It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

5.8 Oklahoma Quake- Largest Ever Recorded- Occurred on Newly Discovered Fault and Prompts New Fears

page: 1
22
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
+5 more 
posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 12:14 AM
link   

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — A 5.8-magnitude earthquake and a series of smaller aftershocks in Oklahoma led to the discovery of a new fault line and stoked fears among some scientists about activity along other unknown faults that could be triggered by oil and gas wastewater that's being injected deep underground.

State and federal regulators on Monday said 32 disposal wells in northeastern Oklahoma must shut down because they are too near the newly discovered fault line that produced the state's strongest earthquake on record on Sept. 3.

Jeremy Boak, head of the Oklahoma Geological Survey, said it's possible that a large "pulse" of disposed wastewater is slowly moving deep underground and triggered the temblor along the new fault located near the town of Pawnee, farther east than most of the previous earthquake activity in Oklahoma.

"My inclination is to worry about the (fault) we don't know about yet, more so than about another very large earthquake in this area," Boak said. "My general feeling is that the rate of earthquakes is declining. I'm more concerned, I think, about whether there's another one of these faults out here that is cued up and ready to go."


More at link:
bigstory.ap.org...

A tough geologic problem rears its ugly head once again, as scientists struggle to determine the source of all these quakes, and now this latest 5.8 that occurred- apparently on a new fault. As the largest quake ever recorded in OK, it has many scientists very concerned about what the future holds- not only for residents, but also for oil and natural gas companies who are now struggling to deal with the issue of having the state shut down or seriously reduce their output.

While my concern is more for the residents, one cannot overlook the fact that many of the residents themselves will be affected not just from the potential damaging earthquakes, but from loss of jobs as well. So it is a multi point problem, with no clear cut answers. The state had already reduced or shut down many wells in the earthquake prone areas, and for a while it "seemed" to help lessen the rate of occurrence. But it just seemed that way.

The 5.8 changed all that again, and may be an indicator that the deep damage has already been done. It may not be able to be "undone". And yet still, there is the lingering reality that many areas which have had these wells are not showing much if any seismicity at all. One cannot overlook that either, so it still is not clear cut that the well water itself is causing the problem. It is one POSSIBLE cause.

Instead, it might also possibly be sheer intraplate pressure causing these quakes. Periods of active seismicty come and go all over the place, not just in OK. Did injection wells cause the 1812 massive quakes on the New Madrid? Now you know the answer to that. And I just mention that to illustrate the point. This is a tough geologic problem that could all of a sudden just stop one day once the pressure is relieved. Or it might stop once a fine, tolerable line level of well injection water is found- that slows or stops the quakes.

This is one case where I am seriously glad I am not a USGS scientist involved with this problem- because they are between a rock and a hard place on this.

ETA: And as far as new fears go, consider this- If we looked at just the largest quakes, the top end keeps getting higher in magnitude, not smaller. Where and how this ends one can only guess. It is possible this could be leading up to a very big, bad day- New Madrid style.

I also wonder, and have for some time, about the possibility of volcanism forming there. If a deep magma plume were under there, and was increasing in volume, it could be putting pressure from underneath on the area faults, causing them to activate. And also causing new ones to form- as might be the case with this latest big quake. This is a remote possibility, for sure, but it could be confirmed or denied through tomography studies. So far, I have not been able to find one that sheds any light on this conjecture...
edit on Tue Sep 13th 2016 by TrueAmerican because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 12:26 AM
link   
Take a notice at Earthquakes, storms, cloud cover, meteor impacts, etc., and notice that they sometimes come in waves. Then ask if there is a connection. I haven't heard anything about this one, but you will notice a rash of various stuff going on last week or so, also increase in UFO sightings...dot dot dot.

New fault line you say? Groovy...



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 12:48 AM
link   
It's from fracking. Like the 5.6 one recently.



