[ROCKMAN]

Hawk – You and P-Y need to stay focused on the topic of this thread so you don’t waste your time and that of others. The subject under discussion is injection wells and not frac’ng or frac fluids. We have threads to discuss the potential dangers of both. For instance why not focus on the questions I just put to dino? I’m very interested in your thoughts on the OK tremor issue.

And yes: salt water is very toxic to both vegetation and wildlife. Especially 2-legged wildlife drinking from their own wells. LOL. Potential salt water contamination is a much greater threat IMHO then the potential of injection wells causing tremors.

[Hawkcreek]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'd')ino - OK: let’s look at smoking. If hundreds of millions of folks had smoked for decades and almost none of them developed cancer would you say that's a good argument against the disease causing medical problems? I can’t imagine you would disagree. Of course that’s purely a hypothetical. But you would agree with that hypothetical assertion, wouldn’t you?

[Peak_Yeast]

@Rockman: I am probably misunderstanding the question...

But to me it seems like there was a dramatic increase in fracking in the past few years. This must lead to a dramatic increase in earthquakes if there is a correlation between them.

The earthquakes seems on the graph to have increased in about the same way as I would expect that number of fracked wells has. I dont know why it became a problem only last year, but I suppose it could be time lag in realizing the problem as well as the proximity to the larger cities.

Also there is the waste disposal wells that must have increased at a similar rate as the wells themselves.

Am I barking up the wrong tree, Mr. Rock? And sorry for messing up your thread. I have partially cleaned up my act to improve your thread.

http://strangesounds.org/2014/08/oklaho ... rease.html



http://preservethebeartoothfront.com/20 ... ith-video/



http://www.heise.de/tp/news/Fracking-Er ... 84864.html
"2012 gab es 11.000 Bohrungen in Oklahoma"

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Ok ... d_fracking

[ROCKMAN]

sub - The Texas Rail Road Commission has for a few years kept track of what's being injected. But in truth what's being injected is of very little concern compared to how it's being injected. As long as the fluids are going ONLY into deep salt water reservoirs no one cares what the exact composition might be. As far a chemical reaction down hole remember that the injected fluids, including frac fluids, are 99%+ water. These are not concentrated chemicals being injected. How fluids are injected and the safeguards to prevent them for getting into fresh water aquifers are much regulated. It would take several thousand words to just cover the Texas regulatory highlights. If you have many free hours go to the TRRC website for the details. Pay particular notice to the public hearing requirements for EVERY PROPOSED injection well. The

And again that's not to say that accidents haven't occurred. That's why they call them accidents. LOL. But they end up being very expensive accidents that companies have to pay for so they really do try very hard to avoid having them. LOL.

And again I’m talking about regs for injection wells which are an entirely different issue the regs for doing frac jobs and the handling of those fluids.

[Outcast_Searcher]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dinopello', '
')
The Oklahoma Geological Survey says this (and more in the link)

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')size=150]The OGS considers it very likely that the majority of recent earthquakes, particularly those in central and north-central Oklahoma, are triggered by the injection of produced water in disposal wells.[/size]

[ROCKMAN]

P-Y: "Am I barking up the wrong tree, Mr. Rock? And sorry for messing up your thread." No…you're not messing it up...now. You just brought some good stuff to the table. But you are running up the wrong tree to a degree: the article is focused on injection wells and tremors...not frac'd wells. Again here are the words from an OK watchdog group, State Impact,

https://stateimpact.npr.org/oklahoma/tag/earthquakes/

which is a reporting project of the NPR…hardly a friend of the oil patch: “There is general consensus among scientists that the spike in Oklahoma’s earthquake activity has been triggered by disposal wells, used to dispose of waste from oil and gas drilling operations — including hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking” — a phenomenon known as “induced” seismicity. Nearly two-dozen peer-reviewed, published papers have concluded disposal wells and quakes are likely connected, the New Yorker reported in April 2015.There are about 3,200 active disposal wells in Oklahoma as of April 2015, data from the state Corporation Commission, the state’s oil and gas regulator, show.”

So again I have to ask you to watch the details: while they mention that some of the injected fluids are coming from frac’d wells, they are not implying that the frac’ng process is causing tremors but that they are being produced by the injection wells. Injection wells are disposal injection wells...they are not frac'd wells even though they do have a fluid injected into them. All the articles make it clear they are talking about INJECTION WELLS...NOT FRAC'D WELLS. And as I just pointed out to sub all the fluids, including waste from frac’d wells are essentially almost 100% water.

And mucho thanks for posting that chart…I haven’t mastered posting them. LOL. Look at the lack of tremors recorded prior to 2009. Again don’t take my word for it…look it up: from 1990 to 2009 hundreds of millions of gallons of fluids have been injected in thousands of disposal wells. Read again what NPR reports: about 3,200 injection wells in OK. The same wells that had injected trillions of gallons of fluid decades before there was an increase in tremors.

So I’m going to keep asking you and others the same f*cking question (FYI - I am smiling as I type that profanity): if the injection wells are causing the increase in seismic activity since 2009 why weren’t they doing so prior to that date when there was as much (and probably more) fluid being injected by the very same wells?

