁠ ) equation for the region and estimate magnitudes for 1104 earthquakes recorded by the deployment. The determined earthquake magnitudes range from M L 0.01 to 3.0. The majority of earthquakes occurred between 1.5 and 5.5 km depth, and the shallowest earthquake depths overlap with the base of injection wells at depths between 1.5 and 2.5 km. We compute focal mechanisms of the largest events ( ⁠ M L > 2.0 ⁠ ), and find a mix of normal‐ and strike‐slip‐faulting types. Earthquakes occur regularly in time during the deployment, but are not evenly distributed in space across the study area, that is, they are spatially clustered. Analysis of the nearest‐neighbor distances in the space–time–magnitude domain shows the seismicity is dominated by single‐event clusters (i.e., independent events). This high proportion of single‐event clusters compared with multievent clusters has been previously noted for induced events at geothermal sites. When clustering occurs, the number of events in a cluster is typically small. We observe only four clusters with 10 or more events. For these larger clusters, we find equivalent numbers of foreshocks and aftershocks; however, the foreshock sequences are significantly longer in duration lasting days to tens of days, while aftershock sequences are observed only on the order of one day. The minimal clustering observed for events in the LASSO array suggests that the majority of events are being directly driven by stress changes due to local saltwater disposal.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 36.5° to 37.1° latitude; -98.3° to -97.6° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Elizabeth S. Cochran, A. Wickham-Piotrowski, K. Kemna, R. M Harrington, S. Dougherty, A. Pena Castro. 2020-05-26. Minimal clustering of injection-induced earthquakes observed with a large-n seismic array. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120200101

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Re-evaluation of shaking, dynamic strain, and the source of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

As the largest historical event in the eastern United States, the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, plays a prominent role in our nation’s seismological and human history and an outsized role in our probabilistic ground‐motion hazard estimates, affecting building codes, insurance rates, and geophysical monitoring. Thus, constraining the characteristics of the 1886 earthquake source, as well as the nature of its shaking distribution and impacts to the extent possible, is essential. Given its vintage, however, societal, geological, and geophysical datasets are limited compared with those used in modern seismological analyses. Because of these limitations, some characteristics of the rupture model are fundamentally nonunique. Still, by re‐evaluating all available data, I can constrain several key aspects of this earthquake. I show that several interpretations in recent analyses are inconsistent regarding the inferred source; shaking; ground failure; and, particularly, railway impacts. Importantly, I have shown that although dynamic strain caused the ground failure that led to track deformation, without the intermediate liquefaction step, dynamic strain alone was unlikely to be the source of rail deformation, contrary to earlier studies. Had earlier pronouncements that dynamic strain is a real concern for bending railways held true, there would be serious ramifications for railway engineering as well as for other above‐ and below‐ground linear infrastructure.

South Carolina↗

ETAS-positive: Extracting unbiased epidemic-type aftershock models from incomplete earthquake catalogs

Earthquake catalogs are inherently incomplete, and short-term fluctuations in catalog completeness can strongly bias estimates of seismicity parameters. Here, we extend the positive statistics framework recently introduced for estimating Gutenberg–Richter a and b values to the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model. The approach focuses on complete magnitude–time intervals defined by pairs of earthquakes in which the second event is larger than the first. Comprehensive synthetic tests demonstrate that the proposed ETAS + method retrieves nearly unbiased parameter estimates even from highly incomplete catalogs, whereas parameters obtained using classical estimation approaches are strongly biased. Application to Southern California reveals a similar trend, with the productivity scaling parameter α approaching the b value, consistent with self-similar earthquake triggering within estimation uncertainties. Owing to its robustness against catalog incompleteness and computational efficiency, the ETAS + method provides a powerful new tool for seismicity analysis and earthquake forecasting.

California↗