Investigating triggering mechanisms behind hydraulic fracturing-induced seismicity: Elastic stress transfer
- Tom Kettlety (School of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol) | James P. Verdon (School of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol) | Maximilian Werner (School of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol) | J Michael Kendall (School of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol)
- Document ID
- Society of Exploration Geophysicists
- 2018 SEG International Exposition and Annual Meeting, 14-19 October, Anaheim, California, USA
- Publication Date
- Document Type
- Conference Paper
- 2018. Society of Exploration Geophysicists
- Induced seismicity, Microseismic, Hydraulic fracturing, Geomechanics
- 0 in the last 30 days
- 18 since 2007
- Show more detail
In this study we investigate the potential driving mechanisms that lead to induced seismicity during hydraulic fracturing. Fluid processes (pore-pressure changes and poroelastic effects) are often considered to be the primary driver. However, some studies have suggested that elastic deformation, and the resulting stress interactions, may contribute to further seismicity. In this paper we use a dataset acquired during hydraulic fracturing to calculate elastic stress transfer during a period of fault activation and induced seismicity. We find that elastic stresses may have weakly promoted failure during the initial phase of activity. However, at later times, stress changes generally acted to inhibit further slip. These signals are further weakened once uncertainties in source mechanisms and other geomechanical parameters are taken into account. Given the estimated in situ stress field, relatively large increases in pore pressure are required to reach the Mohr-Coulomb failure envelope for these faults. We therefore hypothesise that in such scenarios the relatively smaller scale elastic stress transfer effects do not play a significant role.
Presentation Date: Tuesday, October 16, 2018
Start Time: 1:50:00 PM
Location: 208A (Anaheim Convention Center)
Presentation Type: Oral
|File Size||1 MB||Number of Pages||5|
Bao,X., andD. W.Eaton,2016,Fault activation by hydraulic fracturing in western Canada:Science,354,1406–1409,10.1126/science.aag2583.
Catalli,F.,A. P.Rinaldi,V.Gischig,M.Nespoli, andS.Wiemer,2016,The importance of earthquake interactions for injection-induced seismicity: Retrospective modeling of the Basel Enhanced Geothermal System:Geophysical Research Letters,43,4992–4999,10.1002/2016GL068932.
McGarr,A.,2014,Maximum magnitude earthquakes induced by fluid injection:Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth,119,1008–1019,10.1002/2013JB010597.
Pennington,C., andX.Chen,2017,Coulomb stress interactions during the MW 5.8 Pawnee sequence:Seismological Research Letters,88,1024–1031,10.1785/0220170011.
Schoenball,M.,F. R.Walsh,M.Weingarten, andW. L.Ellsworth,2018,How faults wake up: The Guthrie-Langston, Oklahoma earthquakes:The Leading Edge,37,100–106,10.1190/tle37020100.1.
Steacy,S.,D.Marsan,S. S.Nalbant, andJ.McCloskey,2004,Sensitivity of static stress calculations to the earthquake slip distribution:Journal of Geophysical Research,109,B04303,10.1029/2002JB002365.
Sumy,D. F.,E. S.Cochran,K. M.Keranen,M.Wei, andG. A.Abers,2014,Observations of static Coulomb stress triggering of the November 2011 M5.7 Oklahoma earthquake sequence:Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth,119,1904–1923,10.1002/2013jb010612.
Vavrycuk,V.,2014,Iterative joint inversion for stress and fault orientations from focal mechanisms:Geophysical Journal International,199,69–77,10.1093/gji/ggu224.
Walsh,F. R., andM. D.Zoback,2016,Probabilistic assessment of potential fault slip related to injection induced earthquakes: Application to north-central Oklahoma, USA:Geology,44,991–994,10.1130/G38275.1.
Wang,R.,F.Lorenzo-Martín, andF.Roth,2006,PSGRN/PSCMP—A new code for calculating co- and post-seismic deformation, geoid and gravity changes based on the viscoelastic-gravitational dislocation theory:Computers and Geosciences,32,527–541,10.1016/j.cageo.2005.08.006.