Fracking does it again!!! Smh

[JamesB]

Originally Posted by Ariu

An earthquake is a sudden and violent shaking of the ground, as a result of movements within the earth's crust or as result of volcanic action. In north America usually occurs at 4 - 20 km depth.

Hydraulic fracturing is a process in which liquid or sometines gas is injected at high-pressure into an oil - or gas-bearing rock formation to create a network of fractures. These fractures are designed to be contained within formation up to 100 - 150m in thickness at 1000 - 3000m in depth.

Now, the sudden breakdown of a formation during fracking, can cause a seismograph to register shaking of the ground in the surface, but this is not a movement of earth crust, or a slippage of formations in regard with each other. If this would be the case, we would have loss of wellbore integrity and and casing damage on a massive scale in nearby wells.

A seismograph can precisely determine the depth and the epicenter of an earthquake. They are giving the epicenter but not the depth. Why?
CBC must follow up and publish the investigation findings on this matter, which I doubt they will do.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46403405
Depth 40.9km
Those are some deep wells!

Ft St John was 5km depth: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthqua...hy6d/executive

[CBintheNorth]

A good read on the topic.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ticle37656253/

And if the Globe is not your cup of tea, here's a few paragraphs from our very own AER with a couple of supporting links.
https://resource.aer.ca/stories/a-de...x-creek-quakes.

Again, not saying that a frac is what set off this one in FSJ, but it can't be ruled out without further research.
For those people in FSJ I really hope there's no link, because the snowflakes to the Southwest will shut down production in the whole province.

[Ariu]

Ha,
depth: 5.1km
Time: 1.27 (UTC) 5:27pm PST

I doubt the operators are performing fracs so late in the afternoon and how a frac (most likely Montney) at +/-1500m can cause an 4.4M earth quake with epicenter at 5100m.
Speaking about fake news.

[CBintheNorth]

Originally Posted by Ariu

Ha,
depth: 5.1km
Time: 1.27 (UTC) 5:27pm PST

I doubt the operators are performing fracs so late in the afternoon and how a frac (most likely Montney) at +/-1500m can cause an 4.4M earth quake with epicenter at 5100m.
Speaking about fake news.

You've never seen a frac start at 6pm? Never seen one go for 3 days straight? Ever been near a frac?
The rest of your info has merit, except even Montney plays can hit 3kms+ lately, so maybe not really...

[EZM]

Originally Posted by 6.5 shooter

Are you suggesting that a little hole in the ground pressured up to a couple hundred pounds is enough to cause these great big old planet to loose its mind and fall apart ??:

The fact is Fracking can, and does occasionally cause earthquakes.

Where a fracture occurs (and at what depth), although localised, can be a far from where an event can occur (sometimes much deeper and in many km's away).

The overwhelming majority of these seismic events are shallow depth inclusions that do no significant damage.

There is little evidence to suggest fracking will, or will not, trigger a larger (and more destructive) event.

My point (and insinuating question) is simple. Your comments seem to purposefully deny data driven scientific facts rendered by qualified people like geologists and seismologists.

Fracking will cause seismic activities including earthquakes.

Having said that they are not major issues to warrant serious concern.

I am smart enough to know that there are people more qualified and smarter than me that are experts in these areas.

I am smart enough to read and understand.

Denying something or purposely discounting something just because it doesn't suit me is ignorant and insolent.

And ........ before you launch another attack on me, and my opinion, which is based on reality and not convenient fantasy, consider this ....

For most of my career, oil and gas (and fracking specifically) was the source of my income, and, as a result, I have no motivation to make this issue any bigger (or more overblown) than it is ..... trust me ........ BUT I do deal in reality, accept facts, and understand science.

[EZM]

Originally Posted by Ariu

Ha,
depth: 5.1km
Time: 1.27 (UTC) 5:27pm PST

I doubt the operators are performing fracs so late in the afternoon and how a frac (most likely Montney) at +/-1500m can cause an 4.4M earth quake with epicenter at 5100m.
Speaking about fake news.

