Geology Reports⌕ Search

Geology topics

Justin L. Rubinstein

Publications and source records attributed to Justin L. Rubinstein.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
USGS2019

Leakage and increasing fluid pressure detected in Oklahoma's wastewater disposal reservoir

The Arbuckle Group is the principal reservoir used for wastewater disposal in Oklahoma. In Osage County—a seismically quiet part of the state—continuous measurements of fluid pressure reveal that pressure in the reservoir is increasing by at least 5 kPa annually and sometimes at a much higher rate. Tidal analysis reveals that fluid level changes lead the local strain tides, with no apparent influence from transient permeability changes; this indicates a response that is inconsistent with flow in a radially extensive, confined reservoir. We investigate whether this is due to vertical flow to the water table, vertical flow within the Arbuckle, or local distortions from fractures. While none of these alternative models can fully explain both the observed tidal phases and amplitude ratios, the observed response to teleseismic waves supports a mechanism related to leakage rather than fracture effects. At this location fluid influx associated with wastewater disposal is offset by migration into surrounding layers, which include the Precambrian basement below. Thus, our findings suggest the need to monitor for changes in the induced seismicity hazard, while pore pressures increase in a leaky disposal reservoir.

Oklahoma↗
USGS2018

Seismology with dark data: Image-based processing of analog records using machine learning for the rangely earthquake control experiment

Before the digital era, seismograms were recorded in analog form and read manually by analysts. The digital era represents only about 25% of the total time span of instrumental seismology. Analog data provide important constraints on earthquake processes over the long term, and in some cases are the only data available. The media on which analog data are recorded degrades with time and there is an urgent need for cost‐effective approaches to preserve the information they contain. In this study, we work directly with images by constructing a set of image‐based methods for earthquake processing, rather than pursue the usual approach of converting analog data to vector time series. We demonstrate this approach on one month of continuous Develocorder films from the Rangely earthquake control experiment run by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). We scan the films into images and compress these into low‐dimensional feature vectors as input to a classifier that separates earthquakes from noise in a defined feature space. We feed the detected event images into a short‐term average/long‐term average (STA/LTA) picker, a grid‐search associator, and a 2D image correlator to measure both absolute arrival times and relative arrival‐time differences between events. We use these measurements to locate the earthquakes using hypoDD. In the month that we studied, we identified 40 events clustered near the injection wells. In the original study, Raleigh et al. (1976) identified only 32 events during the same period. Scanning without vectorizing analog seismograms represents an attractive approach to archiving these perishable data. We demonstrated that it is possible to carry out precision seismology directly on such images. Our approach has the potential for wide application to analog seismograms.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2018

Induced earthquake families reveal distinctive evolutionary patterns near disposal wells

The timing of events in seismic sequences can provide insights into the physical processes controlling fault slip. In southern Kansas, the rate of earthquakes rose rapidly starting in 2013 following expansion of energy production into the area, demanding the disposal of large volumes of wastewater into deep wells. Seismicity catalogs that are complete to low magnitudes can provide insights into the physical processes that induce seismicity near wastewater disposal. We develop a catalog of over 130,000 earthquakes recorded in southern Kansas from mid‐March 2014 through December 2017 by applying a matched filter algorithm to an original catalog of 5,831 template earthquakes. Detections have nearly identical waveforms to their associated template event and represent slip on nearly co‐located sections of a fault. We select template events with at least 100 associated detections and examine the characteristics of these prolific families of earthquakes. We find that families located close (<10 km) to areas with significant volumes of injected fluids have near‐Poissonian interevent times and the families remain active over longer durations. Families farther from high‐volume injection wells show strong clustering of interevent times and shorter sequence durations. We conclude that increasing pore fluid pressures from nearby disposal of large volumes of wastewater is the primary driver of these long duration episodes, with earthquake‐earthquake interactions driving sequences at greater distance from the wells.

