Los Angeles quake another frack-induced quake?

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 01:06 AM
link   
Three Los Angeles city council members have put forth a motion to ask several different agencies to report back to them whether the 4.4 magnitude quake felt last week in Los Angeles was induced by hydraulic fracturing. There is an active well project at the Veteran's Administration grounds in west Los Angeles, nearby to the epicenter of the quake. The fault line where the quake occurred last week has been dormant for a thousand years until the surprise shaking.



Earlier this year, the council voted to draft rules that would bar hydraulic fracturing, often referred to as “fracking,” acidizing and other kinds of well stimulation in Los Angeles until council members felt sure that Angelenos and the water they drink were safe from their effects. The risk of triggering earthquakes was among the dangers cited by Bonin and Koretz, who championed the move.
“All high-pressure fracking and injection creates ‘seismic events,’” the motion states. It added, “Active oil extraction activities are reportedly taking place on the Veteran’s Administration grounds in West Los Angeles, nearby the epicenter” of the Monday quake.
"It is crucial to the health and safety of the City's residents to understand the seismic impacts of oil and gas extraction activities in the City," the motion said.
Environmental activists have pointed to swarms of earthquakes in Oklahoma, Arkansas and Ohio as evidence of the risk.


Did fracking play a role in LA quake

Of course, the oil and gas industry came out denying that there is any evidence fracking causes earthquakes.



"I think people are trying to take advantage of a naturally occurring incident in order to attack our industry," California Independent Petroleum Assn. CEO Rock Zierman said Tuesday.


There is plenty of evidence that shows fracking is causing earthquakes. Many officials now believe certain quakes were caused by specific wells of the wastewater disposal from all the chemically enhanced water used to pump into the fractures. In Arkansas, for example, regulators shut down four disposal wells after a 2011 series of earthquakes broke out near the town of Guy. One of those quakes was as large as a 4.7 on the Richter scale.

Since then, at least in Arkansas, companies are regulated to prove the drill site is geologically structured for a well and that the site is not near any known faults. There was no doubt in their minds that the four disposal wells had caused the seismic activity. Many other states are also imposing stricter regulations in light of the mounting evidence.

From 2000 to 2011 there was a six-fold increase in earthquakes through the United States. In the heartland, there used to be an average of only 21 seismic events per year. There were 50 quakes in 2009, 87 in 2010 and 134 in 2011. The numbers continue to climb.

Those proponents of the possibility that quakes are caused by fracking state that a study was done for 30 months beginning in 2010 that watched all the quakes in Oklahoma and checked to see if they were within five miles of a well and if they happened within three weeks of the start of the well. The study claims that only 2% of the quakes were within those start dates of an operation. Of course, the seismologist behind the study, John Laws, works for the oil and gas companies in the area. Laws claims that there isn’t enough pressure generated from a frack well to cause an earthquake. He said that it would take 10 frack jobs simultaneously to even match one-hundredth of what nature does when generating an earthquake. He claimed that this increase in earthquakes, up from 50 in Oklahoma in 2000 to over 1,000 quakes in 2010, is just an uptick in activity in the earth’s crust.

But, in recent studies, officials believe that it’s the wastewater disposal wells that may actually be causing the quakes and not the actual drilling for the gas.

Sharp rise in US earthqaukes almost certainly manmade



A U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) team has found that a sharp jump in earthquakes in America’s heartland appears to be linked to oil and natural gas drilling operations.
As hydraulic fracturing has exploded onto the scene, it has increasingly been connected to earthquakes. Some quakes may be caused by the original fracking — that is, by injecting a fluid mixture into the earth to release natural gas (or oil). More appear to be caused by reinjecting the resulting brine deep underground.
Last August, a USGS report examined a cluster of earthquakes in Oklahoma and reported:
Our analysis showed that shortly after hydraulic fracturing began small earthquakes started occurring, and more than 50 were identified, of which 43 were large enough to be located. Most of these earthquakes occurred within a 24 hour period after hydraulic fracturing operations had ceased.