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 12:52 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueAmerican

It's most definitely getting worse

Check out the animation update

I posted this a year or two ago ..and now it's much worse
earthquake.usgs.gov...
a reply to: reldra
I don't think so...see my numerous threads. And replies to threads like this. I've even overlaid the frack sites with the eq centers and they don't line up I'll link the thread I did on it later ... Time to eat
edit on am920163012America/ChicagoTue, 13 Sep 2016 00:59:18 -0500_9000000 by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 01:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Another_Nut

It's nice to see someone else who understands why a necessary neutrality on the issue is warranted, given all the facts. Unlike the poster above you, who is prepared to PROVE, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that it is fracking causing this. Lol- when our best scientists can't for sure say one way or the other.

Now what do you suppose will happen if a major quake, 7+ was to hit along this new fault, or another one in the area? Would fracking have caused that too? No way in hell would I believe that. And seriously, for the people in OK's sakes, I don't want to find out the hard way- that it never was fracking all along, and that it is just a seismically activated area. A 7+ would virtually kill the "fracking caused it" crowd. And to be honest, I used to be In that camp. Now I am not sure at all. A 5.8 is high enough to be deemed a tectonic quake, with a necessary fault length to support that magnitude. Anything higher almost SURELY will be a tectonic cause.
edit on Tue Sep 13th 2016 by TrueAmerican because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 01:13 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueAmerican

Not only would it kill the industry and the nay sayers but it would kill many thousands of people

We build for tornados not earthquakes.

The major cities would shatter if a large magnitude quake happened
edit on am920163001America/ChicagoTue, 13 Sep 2016 01:14:14 -0500_9000000 by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)

edit on am920163001America/ChicagoTue, 13 Sep 2016 01:20:47 -0500_9000000 by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 01:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueAmerican
a reply to: Another_Nut

It's nice to see someone else who understands why a necessary neutrality on the issue is warranted, given all the facts. Unlike the poster above you, who is prepared to PROVE, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that it is fracking causing this. Lol- when our best scientists can't for sure say one way or the other.

Now what do you suppose will happen if a major quake, 7+ was to hit along this new fault, or another one in the area? Would fracking have caused that too? No way in hell would I believe that. And seriously, for the people in OK's sakes, I don't want to find out the hard way- that is never was fracking all along, and that it is just a seismically activated area. A 7+ would virtually kill the "fracking caused it" crowd. And to be honest, I used to be In that camp. Now I am not sure at all. A 5.8 is high enough to be deemed a tectonic quake, with a necessary fault length to support that magnitude. Anything higher almost SURELY will be a tectonic cause.


You see the daily earthquakes there. I had said previous to the 5.6 that the fracking would 'hit a nerve' and it did. Was felt in 5 states. Now it hit another.



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 01:20 AM
link   
That is scary as hell! I have never in my life experienced an earthquake. I worry about the poor people in these areas.



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 01:23 AM
link   
a reply to: reldra

You know, you might be able to run from the facts, but that doesn't make them go away. And the facts are that many MORE places in OK and elsewhere have been enduring fracking wells for years without so much as a peep from earthquakes. So please explain this problem, and how you are able to completely ignore it. If it weren't for that, I'd still be in the fracking camp with you.



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 01:24 AM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Please watch the animation I posted... The increase is exponential

It's so bad now that the usgs has gone from listing all quakes 2.0 and over to 3.0 and higher because the nrumber was approaching 20k earthquakes fast

Eta
Check out these threads
www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...


edit on am920163001America/ChicagoTue, 13 Sep 2016 01:32:17 -0500_9000000 by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 03:27 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueAmerican



In all, the 75,000 barrels a day of wastewater that was being injected in the area is being reduced to about 35,000 barrels a day, said Jim Marlatt with the oil and gas division of the Oklahoma Corporation Commission.


Hahaha, what?? "We're suddenly having all these problem earthquakes which we're pretty sure are from wastewater disposal and/or fracking... Let's keep doing it!" Seriously though, they've already initiated the chain reaction. Even completely stopping probably won't avoid near-term issues. You'd think...they'd think.



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 03:29 AM
link   
I'm going to hazard a guess here and suggest that perhaps some of these deposits being fracked are simply damned close to an ancient & formerly dormant fault, and that the fracking, by way of basic kinetic equal and opposite reaction common sense, just woke it up is all. For example, take stuff out, minute reaction. Put stuff back in, another minute reaction. Lather, rinse, repeat over time for more movement reaction. Ergo, this fault was jostled back into action.