Kansas↗
USGS2018

Tilt Trivia: A free multiplayer app to learn geoscience concepts and definitions

Today’s technology is opening up new ways to learn. Here, we introduce Tilt Trivia, a suite of quiz‐style, multiplayer games for use on mobile devices and tablets (Android or Apple) to help students learn simple definitions and facts. This mobile device game was built using the Unity engine and has a multiplayer functionality that runs seamlessly, all day, every day. A single game consists of 6–10 questions that are selected at random from a base suite of 13–33 questions. A single Tilt Trivia game takes 3–7 min to complete and allows up to five players to play simultaneously in the same game space. To begin, players select a topical avatar to represent them in the game. While in the competitive playing field, players are presented with a question and then they simply tilt their tablets until their avatar rests on the correct answer marker (i.e., true or false). Because the playing field is constantly tilting, keeping your avatar on the correct answer requires a continual counter‐tilting motion of the tablet to maintain your position within the game. A countdown timer is incorporated requiring players to answer the questions as quickly as possible. At the end of the game, a leaderboard displays the players’ scores and rankings, a metric that motivates repeat play. Players have the option of jostling other players off of the correct answer in the hopes of netting the highest score. The game is configurable to any topic and currently there are games for eight different topics (see Data and Resources ).

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2018

Hydromechanical earthquake nucleation model forecasts onset, peak, and falling rates of induced seismicity in Oklahoma and Kansas

The earthquake activity in Oklahoma and Kansas that began in 2008 reflects the most widespread instance of induced seismicity observed to date. We develop a reservoir model to calculate the hydrologic conditions associated with the activity of 902 saltwater disposal wells injecting into the Arbuckle aquifer. Estimates of basement fault stressing conditions inform a rate‐and‐state friction earthquake nucleation model to forecast the seismic response to injection. Our model replicates many salient features of the induced earthquake sequence, including the onset of seismicity, the timing of the peak seismicity rate, and the reduction in seismicity following decreased disposal activity. We present evidence for variable time lags between changes in injection and seismicity rates, consistent with the prediction from rate‐and‐state theory that seismicity rate transients occur over timescales inversely proportional to stressing rate. Given the efficacy of the hydromechanical model, as confirmed through a likelihood statistical test, the results of this study support broader integration of earthquake physics within seismic hazard analysis.

Oklahoma, Kansas↗
USGS2018

2018 one‐year seismic hazard forecast for the central and eastern United States from induced and natural earthquakes

This article describes the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 2018 one‐year probabilistic seismic hazard forecast for the central and eastern United States from induced and natural earthquakes. For consistency, the updated 2018 forecast is developed using the same probabilistic seismicity‐based methodology as applied in the two previous forecasts. Rates of earthquakes across the United States M &#x2265; 3.0 "> M ≥ 3.0 grew rapidly between 2008 and 2015 but have steadily declined over the past 3 years, especially in areas of Oklahoma and southern Kansas where fluid injection has decreased. The seismicity pattern in 2017 was complex with earthquakes more spatially dispersed than in the previous years. Some areas of west‐central Oklahoma experienced increased activity rates where industrial activity increased. Earthquake rates in Oklahoma (429 earthquakes of M &#x2265; 3 "> M ≥ 3 and 4 M &#x2265; 4 "> M ≥ 4 ), Raton basin (Colorado/New Mexico border, six earthquakes M &#x2265; 3 "> M ≥ 3 ), and the New Madrid seismic zone (11 earthquakes M &#x2265; 3 "> M ≥ 3 ) continue to be higher than historical levels. Almost all of these earthquakes occurred within the highest hazard regions of the 2017 forecast. Even though rates declined over the past 3 years, the short‐term hazard for damaging ground shaking across much of Oklahoma remains at high levels due to continuing high rates of smaller earthquakes that are still hundreds of times higher than at any time in the state’s history. Fine details and variability between the 2016–2018 forecasts are obscured by significant uncertainties in the input model. These short‐term hazard levels are similar to active regions in California. During 2017, M &#x2265; 3 "> M ≥ 3 earthquakes also occurred in or near Ohio, West Virginia, Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Illinois, Oklahoma, Kansas, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2018