The bottom line...Good for Angeleno's. At least they have some common sense council members looking out for them.
edit on 20-3-2014 by Rezlooper because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 01:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Rezlooper
 


Does God frack? I'd have to wait and hear for what the scientists have to say, but I'm pretty sure that what we felt was organic, grade-A earthquake.
edit on bThu, 20 Mar 2014 01:24:51 -0500am78America/Chicago3amThursday20America/Chicago by brazenalderpadrescorpio because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 01:48 AM
link   
reply to post by brazenalderpadrescorpio
 


And what does a EQ caused by fracking feel like?
And god fracks with the best of them, OG fracker



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 01:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Sremmos80
 


A fracking earthquake feels like: Ohhh...ohh...ohhhhh. Whereas a natural earthquake feels like: Ohhhh! Ohhh...ohhh...mmm; yummy. As you can tell, I've lived in L.A. a long time.
Just kidding. I don't know, I figure most earthquakes here are natural. It's probably some special interest group trying to stir up some controversy.



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 01:05 PM
link   

brazenalderpadrescorpio
reply to post by Sremmos80
 


A fracking earthquake feels like: Ohhh...ohh...ohhhhh. Whereas a natural earthquake feels like: Ohhhh! Ohhh...ohhh...mmm; yummy. As you can tell, I've lived in L.A. a long time.
Just kidding. I don't know, I figure most earthquakes here are natural. It's probably some special interest group trying to stir up some controversy.


Last month Oklahoma had over 400 earthquakes. I don't think anyone needs to stir up controversy with statistics like that. It's obvious it's fracking. Same as in Ohio. They don't normally have quakes like you guys in California, so sure, it's alittle harder to say whether one of your quakes was natural or manmade. Also, the fact that this fault that shook in LA has been quiet for so long and has had very little activity outside of that 4.4 raises a few questions...it was also very close to a drilling operation...my guess on this one...fracking!



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Rezlooper
 


Those fracking earthquakes in Oklahoma were nowhere near the magnitude of the earthquakes we get here (they were much, much smaller in magnitude; those in Oklahoma that is). I'm no scientist, but I would say that that earthquake was bound to manifest itself whether fracking or not. I would say that fracking may have made it a stronger magnitude, but it wasn't even a strong earthquake to start with. You should have been here during the Whittier earthquake, or the Northridge earthquake. Those were earthquakes.

However, I'm not saying that fracking is not a problem everywhere. I think that if fracking is being allowed to continue here in California, at that future time, we will for sure have a problem. So it wouldn't hurt to nip it in the bud while we still can.



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 03:14 PM
link   

brazenalderpadrescorpio
reply to post by Rezlooper
 


Those fracking earthquakes in Oklahoma were nowhere near the magnitude of the earthquakes we get here (they were much, much smaller in magnitude; those in Oklahoma that is). I'm no scientist, but I would say that that earthquake was bound to manifest itself whether fracking or not. I would say that fracking may have made it a stronger magnitude, but it wasn't even a strong earthquake to start with. You should have been here during the Whittier earthquake, or the Northridge earthquake. Those were earthquakes.

However, I'm not saying that fracking is not a problem everywhere. I think that if fracking is being allowed to continue here in California, at that future time, we will for sure have a problem. So it wouldn't hurt to nip it in the bud while we still can.



www.examiner.com...
This one was 5.7... that is a good one even for CA..

What makes you so sure that that earthquake was bond to happen regardless of fracking?

And what makes you think that if it will be a problem in the future that it is not a problem now?



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Rezlooper
 


How deep does fracking go?

How deep was the epicenter of the earthquake?

Was there fracking during the 1906 San Francisco earthquake?
Was there fracking during the New Madrid quake of 1811?


Not buying it.



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 03:40 PM
link   
I'd give more credence to this if they had some actual evidence that there was some fracking going on in the vicinity of the fault. They don't; they just decided that must be it because they hadn't had any quakes there for a while. There is some pumping taking place, but pumping and fracking are different types of activity.



Earlier this year, the council voted to draft rules that would bar hydraulic fracturing, often referred to as “fracking,” acidizing and other kinds of well stimulation in Los Angeles until council members felt sure that Angelenos and the water they drink were safe from their effects. The risk of triggering earthquakes was among the dangers cited by Bonin and Koretz, who championed the move.

