Skip to content

How big is a small earthquake? Challenges in determining microseismic magnitudes

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Standard

How big is a small earthquake? Challenges in determining microseismic magnitudes. / Kendall, J M; Butcher, Antony; Stork, Anna; Verdon, James; Luckett, R; Baptie, Brian .

In: First Break, Vol. 37, No. 2, 01.02.2019, p. 51-56.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Harvard

Kendall, JM, Butcher, A, Stork, A, Verdon, J, Luckett, R & Baptie, B 2019, 'How big is a small earthquake? Challenges in determining microseismic magnitudes', First Break, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 51-56.

APA

Vancouver

Author

Kendall, J M ; Butcher, Antony ; Stork, Anna ; Verdon, James ; Luckett, R ; Baptie, Brian . / How big is a small earthquake? Challenges in determining microseismic magnitudes. In: First Break. 2019 ; Vol. 37, No. 2. pp. 51-56.

Bibtex

@article{bbba766ce06d452d9602d4148439fb1f,
title = "How big is a small earthquake? Challenges in determining microseismic magnitudes",
abstract = "Earthquake magnitudes are surprisingly difficult to estimate accurately. This is especially true when evaluating small earthquakes: for example, those caused by human activities such as shale gas stimulation, CO2 and waste water storage, and enhanced geothermal systems. Uncertainties are created by a range of issues including: which ‘magnitude’ scale is used; what type of instrument records the earthquake; how the instruments are deployed; and the heterogeneity of the Earth between the source and the receivers. Errors can be larger than an order of magnitude in scale. For very small earthquakes this is not usually of much concern. However, occasionally, larger earthquakes induced by human activity are felt at the surface. This has led to regulatory frameworks that require accurate assessment of earthquake magnitudes before they reach the point of being felt. Hence, to monitor and mitigate felt seismicity there is a need to calculate accurate earthquake magnitudes in real time. Regulatory monitoring of induced seismicity is becoming a key issue in the successful development of reservoir projects that involve stimulation or storage. Here, we discuss the challenges with implementing such reservoir monitoring, and provide a suggested monitoring strategy.",
author = "Kendall, {J M} and Antony Butcher and Anna Stork and James Verdon and R Luckett and Brian Baptie",
year = "2019",
month = "2",
day = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "37",
pages = "51--56",
journal = "First Break",
issn = "0263-5046",
publisher = "European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers (EAGE)",
number = "2",

}

RIS - suitable for import to EndNote

TY - JOUR

T1 - How big is a small earthquake? Challenges in determining microseismic magnitudes

AU - Kendall, J M

AU - Butcher, Antony

AU - Stork, Anna

AU - Verdon, James

AU - Luckett, R

AU - Baptie, Brian

PY - 2019/2/1

Y1 - 2019/2/1

N2 - Earthquake magnitudes are surprisingly difficult to estimate accurately. This is especially true when evaluating small earthquakes: for example, those caused by human activities such as shale gas stimulation, CO2 and waste water storage, and enhanced geothermal systems. Uncertainties are created by a range of issues including: which ‘magnitude’ scale is used; what type of instrument records the earthquake; how the instruments are deployed; and the heterogeneity of the Earth between the source and the receivers. Errors can be larger than an order of magnitude in scale. For very small earthquakes this is not usually of much concern. However, occasionally, larger earthquakes induced by human activity are felt at the surface. This has led to regulatory frameworks that require accurate assessment of earthquake magnitudes before they reach the point of being felt. Hence, to monitor and mitigate felt seismicity there is a need to calculate accurate earthquake magnitudes in real time. Regulatory monitoring of induced seismicity is becoming a key issue in the successful development of reservoir projects that involve stimulation or storage. Here, we discuss the challenges with implementing such reservoir monitoring, and provide a suggested monitoring strategy.

AB - Earthquake magnitudes are surprisingly difficult to estimate accurately. This is especially true when evaluating small earthquakes: for example, those caused by human activities such as shale gas stimulation, CO2 and waste water storage, and enhanced geothermal systems. Uncertainties are created by a range of issues including: which ‘magnitude’ scale is used; what type of instrument records the earthquake; how the instruments are deployed; and the heterogeneity of the Earth between the source and the receivers. Errors can be larger than an order of magnitude in scale. For very small earthquakes this is not usually of much concern. However, occasionally, larger earthquakes induced by human activity are felt at the surface. This has led to regulatory frameworks that require accurate assessment of earthquake magnitudes before they reach the point of being felt. Hence, to monitor and mitigate felt seismicity there is a need to calculate accurate earthquake magnitudes in real time. Regulatory monitoring of induced seismicity is becoming a key issue in the successful development of reservoir projects that involve stimulation or storage. Here, we discuss the challenges with implementing such reservoir monitoring, and provide a suggested monitoring strategy.

M3 - Article

VL - 37

SP - 51

EP - 56

JO - First Break

JF - First Break

SN - 0263-5046

IS - 2

ER -