The 2013–2016 induced earthquakes in Harper and Sumner Counties, southern Kansas

We examine the first four years (2013–2016) of the ongoing seismicity in southern Kansas using high‐precision locations derived from a local seismometer network. The earthquakes occur almost exclusively in the shallow crystalline basement, below the wastewater injection horizon of the Arbuckle Group at the base of the sedimentary section. Multiple lines of evidence lead us to conclude that disposal of wastewater from the production of oil and gas by deep injection is the probable cause for the surge of seismicity that began in 2013. First, the seismicity correlates in space and time with the injection. We observe increases in seismicity subsequent to increases in injection and decreases in seismicity in response to decreases in injection. Second, the earthquake‐rate change is statistically improbable to be of natural origin. From 1974 through the time of the injection increase in 2012, no M L "> M L 4 or larger earthquakes occurred in the study area, while six occurred between 2012 and 2016. The probability of this rate change occurring randomly is &#x223C; 0.16 % "> ∼ 0.16 % . Third, the other potential industrial drivers of seismicity (hydraulic fracturing and oil production) do not correlate in space or time with seismicity. Local geological conditions are important in determining whether injection operations will induce seismicity, as shown by absence of seismicity near the largest injection operations in the southwest portion of our study area. In addition to local operations, the presence of seismicity 10+ km from large injection wells indicates that regional injection operations also need to be considered to understand the effects of injection on seismicity.

Kansas↗
USGS2017

The effects of varying injection rates in Osage County, Oklahoma, on the 2016 Mw5.8 Pawnee earthquake

The 2016 M w 5.8 Pawnee earthquake occurred in a region with active wastewater injection into a basal formation group. Prior to the earthquake, fluid injection rates at most wells were relatively steady, but newly collected data show significant increases in injection rate in the years leading up to earthquake. For the same time period, the total volumes of injected wastewater were roughly equivalent between variable‐rate and constant‐rate wells. To understand the possible influence of these changes in injection, we simulate the variable‐rate injection history and its constant‐rate equivalent in a layered poroelastic half‐space to explore the interplay between pore‐pressure effects and poroelastic effects on the fault leading up to the mainshock. In both cases, poroelastic stresses contribute a significant proportion of Coulomb failure stresses on the fault compared to pore‐pressure increases alone, but the resulting changes in seismicity rate, calculated using a rate‐and‐state frictional model, are many times larger when poroelastic effects are included, owing to enhanced stressing rates. In particular, the variable‐rate simulation predicts more than an order of magnitude increase in seismicity rate above background rates compared to the constant‐rate simulation with equivalent volume. The observed cumulative density of earthquakes prior to the mainshock within 10 km of the injection source exhibits remarkable agreement with seismicity predicted by the variable‐rate injection case.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2017

2017 One‐year seismic‐hazard forecast for the central and eastern United States from induced and natural earthquakes

We produce a one‐year 2017 seismic‐hazard forecast for the central and eastern United States from induced and natural earthquakes that updates the 2016 one‐year forecast; this map is intended to provide information to the public and to facilitate the development of induced seismicity forecasting models, methods, and data. The 2017 hazard model applies the same methodology and input logic tree as the 2016 forecast, but with an updated earthquake catalog. We also evaluate the 2016 seismic‐hazard forecast to improve future assessments. The 2016 forecast indicated high seismic hazard (greater than 1% probability of potentially damaging ground shaking in one year) in five focus areas: Oklahoma–Kansas, the Raton basin (Colorado/New Mexico border), north Texas, north Arkansas, and the New Madrid Seismic Zone. During 2016, several damaging induced earthquakes occurred in Oklahoma within the highest hazard region of the 2016 forecast; all of the 21 moment magnitude ( M ) ≥4 and 3 M ≥5 earthquakes occurred within the highest hazard area in the 2016 forecast. Outside the Oklahoma–Kansas focus area, two earthquakes with M ≥4 occurred near Trinidad, Colorado (in the Raton basin focus area), but no earthquakes with M ≥2.7 were observed in the north Texas or north Arkansas focus areas. Several observations of damaging ground‐shaking levels were also recorded in the highest hazard region of Oklahoma. The 2017 forecasted seismic rates are lower in regions of induced activity due to lower rates of earthquakes in 2016 compared with 2015, which may be related to decreased wastewater injection caused by regulatory actions or by a decrease in unconventional oil and gas production. Nevertheless, the 2017 forecasted hazard is still significantly elevated in Oklahoma compared to the hazard calculated from seismicity before 2009.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2017