“All high-pressure fracking and injection creates ‘seismic events,’” the motion states. It added, “Active oil extraction activities are reportedly taking place on the Veteran’s Administration grounds in West Los Angeles, nearby the epicenter” of the Monday quake.


So, if activities are reportedly taking place ... are they or aren't they? Do they know or did they just vote on heresay?

However, it's a fault in a tectonically active zone where quakes have been known to happen naturally in the past.



Seismologist Lucy Jones, a USGS science advisor for risk reduction, said she would need to know much more about nearby pumping in the area, such as whether someone was changing the water pressure deep in the ground, to say whether it could have been a factor in the Monday temblor.

However, "my first impression is that sounds implausible," Jones said, "just because the earthquake was so deep. Induced earthquakes are almost always shallower than this."



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Sremmos80
This one was 5.7... that is a good one even for CA..


I thought they said it was a 4.4? 4.4 is not that strong. That's like a high-medium strength earthquake. At least for here in California.


What makes you so sure that that earthquake was bond to happen regardless of fracking?


That's not what I said. I said in my last comment that fracking may have contributed to the earthquake. That said, based on how strong the Oklahoma earthquakes were, and how strong this earthquake was, I believe that fracking was only partly to blame.


And what makes you think that if it will be a problem in the future that it is not a problem now?


I think it is a problem now, in a sense, as it relates to the future. I mentioned most of these things in my last post.



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 03:49 PM
link   
What I see is some frightened villagers.

The ground shook.

People got scared.

Some of the village elders blamed it on a witch!

So now the villagers have gathered with torches and pitch-forks to kill a witch because she made the gound shake.

Doesn't matter if it was the witch or not.

The villagers wanna kill something!



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by brazenalderpadrescorpio
 





I thought they said it was a 4.4? 4.4 is not that strong. That's like a high-medium strength earthquake. At least for here in California.


Would of saved you some confusion if you clicked the link i gave you...
It was a 5.7 out in OK




I'm no scientist, but I would say that that earthquake was bound to manifest itself whether fracking or not.


You sure you didn't say this sentence in your previous post?
You did then go on to say in the next sentence that the fracking could have increased that magnitude of it, but you did in fact say this EQ was bound to happen, fracking or not
edit on thThu, 20 Mar 2014 15:52:58 -0500America/Chicago320145880 by Sremmos80 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 03:52 PM
link   
"never let a good trembler go to waste…" -Rahm Emmanuel

just another opportunity to pander to constituencies in a community that has endured EQ's for decades and decades.

pathetic really.



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Sremmos80
Would of saved you some confusion if you clicked the link i gave you...
It was a 5.7 out in OK


My bad. Yeah, that is pretty strong. Especially for Oklahoma.


brazenalderpadrescorpio
I'm no scientist, but I would say that that earthquake was bound to manifest itself whether fracking or not.



You sure you didn't say this sentence in your previous post?
You did then go on to say in the next sentence that the fracking could have increased that magnitude of it, but you did in fact say this EQ was bound to happen, fracking or not


I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. I believe that the earthquake was partly caused by fracking, and partly caused by natural reasons.
edit on bThu, 20 Mar 2014 17:05:03 -0500pm78America/Chicago3pmThursday20America/Chicago by brazenalderpadrescorpio because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 06:23 PM
link   

beezzer
reply to post by Rezlooper
 


How deep does fracking go?

How deep was the epicenter of the earthquake?

Was there fracking during the 1906 San Francisco earthquake?
Was there fracking during the New Madrid quake of 1811?


Not buying it.


Think you're missing the point there Beez, how many earthquakes were taking place in Oklahoma in 1906 or in 1811? But, here and now, 2014, there were over 400 in one month in Oklahoma. The suggestion isn't that suddenly, a California quake must be due to fracking...no, it's that this particular quake may be due to fracking because there is extraction activity nearby and the actual location of this quake hasn't had activity in a thousand years.

Most fracking is about a mile down. Most frack-induced quakes are pretty shallow, but this LA quake was 12 miles deep and that is one reason some dispute that it was caused by fracking, but at the same time, there aren't fault lines in OK. This quake in LA was on a fault, so maybe that it why it was deeper, but 12 miles is still pretty shallow.