The relation of how deep the target area is, to where an seismic event can occur, absolutely can be many km's away (or many km's deeper).

In major events (unrelated to fracking) like earthquakes on the west coast, a shift can occur at one point yet the earthquake's epicentre can be 30-40 km away.

[Woolyoldbugger]

There are some guys on here who wont accept facts if it goes against what they hold dear. Be it oil, gun laws, the right to hate and hassle. Im certain that to them the Earth is flat and they dont vax their kids. Earthquakes are a naturally occurring part of the living organism we call home. It is always adjusting itself to thecforces in and around it. Alberta has Earthquakes everyday with Rocky Mtn House and Hinton experiencing the biggest and most on a day by day average. Does Fracking cause Earthquakes absolutely! Thats not the worst thing as mentioned earlier it is the destruction of aquafirs and clean drinkng water that is going to be worth way more than oil ever has. We cant drink oil!

[Grizzly Adams]

Originally Posted by Woolyoldbugger

There are some guys on here who wont accept facts if it goes against what they hold dear. Be it oil, gun laws, the right to hate and hassle. Im certain that to them the Earth is flat and they dont vax their kids. Earthquakes are a naturally occurring part of the living organism we call home. It is always adjusting itself to thecforces in and around it. Alberta has Earthquakes everyday with Rocky Mtn House and Hinton experiencing the biggest and most on a day by day average. Does Fracking cause Earthquakes absolutely! Thats not the worst thing as mentioned earlier it is the destruction of aquafirs and clean drinkng water that is going to be worth way more than oil ever has. We cant drink oil!

Unfortunately, water is mostly a use it or lose it resource, the earth is constantly creating more. Problem with fresh water is really about distribution. Just north of here, they had a 7 mile pipeline taking water out of the Little Red Deer River. Don't think that affected the river at all.

Grizz

[The Elkster]

Originally Posted by CBintheNorth

I think most people would lose their minds if they saw how much water (a lot of it fresh) got pumped down hole.
I've watched 30,000m3 (yes, 30,000,000 litres) poseidons of fresh water get drained to nothing. Gone.
While fracking may cause an earthquake here or there, the real problem I believe, is how much fresh water we're pumping down hole.
That should be a much greater concern to people.

Exercise for you. Calculate how much oil and gas on average is produced from said wells then calculate how much water vapor is produced from combusting those hydrocarbon products. I think you'll find the more water is produced combusting those products than lost during fracing but go out and run the numbers then let us know. I've done back of the envelope calc's for gas wells and it definitely came out in favor of more net surface water.

I think the earth quake issue is valid and yet irrelevant at the same time. How many of the earth quakes attributed to oil have lead to massive disruption/damage? I think NONE. Cripes even surface blasting results in measurable seismic activity. So one should be saying "is this something we should be concerned about? Its pretty clear the energy used in fracing specially cumulatively is enough to cause a measurable quake BUT what does that really mean. The only way the limited energy frac (limited energy in relation to natural earth forces) is going to cause a catastrophic quake is if it acts as the final straw trigger to an already unstable fault line. As someone said previously, if anything this should actually minimize the risk of an energy buildup and a resulting major fault slip/strike quake later on. If you asked a quake specialist what they might possibly do to prevent THE BIG ONE I'm pretty sure the first thing they'd say is try to proactively relieve the tectonically building fault pressure by allowing/causing controlled small quakes rather than doing nothing and allowing one large pressure event to build.

IMO this is a massive case of not putting things into context. The media once again is most to blame for this misdirection. What green group hell bent on killing oil isn't going to jump on a chance to vilify O&G by any means including partial facts. And what media outlet won't disproportionately pander to a special interest groups and give them a voice way out of proportion to their numbers?

That is my 2 cents.