Oklahoma experiences largest earthquake during ongoing regional wastewater injection hazard mitigation efforts

The 3 September 2016, M w 5.8 Pawnee earthquake was the largest recorded earthquake in the state of Oklahoma. Seismic and geodetic observations of the Pawnee sequence, including precise hypocenter locations and moment tensor modeling, shows that the Pawnee earthquake occurred on a previously unknown left-lateral strike-slip basement fault that intersects the mapped right-lateral Labette fault zone. The Pawnee earthquake is part of an unprecedented increase in the earthquake rate in Oklahoma that is largely considered the result of the deep injection of waste fluids from oil and gas production. If this is, indeed, the case for the M 5.8 Pawnee earthquake, then this would be the largest event to have been induced by fluid injection. Since 2015, Oklahoma has undergone wide-scale mitigation efforts primarily aimed at reducing injection volumes. Thus far in 2016, the rate of M 3 and greater earthquakes has decreased as compared to 2015, while the cumulative moment—or energy released from earthquakes—has increased. This highlights the difficulty in earthquake hazard mitigation efforts given the poorly understood long-term diffusive effects of wastewater injection and their connection to seismicity.

Oklahoma↗
USGS2016

Far-field pressurization likely caused one of the largest injection induced earthquakes by reactivating a large pre-existing basement fault structure

The M w 5.1 Fairview, Oklahoma, earthquake on 13 February 2016 and its associated seismicity produced the largest moment release in the central and eastern United States since the 2011 M w 5.7 Prague, Oklahoma, earthquake sequence and is one of the largest earthquakes potentially linked to wastewater injection. This energetic sequence has produced five earthquakes with M w 4.4 or larger. Almost all of these earthquakes occur in Precambrian basement on a partially unmapped 14 km long fault. Regional injection into the Arbuckle Group increased approximately sevenfold in the 36 months prior to the start of the sequence (January 2015). We suggest far-field pressurization from clustered, high-rate wells greater than 12 km from this sequence induced these earthquakes. As compared to the Fairview sequence, seismicity is diffuse near high-rate wells, where pressure changes are expected to be largest. This points to the critical role that preexisting faults play in the occurrence of large induced earthquakes.

Geophysical Research Letters↗
USGS2016

A rare moderate‐sized (Mw 4.9) earthquake in Kansas: Rupture process of the Milan, Kansas, earthquake of 12 November 2014 and its relationship to fluid injection

The largest recorded earthquake in Kansas occurred northeast of Milan on 12 November 2014 ( M w 4.9) in a region previously devoid of significant seismic activity. Applying multistation processing to data from local stations, we are able to detail the rupture process and rupture geometry of the mainshock, identify the causative fault plane, and delineate the expansion and extent of the subsequent seismic activity. The earthquake followed rapid increases of fluid injection by multiple wastewater injection wells in the vicinity of the fault. The source parameters and behavior of the Milan earthquake and foreshock–aftershock sequence are similar to characteristics of other earthquakes induced by wastewater injection into permeable formations overlying crystalline basement. This earthquake also provides an opportunity to test the empirical relation that uses felt area to estimate moment magnitude for historical earthquakes for Kansas.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2016

Seismic‐hazard forecast for 2016 including induced and natural earthquakes in the central and eastern United States

