Seismic Moment Evolution During Hydraulic Stimulations

Bentz, Stephan; Kwiatek, Grzegorz; Martínez‐Garzón, Patricia; Bohnhoff, Marco; Dresen, Georg

doi:10.1029/2019gl086185

Cited by 34 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 42 publications

(87 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is also supported by the observed induced seismicity correlated with variation of waste‐water injection rate in Oklahoma (Langenbruch & Zoback, 2016) and by the recent successful field tests of controlling seismic activity in EGS projects (Kwiatek et al, 2019) by adjusting injection parameters during a pressure‐controlled, stable injection phase. The monitored response of linear moment release with ongoing injected volume for field projects is believed to be indicative of stable rupture (Bentz et al, 2020), which is in agreement with our experimental results.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Based on an average stress drop of about 26 MPa during entire fluid injection, the total seismic energy radiated in our tests corresponds to about 1.6 × 10 −3 J. This results in a seismic injection efficiency (the ratio of seismic energy to hydraulic energy) of about 10 −5 , consistent with the reported range from laboratory hydraulic fracture experiments (Goodfellow et al, 2015) and field‐scale fluid injection operations (Bentz et al, 2020; Kwiatek et al, 2018).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 86%

“…Note that the seismic moment is determined either from radiated seismic waves during in situ and field tests or from the radiated acoustic emission events during laboratory tests. The data sets of field‐scale hydraulic stimulation projects are from Bentz et al (2020). The collected projects include Basel, Berlin geothermal field (BGF), Cooper Basin, German deep scientific drilling hole (KTB), Paralana, Pohang, Soultz‐sous‐Forêts, and Helsinki.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is widely acknowledged that fluid injection into the subsurface may induce earthquakes, as reported from waste‐water disposal operations (Keranen et al, 2014), hydraulic fracturing in shale formations (Ellsworth, 2013), or in enhanced geothermal system (EGS) projects (Bentz et al, 2020). Fluid injection causes seismicity by diffusion of a pore pressure pulse (Shapiro & Dinske, 2009; Shapiro et al, 2002) and through poroelastic coupling to the rock matrix (Goebel et al, 2016, 2017; Segall & Lu, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the majority of past and present field‐scale hydraulic stimulation projects, the trends of cumulative seismic moment with injected volume roughly show a linear relation but commonly remain below the upper bound of McGarr's model (Bentz et al, 2020). Interestingly, the corresponding slopes of maximum observed seismic moment versus cumulative injected volume in a double logarithmic plot range from 1 to 1.5 (Bentz et al, 2020), as predicted by the models of McGarr (2014) and Galis et al (2017). This strongly suggests that the seismicity evolves in a stable way, at least for some period of the injection.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Injection‐Induced Seismic Moment Release and Laboratory Fault Slip: Implications for Fluid‐Induced Seismicity

Wang

Kwiatek

Rybacki

et al. 2020

Geophysical Research Letters

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding the relation between injection-induced seismic moment release and operational parameters is crucial for early identification of possible seismic hazards associated with fluid-injection projects. We conducted laboratory fluid-injection experiments on permeable sandstone samples containing a critically stressed fault at different fluid pressurization rates. The observed fluid-induced fault deformation is dominantly aseismic. Fluid-induced stick-slip and fault creep reveal that total seismic moment release of acoustic emission (AE) events is related to total injected volume, independent of respective fault slip behavior. Seismic moment release rate of AE scales with measured fault slip velocity. For injection-induced fault slip in a homogeneous pressurized region, released moment shows a linear scaling with injected volume for stable slip (steady slip and fault creep), while we find a cubic relation for dynamic slip. Our results highlight that monitoring evolution of seismic moment release with injected volume in some cases may assist in discriminating between stable slip and unstable runaway ruptures. Plain Language Summary Anthropogenic earthquakes caused by fluid injection have been reported worldwide to occur in the frame of waste-water disposal, CO 2 sequestration, and stimulation of hydrocarbon or deep geothermal reservoirs. To study the dynamics of injection-induced seismic energy release in a controlled environment, we performed laboratory fluid injection experiments on critically stressed high-permeability sandstone samples with a prefabricated fault. We monitored acoustic emission occurring during injection-induced fault sliding. We find that the total seismic deformation (expressed as total seismic moment) is related to total injected volume, independent of fault slip modes (i.e., dynamic slip, steady slip, and fault creep). Seismic moment release rate roughly scales with fault slip velocity. In our experiments, the fluid pressure front migrates faster than the rupture front by about 5 orders of magnitude, resulting in fault slip within a zone of homogeneous fluid overpressure. We find that cumulative seismic moment scales linearly with the injected volume for stable slip (steady slip and fault creep), while it follows a cubic relation for dynamic slip. Our experimental results suggest that the deviation of cumulative moment release with injected volume from a linear trend in practice might be a sign for potential seismic risk. This may be considered in modifying current injection strategies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Injection‐Induced Seismic Moment Release and Laboratory Fault Slip: Implications for Fluid‐Induced Seismicity

Wang

Kwiatek

Rybacki

et al. 2020

Geophysical Research Letters

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Fluid-induced anthropogenic and natural earthquake swarms driven by aseismic slip

Danré

Barros

Cappa

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anthropogenic fluid injections at depth induce seismicity which is generally organized as swarms, clustered in time and space, with moderate magnitudes. Earthquake swarms also occur naturally in different tectonic contexts. While some similarities between natural and injection-induced swarms have already been observed, whether they are driven by the same mechanism is still an open question. Indeed, they are commonly related to fluid pressure processes, while recent observations suggest the presence of aseismic slip driving seismicity. Based on such observations, we propose a simple model that combines fluid and aseismic processes, in which seismicity is triggered by fluid-induced aseismic slip. The model reconciles the seismicity migration observed in natural and anthropogenic swarms, and allows us to quantify the seismic-to-total moment ratio. By validating our approach using 22 earthquake swarms, both from natural and anthropogenic origins, our findings provide a generic explanation of the swarm driving process.

show abstract

Limited earthquake interaction during a geothermal hydraulic stimulation in Helsinki, Finland

Kwiatek

Martínez‐Garzón

Davidsen

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geothermal energy is considered an important and growing source of low-carbon-footprint energy. Development of deep Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS) using massive fluid injection (hydraulic fracturing) to improve reservoir permeability often leads to the occurrence of induced seismicity (e.g., Majer et al., 2012). Large earthquakes associated with anthropogenic fluid injection activities such as in Basel, Switzerland (e.g., Giardini, 2009)

show abstract

Seismic Moment Evolution During Hydraulic Stimulations

Cited by 34 publications

References 42 publications

Injection‐Induced Seismic Moment Release and Laboratory Fault Slip: Implications for Fluid‐Induced Seismicity

Injection‐Induced Seismic Moment Release and Laboratory Fault Slip: Implications for Fluid‐Induced Seismicity

Fluid-induced anthropogenic and natural earthquake swarms driven by aseismic slip

Limited earthquake interaction during a geothermal hydraulic stimulation in Helsinki, Finland

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About