[CBintheNorth]

Originally Posted by The Elkster

Exercise for you. Calculate how much oil and gas on average is produced from said wells then calculate how much water vapor is produced from combusting those hydrocarbon products. I think you'll find the more water is produced combusting those products than lost during fracing but go out and run the numbers then let us know. I've done back of the envelope calc's for gas wells and it definitely came out in favor of more net surface water.

I think the earth quake issue is valid and yet irrelevant at the same time. How many of the earth quakes attributed to oil have lead to massive disruption/damage? I think NONE. Cripes even surface blasting results in measurable seismic activity. So one should be saying "is this something we should be concerned about? Its pretty clear the energy used in fracing specially cumulatively is enough to cause a measurable quake BUT what does that really mean. The only way the limited energy frac (limited energy in relation to natural earth forces) is going to cause a catastrophic quake is if it acts as the final straw trigger to an already unstable fault line. As someone said previously, if anything this should actually minimize the risk of an energy buildup and a resulting major fault slip/strike quake later on. If you asked a quake specialist what they might possibly do to prevent THE BIG ONE I'm pretty sure the first thing they'd say is try to proactively relieve the tectonically building fault pressure by allowing/causing controlled small quakes rather than doing nothing and allowing one large pressure event to build.

IMO this is a massive case of not putting things into context. The media once again is most to blame for this misdirection. What green group hell bent on killing oil isn't going to jump on a chance to vilify O&G by any means including partial facts. And what media outlet won't disproportionately pander to a special interest groups and give them a voice way out of proportion to their numbers?

That is my 2 cents.

As long as the well isn't a duster you mean?

Well, I don't think the answer isn't as simple as you'd like it to be.
What you're neglecting to take into account in your "calcs" is that all that water being produced through combustion came to be by stripping oxygen out of the atmosphere, which was very likely already attached to a hydrogen molecule (given that our relative humidity bounces between 23% and 75%). Therefore the reaction produced 2 molecules of water, yes, but it also altered 2, rendering it neutral, or mostly neutral.
And you need to take into account how much of what comes out of the ground isn't destined to be burnt.

So in short, your question is impossible to answer as asked.
The rest of your post I mostly agree with.

[sikwhiskey]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

Was there earthquakes before fracking? CBC

Lol. There was a 7.0 south of Anchorage Alaska yesterday at 8:30 am. No mention of this in the propaganda spewed by the CBC? That’s a big fault line all the way to commyfornia. Trump wasn’t fracing up Alaska ?
The CBC is long overdue for public funding to be cut off completely.

[.257Weatherby]

Originally Posted by EZM

Are you suggesting earthquakes cannot be caused by Fracking?

Are you saying they can cause earthquakes?
I'm not a geologist , but one should consider the source ...when it comes from the CBC.
Was listening to the CBC on Friday morning and they said suggested it might be caused by fracking and by 1300 hrs they said it was definitively caused by fracking.
Rob

[sikwhiskey]

^^ 230-500+ quakes and after shocks in Alaska in the last 48 hrs. The largest was 44km below the earths crust .... ya fracing bad. Where does the CBC dream this up ? even worse is people believe this tripe time and time again...

[Kim473]

Reading some of the facts in this thread. no wonder that a lot of lakes in the province have record low water levels. Alberta will be a desert in 20 to 30 years.

[R3illy]

Originally Posted by sikwhiskey

^^ 230-500+ quakes and after shocks in Alaska in the last 48 hrs. The largest was 44km below the earths crust .... ya fracing bad. Where does the CBC dream this up ? even worse is people believe this tripe time and time again...

Whats got you so paranoid that you think fracking wouldnt cause an earthquake. If youd like we could sit for beers with my buddy whos leading the world in fracking/earthquake research.

I dont mind listening to the crazies conspiracy theories while having a few beers.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by EZM

The fact is Fracking can, and does occasionally cause earthquakes.

Where a fracture occurs (and at what depth), although localised, can be a far from where an event can occur (sometimes much deeper and in many km's away).

The overwhelming majority of these seismic events are shallow depth inclusions that do no significant damage.