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has produced a one‐year (2016) probabilistic seismic‐hazard assessment for the central and eastern United States (CEUS) that includes contributions from both induced and natural earthquakes that are constructed with probabilistic methods using alternative data and inputs. This hazard assessment builds on our 2016 final model ( Petersen et al. , 2016 ) by adding sensitivity studies, illustrating hazard in new ways, incorporating new population data, and discussing potential improvements. The model considers short‐term seismic activity rates (primarily 2014–2015) and assumes that the activity rates will remain stationary over short time intervals. The final model considers different ways of categorizing induced and natural earthquakes by incorporating two equally weighted earthquake rate submodels that are composed of alternative earthquake inputs for catalog duration, smoothing parameters, maximum magnitudes, and ground‐motion models. These alternatives represent uncertainties on how we calculate earthquake occurrence and the diversity of opinion within the science community. In this article, we also test sensitivity to the minimum moment magnitude between M 4 and M 4.7 and the choice of applying a declustered catalog with b =1.0 rather than the full catalog with b =1.3. We incorporate two earthquake rate submodels: in the informed submodel we classify earthquakes as induced or natural, and in the adaptive submodel we do not differentiate. The alternative submodel hazard maps both depict high hazard and these are combined in the final model. Results depict several ground‐shaking measures as well as intensity and include maps showing a high‐hazard level (1% probability of exceedance in 1 year or greater). Ground motions reach 0.6 g horizontal peak ground acceleration (PGA) in north‐central Oklahoma and southern Kansas, and about 0.2 g PGA in the Raton basin of Colorado and New Mexico, in central Arkansas, and in north‐central Texas near Dallas–Fort Worth. The chance of having levels of ground motions corresponding to modified Mercalli intensity (MMI) VI or greater earthquake shaking is 2%–12% per year in north‐central Oklahoma and southern Kansas and New Madrid similar to the chance of damage at sites in high‐hazard portions of California caused by natural earthquakes. Hazard is also significant in the Raton basin of Colorado/New Mexico; north‐central Arkansas; Dallas–Fort Worth, Texas; and in a few other areas. Hazard probabilities are much lower (by about half or more) for exceeding MMI VII or VIII. Hazard is 3‐ to 10‐fold higher near some areas of active‐induced earthquakes than in the 2014 USGS National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM), which did not consider induced earthquakes. This study in conjunction with the LandScan TM Database (2013) indicates that about 8 million people live in areas of active injection wells that have a greater than 1% chance of experiencing damaging ground shaking (MMI≥VI) in 2016. The final model has high uncertainty, and engineers, regulators, and industry should use these assessments cautiously to make informed decisions on mitigating the potential effects of induced and natural earthquakes.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2016

2016 one-year seismic hazard forecast for the Central and Eastern United States from induced and natural earthquakes

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has produced a 1-year seismic hazard forecast for 2016 for the Central and Eastern United States (CEUS) that includes contributions from both induced and natural earthquakes. The model assumes that earthquake rates calculated from several different time windows will remain relatively stationary and can be used to forecast earthquake hazard and damage intensity for the year 2016. This assessment is the first step in developing an operational earthquake forecast for the CEUS, and the analysis could be revised with updated seismicity and model parameters. Consensus input models consider alternative earthquake catalog durations, smoothing parameters, maximum magnitudes, and ground motion estimates, and represent uncertainties in earthquake occurrence and diversity of opinion in the science community. Ground shaking seismic hazard for 1-percent probability of exceedance in 1 year reaches 0.6 g (as a fraction of standard gravity [g]) in northern Oklahoma and southern Kansas, and about 0.2 g in the Raton Basin of Colorado and New Mexico, in central Arkansas, and in north-central Texas near Dallas. Near some areas of active induced earthquakes, hazard is higher than in the 2014 USGS National Seismic Hazard Model (NHSM) by more than a factor of 3; the 2014 NHSM did not consider induced earthquakes. In some areas, previously observed induced earthquakes have stopped, so the seismic hazard reverts back to the 2014 NSHM. Increased seismic activity, whether defined as induced or natural, produces high hazard. Conversion of ground shaking to seismic intensity indicates that some places in Oklahoma, Kansas, Colorado, New Mexico, Texas, and Arkansas may experience damage if the induced seismicity continues unabated. The chance of having Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) VI or greater (damaging earthquake shaking) is 5–12 percent per year in north-central Oklahoma and southern Kansas, similar to the chance of damage caused by natural earthquakes at sites in parts of California.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2015

