Hydraulic fracturing (HF) is a technique that is used for extracting petroleum resources from impermeable host rocks. In this process, fluid injected under high pressure causes fractures to propagate. This technique has been transformative for the hydrocarbon industry, unlocking otherwise stranded resources; however, environmental concerns make HF controversial. One concern is HF‐induced seismicity, since fluids driven under high pressure also have the potential to reactivate faults. Controversy has inevitably followed these HF‐induced earthquakes, with economic and human losses from ground shaking at one extreme and moratoriums on resource development at the other. Here, we review the state of knowledge of this category of induced seismicity. We first cover essential background information on HF along with an overview of published induced earthquake cases to date. Expanding on this, we synthesize the common themes and interpret the origin of these commonalities, which include recurrent earthquake swarms, proximity to well bore, rapid response to stimulation, and a paucity of reported cases. Next, we discuss the unanswered questions that naturally arise from these commonalities, leading to potential research themes: consistent recognition of cases, proposed triggering mechanisms, geologically susceptible conditions, identification of operational controls, effective mitigation efforts, and science‐informed regulatory management. HF‐induced seismicity provides a unique opportunity to better understand and manage earthquake rupture processes; overall, understanding HF‐induced earthquakes is important in order to avoid extreme reactions in either direction.

No abstract

This study investigated the utility of multistation waveform cross correlation to help discern induced seismicity. Template matching was applied to all Ohio earthquakes cataloged since the arrival of nearby EarthScope TA stations in late 2010. Earthquakes that were within 5 km of fluid injection activities in regions that lacked previously documented seismicity were found to be swarmy. Moreover, the larger number of events produced by template matching for these swarmy sequences made it easier to establish more detailed temporal and spatial relationships between the seismicity and fluid injection activities, which is typically required for an earthquake to be considered induced. Study results detected three previously documented induced sequences (Youngstown, Poland Township, and Harrison County) and provided evidence that suggests two additional cases of induced seismicity (Belmont/Guernsey County and Washington County). Evidence for these cases suggested that unusual swarm‐like behaviors in regions that lack previously documented seismicity can be used to help distinguish induced seismicity, complementing the traditional identification of an anthropogenic source spatially and temporally correlated with the seismicity. In support of this finding, we identified 17 additional cataloged earthquakes in regions of previously documented seismicity and away from disposal wells or hydraulic fracturing that returned very few template matches. The lack of swarminess helps to indicate that these events are most likely naturally occurring.

Wastewater disposal is generally accepted to be the primary cause of the increased seismicity rate in Oklahoma within the past decade, but no statewide analysis has investigated the contribution of hydraulic fracturing (HF) to the observed seismicity or the seismic hazard. Utilizing an enhanced seismicity catalog generated with multistation template matching from 2010 to 2016 and all available hydraulic fracturing information, we identified 274 HF wells that are spatiotemporally correlated with bursts of seismicity. The majority of HF‐induced seismicity cases occurred in the SCOOP/STACK plays, but we also identified prominent cases in the Arkoma Basin and some more complex potential cases along the edge of the Anadarko Platform. For HF treatments where we have access to injection parameters, modeling suggests that poroelastic stresses are likely responsible for seismicity, but we cannot rule out direct pore pressure effects as a contributing factor. In all of the 16 regions we identified, ≥75% of the seismicity correlated with reported HF wells. In some regions, >95% of seismicity correlated with HF wells and >50% of the HF wells correlated with seismicity. Overall, we found ~700 HF‐induced earthquakes with M ≥ 2.0, including 12 events with M 3.0–3.5. These findings suggest state regulations implemented in 2018 that require operators in the SCOOP/STACK plays to take action if a M > 2 earthquake could have a significant impact on future operations.

A series of earthquakes in 2011 near Youngstown, OH, has been a focal point for discussions of seismicity induced by a nearby wastewater disposal well. Utilizing an efficient waveform template matching procedure, the optimal correlation template to study the Youngstown sequence was identified by varying parameters such as the stations utilized, frequency passband, and seismogram length. A catalog composed of 566 events was identified between January 2011 and February 2014. Double-difference relocation refines seismicity to a ∼800 m linear streak from the Northstar 1 injection well to the WSW along the same strike as the fault plane of the largest event. Calculated Gutenberg-Richter b-values are consistent with trends observed in other regions with seismicity induced by fluid injection.