There is little evidence to suggest fracking will, or will not, trigger a larger (and more destructive) event.

My point (and insinuating question) is simple. Your comments seem to purposefully deny data driven scientific facts rendered by qualified people like geologists and seismologists.

Fracking will cause seismic activities including earthquakes.

Having said that they are not major issues to warrant serious concern.

I am smart enough to know that there are people more qualified and smarter than me that are experts in these areas.

I am smart enough to read and understand.

Denying something or purposely discounting something just because it doesn't suit me is ignorant and insolent.

And ........ before you launch another attack on me, and my opinion, which is based on reality and not convenient fantasy, consider this ....

For most of my career, oil and gas (and fracking specifically) was the source of my income, and, as a result, I have no motivation to make this issue any bigger (or more overblown) than it is ..... trust me ........ BUT I do deal in reality, accept facts, and understand science.

I believe it is injection operations that build pressure along a fault. Extended pressure can cause a lubricating slip fracture earthquake.

Maybe a large area of tightly space hydrologic fracture stimulating could do something similar.

In this instance it is questionable and also coincidental to the big Alaska earthquake.

[EZM]

Originally Posted by .257Weatherby

Are you saying they can cause earthquakes?
I'm not a geologist , but one should consider the source ...when it comes from the CBC.
Was listening to the CBC on Friday morning and they said suggested it might be caused by fracking and by 1300 hrs they said it was definitively caused by fracking.
Rob

Yes, according to geologists and seismologists fracking can cause seismic events including earthquakes.

Regarding the CBC (or other news reports) ... We live in a time where we all need to be pragmatic, realistic, yet somewhat sceptical or cautious with our sources of information. Particularly, the spin media puts on things ...... who knows how credible each and every story might be or how they acquired their source information.

Maybe this "spin" issue has existed for years and we are now only becoming more aware of it, or maybe there's more spin ...... either way ...... kind of sad really.

[Woolyoldbugger]

Originally Posted by Grizzly Adams

Unfortunately, water is mostly a use it or lose it resource, the earth is constantly creating more. Problem with fresh water is really about distribution. Just north of here, they had a 7 mile pipeline taking water out of the Little Red Deer River. Don't think that affected the river at all.

Grizz

You must have missed that Science class. The earth does not create water! Every drop is the same drop since the beggining of time the more we pollute the less we have! I teach Science so please dont argue back.

[Grizzly Adams]

Originally Posted by Woolyoldbugger

You must have missed that Science class. The earth does not create water! Every drop is the same drop since the beggining of time the more we pollute the less we have! I teach Science so please dont argue back.

You must have missed the class, where they taught the water cycle, all fresh water originates as sea water and ends up back in the sea.

Grizz

[Woolyoldbugger]

Originally Posted by Grizzly Adams

You must have missed the class, where they taught the water cycle, all fresh water originates as sea water and ends up back in the sea.

Grizz

I teach the water cycle i get it. You said the earth is constantly "creating more water" ! Use the language better no water is created. The water cycle is the constant recycling of existing water. Not newly created! Therefore the more of it we pollute the less we have! End of story!

[Grizzly Adams]

Originally Posted by Woolyoldbugger

I teach the water cycle i get it. You said the earth is constantly "creating more water" ! Use the language better no water is created. The water cycle is the constant recycling of existing water. Not newly created! Therefore the more of it we pollute the less we have! End of story!

Sorry, it's creating Fresh Water. We owe our existence to using it.

Grizz

[CBintheNorth]

Originally Posted by Grizzly Adams

You must have missed the class, where they taught the water cycle, all fresh water originates as sea water and ends up back in the sea.

Grizz

I wonder how the produced water/flow-back ends up in the ocean once it's pumped down a disposal well? Do you truly know that it does?
They suck it out of lakes, rivers, creeks, wells, dugouts, mix it with all sorts of crap, pump it down hole, and then recover most of it. Most companies will use the same water multiple times and keep topping it off. But when it becomes too rank it goes to a disposal well/cavern. After that I have no idea what happens to it.
If you could tell me how it gets to the ocean that would be great.