Seismic hazard in the Nation's breadbasket

The USGS National Seismic Hazard Maps were updated in 2014 and included several important changes for the central United States (CUS). Background seismicity sources were improved using a new moment-magnitude-based catalog; a new adaptive, nearest-neighbor smoothing kernel was implemented; and maximum magnitudes for background sources were updated. Areal source zones developed by the Central and Eastern United States Seismic Source Characterization for Nuclear Facilities project were simplified and adopted. The weighting scheme for ground motion models was updated, giving more weight to models with a faster attenuation with distance compared to the previous maps. Overall, hazard changes (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years, across a range of ground-motion frequencies) were smaller than 10% in most of the CUS relative to the 2008 USGS maps despite new ground motion models and their assigned logic tree weights that reduced the probabilistic ground motions by 5&ndash;20%.

Earthquake Spectra↗
USGS2015

Interpretation of S waves generated by near-surface chemical explosions at SAFOD

A series of near-surface chemical explosions conducted at the San Andreas Fault Observatory at Depth (SAFOD) were recorded by high-frequency downhole receiver arrays in separate experiments in November 2003 and May 2005. The 2003 experiment involved &sim;100&thinsp;&thinsp;kg shots detonated along a 46-km-long line (Hole&ndash;Ryberg line) centered on SAFOD and recorded by 32 three-component geophones in the pilot hole between 0.8 and 2.0 km depth. The 2005 experiment involved &sim;36&thinsp;&thinsp;kg shots detonated at Parkfield Area Seismic Observatory (PASO) stations (at &sim;1&ndash;8&thinsp;&thinsp;km offset) recorded by 80 three-component geophones in the main hole between the surface and 2.4 km depth. These data sample the downgoing seismic wavefield and constrain the shallow velocity and attenuation structure, as well as the first-order characteristics of the source. Using forward modeling on a velocity structure designed for the near field, both observed P - and S -wave energy for the PASO shots are identified with the travel times expected for direct and/or reflected phases. Larger-offset recordings from shots along the Hole&ndash;Ryberg line reveal substantial SV and SH energy, especially southwest of SAFOD from the source as indicated by P -to- S amplitude ratios. The generated SV energy is interpreted to arise chiefly from P -to- S conversions at subhorizontal discontinuities. This provides a simple mechanism for often-observed low P -to- S amplitude ratios from nuclear explosions in the far field, as originating from strong near-field wave conversions.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗
USGS2015

Myths and facts on wastewater injection, hydraulic fracturing, enhanced oil recovery, and induced seismicity

The central United States has undergone a dramatic increase in seismicity over the past 6 years (Fig. 1), rising from an average of 24 M&ge;3 earthquakes per year in the years 1973&ndash;2008 to an average of 193 M&ge;3 earthquakes in 2009&ndash;2014, with 688 occurring in 2014 alone. Multiple damaging earthquakes have occurred during this increase including the 2011 M 5.6 Prague, Oklahoma, earthquake; the 2011 M 5.3 Trinidad, Colorado, earthquake; and the 2011 M 4.7 Guy‐Greenbrier, Arkansas, earthquake. The increased seismicity is limited to a few areas and the evidence is mounting that the seismicity in many of these locations is induced by the deep injection of fluids from nearby oil and gas operations. Earthquakes that are caused by human activities are known as induced earthquakes. Most injection operations, though, do not appear to induce earthquakes. Although the message that these earthquakes are induced by fluid injection related to oil and gas production has been communicated clearly, there remains confusion in the popular press beyond this basic level of understanding.

Seismological Research Letters↗