Understanding injection-induced seismicity in enhanced geothermal systems: From the coupled thermo-hydro-mechanical-chemical process to anthropogenic earthquake prediction

Rathnaweera, T.D.; Wu, Weili; Ji, Yinlin; Gamage, Ranjith Pathegama

doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2020.103182

Cited by 101 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 132 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The moment‐volume relation observed in our experiments is drawn from the scenario of injection‐induced fault slip confined within a homogeneous pressurized region. In striking contrast to well‐controlled laboratory experiments, the geological setting of reservoir‐scale injection projects in many cases may be not properly confined and even some hidden faults nearby may not be known in advance (Eyre et al, 2019; Rathnaweera et al, 2020). Nevertheless, it appears that a linear relation of moment ‐ injected volume for stable slip is found in different geological settings by monitoring evolution of moment release at many field‐scale fluid injection projects (Figure 4).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…properly confined and even some hidden faults nearby may not be known in advance (Eyre et al, 2019;Rathnaweera et al, 2020). Nevertheless, it appears that a linear relation of momentinjected volume for stable slip is found in different geological settings by monitoring evolution of moment release at many field-scale fluid injection projects (Figure 4).…”

Section: Implications For Fluid-induced Seismicitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Wang

Kwiatek

Rybacki

et al. 2020

Geophysical Research Letters

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: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Implications For Fluid-induced Seismicitymentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Wang

Kwiatek

Rybacki

et al. 2020

Geophysical Research Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Verification of these results from hydrogeomechanical modeling studies (Jeanne et al, 2014; Maxwell et al, 2015; Rutqvist et al, 2015) will also be invaluable to ascertain the physical mechanisms involved in mitigation. These types of studies have been sparse in the HF earthquake literature; however, the modeling approaches from enhanced geothermal systems will likely be portable to HF‐induced earthquakes (Rathnaweera et al, 2020).…”

Section: Interpretations and Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hydraulic Fracturing‐Induced Seismicity

Schultz

Skoumal

Brudzinski

et al. 2020

Reviews of Geophysics

256

176

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…Even though no earthquake prediction methods are currently reliable [91] for induced seismicity, there are different approaches able to forecast the maximum magnitude of injection-induced earthquakes, as a fluid injection into geothermal reservoirs is manageable and mostly affects the regional stress fields. Accordingly, the damage level could be predicted [92]. This proves that, for facing the geohazards and avoiding unsafe buildings, it should be taken into account the assessment and mitigation of possible building structural vulnerabilities, mostly in seismic high-hazard areas (southern Europe for natural earthquakes and the rest of EU for induced ones) [90].…”

Section: Summary and Trends Of Floods Wildfires And Seismic Hazards mentioning

confidence: 97%

Major European Stressors and Potential of Available Tools for Assessment of Urban and Buildings Resilience

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent data show that there are intensifications of phenomena related to climate change, such as the increasing of heavy rains, more frequent and intense droughts connected with fires, and alterations of the local climatic conditions, including heat islands with consequent impacts on cities, districts, and buildings. Not only are natural hazards stressing Europe but also human-induced events like low-magnitude earthquakes as a direct cause of fracking or mining. This study aimed to investigate the significant stressors and summarize what impact is the most dangerous in each European country. There is a need to secure the operating conditions of urban infrastructures and to preserve a high-quality indoor environment of buildings. The main scope of this paper is to compare selected tools that evaluate the urban and building resilience and to assess their suitability, based on an analysis of natural and human-induced hazards in the European countries. The results represent a contribution to urban and architectural planning practice, and to the consistent implementation of measures to improve the resilience of the built environment by providing guidance as to which assessment tool is most suitable for each country.

show abstract

Understanding injection-induced seismicity in enhanced geothermal systems: From the coupled thermo-hydro-mechanical-chemical process to anthropogenic earthquake prediction

Cited by 101 publications

References 132 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

Hydraulic Fracturing‐Induced Seismicity

Major European Stressors and Potential of Available Tools for Assessment of Urban and Buildings Resilience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About