[sikwhiskey]

Originally Posted by R3illy

Whats got you so paranoid that you think fracking wouldnt cause an earthquake. If youd like we could sit for beers with my buddy whos leading the world in fracking/earthquake research.

I dont mind listening to the crazies conspiracy theories while having a few beers.

Well 500 plus earthquakes on a major fault line with tsunami warnings, when the aftershock was felt in North Carolina, and immediately the CBC starts on the anti oil fracing bad propoganda, stinks like an agenda to me. Fracing may cause quakes, ok I’ll buy that even at 5km depth. Was it the cause of this particular one? I highly doubt it given what just happened 500 miles northwest. No paranoia on my part.
I’d love to sit down with you and your buddy for beers and go over some theories on fracing and quakes. My tinfoil hat is adjustable so it’s never on too tight

[Norwest Alta]

I’m unsure how long we’ve been fracking in Alberta or the bc peace but about 30 years ago we experienced a earthquake at my uncles by Dawson creek. It was a very weird feeling.

[dgreen]

Originally Posted by Grizzly Adams

Unfortunately, water is mostly a use it or lose it resource, the earth is constantly creating more. Problem with fresh water is really about distribution. Just north of here, they had a 7 mile pipeline taking water out of the Little Red Deer River. Don't think that affected the river at all.

Grizz

Water is a finite resource - it is cycled between rivers, lands, and oceans, although only about 3% of it freshwater. If we use more than is replenished each year then we'll run into trouble eventually.

The reason that pipeline likely didn't have much effect is probably because they would have restricted in how much water they could take based on a study as part of the assessment regulations involved in obtaining a permit to take water.

[6.5 shooter]

Originally Posted by CBintheNorth

I'll say it. Yes.

Ever been on location when they're fracking 4, 5, or even 10 wells, sending 4-6 million litres of water down each hole at 10 - 15,000 psi?
All that lubricity jammed into plate formations, sometimes in multiple locations within hours of each other and only miles apart, and you just can't imagine the plates shifting? Seriously?
I'm not saying every Quake is caused by fracking, but fracking definitely causes some quakes. It's been proven.
I actually had a customer on the location that set off the one in Fox Creek a couple years ago.

SOOOO when the earth starts to slow down in its rotation..... we (all the people in the world) can all face west and start running that would speed it up as again so it was just right and not lose time any more.?

[sikwhiskey]

Originally Posted by Norwest Alta

I’m unsure how long we’ve been fracking in Alberta or the bc peace but about 30 years ago we experienced a earthquake at my uncles by Dawson creek. It was a very weird feeling.

There was and have been big quakes all over AB and BC. One in particular off the cost of Vancouver Is. turned fairmont hot springs black. I could be inerror on the location of the quake as I read about it many years ago.
Last year or the year before there was a quake 10km below Lethbridge that I felt in the basement of my brothers house. Can’t remember if I started a post about here or not. Was a very weird feeling, lights moving, house creeking, dogs going bananas

[CBintheNorth]

Originally Posted by 6.5 shooter

SOOOO when the earth starts to slow down in its rotation..... we (all the people in the world) can all face west and start running that would speed it up as again so it was just right and not lose time any more.?

I don't think I'm alone in my sentiments when I ask this.......
WTH are you talking about?

I honestly have no idea what point you are trying to make with that ridiculous question.

[Kim473]

Originally Posted by 6.5 shooter

SOOOO when the earth starts to slow down in its rotation..... we (all the people in the world) can all face west and start running that would speed it up as again so it was just right and not lose time any more.?

Something like a Gerbil on a wheel. And when we all stop at the same time mid day, we can have 24 hrs of daylight for that big party we have planned . Hahaha.

[Skytop B]

I'm about to start frac operations 50km West of RMH - 2500mTVD - TD 4925mMD - BRACE YOURSELVES!!!!! LOL - ALL RECYCLED H2O