Although the magma plume idea is also a good one and is worth a look. TA, could it boil down to something as small as a thin "river" under there?



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 05:28 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueAmerican

Kind of like when you see asphalt streets pot hole or get distorted,it means the substrate has been comprimised,in other words,keep washing out the bottom,soon the top will fall,that fracking is loosening the substrate so consequently,earth will be filling in the cracks,which can be buildings streets etc,scary part that area isn't built like in Calif to sesmic standards,a 7.0 or above could shake those states to the ground,and the history of past devistation could be worst disaster in natural history,I think they are poking the rattle snake with a stick IMO



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 05:50 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueAmerican

Hey TA,

Do you think it possible that Oklahoma activity is linked to any dormant glacial rebound from the Laurentide Ice Sheet? From memory, it stretched down to the Missouri river. As we know, 14'000 years is a snip in geological time.

Not basing this on anything other than a thought that occured whilst perusing your thread! Im thinking a couple of km's thick of ice could cause all sorts of unkown faults quite low into the crust (in terms of shallow rather than deep quakes).



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 05:50 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueAmerican

Hey TA,

Do you think it possible that Oklahoma activity is linked to any dormant glacial rebound from the Laurentide Ice Sheet? From memory, it stretched down to the Missouri river. As we know, 14'000 years is a snip in geological time.

Not basing this on anything other than a thought that occured whilst perusing your thread! Im thinking a couple of km's thick of ice could cause all sorts of unkown faults quite low into the crust (in terms of shallow rather than deep quakes).



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 06:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flavian
a reply to: TrueAmerican

Hey TA,

Do you think it possible that Oklahoma activity is linked to any dormant glacial rebound from the Laurentide Ice Sheet?


I'd have to answer no to that based on two main reasons:
1) I don't believe from geologic records that it extended as far south as OK.
2) Even if it did, the edges of the ice sheet were much much thinner than the main core of it up north in Canada. Therefore, I don't believe the pressure would have been sufficient to cause this kind of belated post glacial rebound. But still, see reason number one.

One of the most confounding issues of these quakes is the huge area they are covering. I mean it's one thing to have a swarm in a relatively contained area. But these quakes are covering hundreds of square miles with no apparent rhyme or reason. Unless... Supervolcano underneath... Gah, perish the thought...



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 06:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Another_Nut

I was thinking the same thing that area is not built to handle earthquakes. If a big one hits that area I don't see a whole lot of standing building being left. Even if it does not kill a lot of people a far bit would be out of a job.



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 06:39 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueAmerican

Cheers TA. Like i said, it was a lazy thought whilst reading your thread! I hadn't factored in the thinner edges......d'oh! As to the extent though, Southern England (and Netherlands) is still sinking because Northern Scotland is still rising....

I would highly doubt supervolcano but then you never now. I am not aware of any magma plumes in the area though. If it is a supervolcano, it must the biggest one on the planet.....scary thought....



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 06:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Flavian

No prob, it was a valid question.

I am actually looking into see if any of the moment tensors from some of these quakes might possibly hint at ruptures caused from pressure upwards... From underneath... Way deep down. And on that note, it is possible that if deep enough, a magma plume may remain undetectable to seismic tomography for thousands of years to come... Until one fateful day...



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 06:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Nyiah
TA, could it boil down to something as small as a thin "river" under there?


A thin river that stretches hundreds of square miles in every direction? Lol. Well... I suppose anything's possible.

One of the other things that is at issue here is rain water. For thousands of years water has carved paths in and out of that rock down there. And yet only since the fracking have these quakes been occurring so frequently... Or... Have they? Who was around starting 120 years ago, before seismographs, to record seismicity below 3.5 in OK? For all we know, there could have been many many other episodic periods of this kind of seismicity there.

Nonetheless, your points are still valid- and believe me, I am not dismissing whatsoever the fracking crowd. I still have one foot in that pond...




top topics



 
22
<<   2 >>

log in

join