You don't believe that the quakes in OK are the result of fracking? Or, are you referring to this LA quake?
edit on 20-3-2014 by Rezlooper because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Rezlooper
 


No, they don't even know if the activity taking place is fracking activity. They do pumping there, but do they do fracking?

Also, the quake is different than the fracking quakes in OK. Those are shallow; this one was deep.

Also, this is an area that historically has earthquakes.

So, are we now to assume that all earthquakes are fracking earthquakes ... until they aren't?



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 06:37 PM
link   
I'm gonna say I doubt it. It is just some politicians trying to score points with their base voters. The VA area where they do the pumping is on the other side of some pretty significant hills from the epicenter. This is SoCal, we kind of are known for our earthquakes.



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Rezlooper
 


What do you mean Oklahoma has no faults?



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Rezlooper
 


Let's take a look at good old Oklahoma shall we.


The New Madrid, Missouri, earthquakes of 1811 and 1812 probably were the earliest historical tremors felt in the area that is now eastern Oklahoma (then part of Arkansas Territory). Before Oklahoma became a state, the earliest documented earthquake epicenter within its current boundaries occurred on October 22, 1882, probably near Fort Gibson, Indian Territory, although the precise location cannot be precisely determined. The Cherokee Advocate reported that at Fort Gibson "the trembling and vibrating were so severe as to cause door and window shutters to open and shut, hogs in pens to fall and squeal, poultry to run and hide, the tops of weeds to dip, [and] cattle to lowe." The first locatable earthquake in Oklahoma occurred near Jefferson, Grant County, on December 2, 1897. The largest known Oklahoma earthquake (with the possible exception of the Fort Gibson 1882 event) occurred near El Reno, Canadian County, on April 9, 1952. This magnitude 5.5 earthquake, as measured on the Richter Scale, caused a fifty-foot-long crack in the State Capitol Office Building in Oklahoma City. It was felt throughout Oklahoma and in parts of seven other states. The total felt area was approximately 140,000 square miles. Des Moines, Iowa, and Austin, Texas, were at the northern and southern limits, respectively.

OH, My Goodness, the Hogs in the pens, fell and squealed because the quake was so bad and the window shutters opened.
The best part is the fifty foot long crack in the Capital building.


In Oklahoma, ground motion from earthquakes is recorded at nine widely separated locations. The main recording and research facility, station TUL, is located near Leonard, Oklahoma, in southeastern Tulsa County. Approximately fifty minor earthquakes occur in Oklahoma each year, but only an average of one to two are reported felt. Prior to 1962 all fifty-nine earthquakes in Oklahoma were known either from historical accounts or from seismograph stations outside the state. Oklahoma's first seismographs were installed in late 1961. From 1962 through 1976, seventy additional earthquakes were added to the earthquake data base. In 1977 a state-wide network of seismograph stations was installed to improve earthquake detection and location. Over 1,550 additional earthquakes were located in Oklahoma from 1977 through 2002. Typical Oklahoma earthquake-magnitude values range from 1.8 to 2.5, and focal depths are generally shallow (less than three miles). Earthquakes have occurred in seventy-three of Oklahoma's seventy-seven counties. Only Washington, Nowata, Craig, and Adair counties have had no known earthquakes.

OK, Quakes
They felt a need to install more quake detecting devices ion 1977, so I think they my have a Quake Problem From Time To Time!
I just don't believe that everything Humans Do, Negatively Effect Earth, some things Yes, Hunting Whales and Baby Seals and Burning The Amazon Rain Forest, But Fraking,,,, and pumping water back in to the earth, if that was such a big problem, then why hasn't all the Glaciers that are melting and the water running deep in to the earth before exiting to the Oceans, why doesn't that cause more Earth Quakes.
Just Asking.



posted on Mar, 21 2014 @ 12:34 AM
link   

guohua
reply to post by Rezlooper
 


why hasn't all the Glaciers that are melting and the water running deep in to the earth before exiting to the Oceans, why doesn't that cause more Earth Quakes.
Just Asking.


It is...and other land subsidence events including sink holes, land cracks and land slides. Also, it's creating a heck of a lot more volcanic activity.





new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join