And here I’ll make it easier with respect to the New Madrid reference: One of the largest estimated earthquakes to ever occur in the USA…the New Madrid Earthquakes in 1811-12. From:

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/ ... 1-1812.php

A Sequence of Three Main Shocks in 1811-1812: This sequence of three very large earthquakes is usually referred to as the New Madrid earthquakes, after the Missouri town that was the largest settlement on the Mississippi River between St. Louis, Missouri and Natchez, Mississippi. On the basis of the large area of damage (600,000 square kilometers), the widespread area of perceptibility (5,000,000 square kilometers), and the complex physiographic changes that occurred, the New Madrid earthquakes of 1811-1812 rank as some of the largest in the United States since its settlement by Europeans. They were by far the largest east of the Rocky Mountains in the U.S. and Canada. The area of strong shaking associated with these shocks is two to three times as large as that of the 1964 Alaska earthquake and 10 times as large as that of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake.

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1128/

And for those geographically challenged: Yes… the NE corner of OK butts into the area where the NME happened.

And how are things today in the area of the NME? In 2015: ST. LOUIS, MO - “The USGS reports that a 3.5 magnitude earthquake hit along the deeply buried New Madrid fault. The New Madrid fault line is about twenty times larger than California’s famed San Andreas fault. The biggest earthquake in U.S. history happened in the New Madrid seismic zone in 1812. The fault line has been more active over the last few years. Quakes have rattled residents in Illinois and Indiana over the last year. Eastern Arkansas felt a quake in late October, making the quake the largest in the NMSZ in several years. Emergency responders suggest having a basic plan that family members, and neighbors, can agree on. Missouri officials are saying that earthquake insurance is critical.”

So a fault line that is 20X larger the more famous San Andreas fault lies just east of OK. According to the USGS MO is experiencing a tremor every two days. Tremors that are larger than those being felt in OK. And again according to the USGS there are 16 states with the highest risk of significant earthquakes…and OK isn't even one of those 16. Here are the details. Check the seismic activity map in particular.

http://www.ozarksfirst.com/news/new-map ... arthquakes

WASHINGTON -- Updated maps from the U.S. government show Missouri is one of 16 states with a high danger risk for earthquakes. The maps, released this week by the U.S. Geological Survey, show the most recent belief of geologists where future earthquakes will happen. Missouri's Bootheel region along the New Madrid Fault shows a high risk. The hazard is especially high…in several active regions of the central and eastern U.S., such as near New Madrid, MO, and near Charleston, SC. The 16 states at highest risk are Alaska, Arkansas, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Kentucky, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. In all, 42 of the nation's 50 states are at risk of some sort for seismic activity.

So here’s another question: why the f*ck are we discussing tremors in OK when, according to the USGS, there a greater earthquake risk in South Carolina? Ohh…ohh…I know: because there is virtually no oil patch activity in South Carolina. LOL.

[ROCKMAN]

Also for a little balance to the map showing all those tremors recorded in OK. According to the USGS they estimate 130,000 magnitude 3 to 3.9 RS and 1.3 million 2 to 2.9 RS "earthquakes" in the US annually. That map with red dots on it would be more impressive then the one of OK. LOL.

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/ ... qstats.php

[h2]

Apneaman, that's an excellent link to the exxon article. I find it particularly interesting because when I have to suffer through darwinian's endless peakoilbarrel.com comment threads, a guy who actually fits everything you accuse the rockman of, is the poster child for a petroleum engineer who is so stupid that he actually took the exxon public statements and actions as the engineering truth, I'm referring of course to Fernando Leanme, global warming denialist par excellence, who embarrasses himself every time he types a character on the topic. I will from now on find a special warmth and glee when I come across this strain of dumb engineer (it's not only in the oil industry by the way they exist, they are exactly the same across the engineering spectrum, and are particularly prevalent in tech, but certainly not restricted to tech). The basic notion was found in the wonderful quote theoildrum used to show on their top page quote box, about it's a rare man who will question the source of his salary.

But rockman, I think you're off target, I'd look more at the rest of the industry, the ones that either know the stuff and lie about it, or don't know it, and are stupid enough to believe in it. But the rest of the business, it was a bit saddening but unfortunately totally expected to see a group whose very livelihoods depend on not thinking about the consequences of their actions refusing to then be aware or speculate on those consequences, that's the petroleum geologists. But most does not mean all. In fact, if you read that carefully, you would have discovered that trade group did not stop the discussion of global warming issues because they wanted to suppress it, but rather because of the extreme debate and I assume rancor it generated among its ranks. In other words, clearly a significant number of petroleum geologists are fully aware of reality, and find the embarrassing intellectual dishonesty of those who refuse to actually follow the real science to be too irksome to let slip to the side, and go unchallenged. And that's what I'd expect, in any group like this, you have the sort of dumb ones, who I would assume are also kind of mediocre as engineers, adequate, but mediocre, who refuse to accept reality, then you have the smart ones, who understand science and reality fine.

As the rockman has said many times, if we didn't buy the stuff, it wouldn't get drilled. Since I think I can count on the fingers of one, maybe two, hands, the numbers of public commentators on these issues who actually change their behavior to actually reduce their fuel consumption, that means, no car, no flying, etc, I think it's worth spreading the blame around a bit. You know, those pretend liberal suburban mom's who ferry their kids around everywhere in a minivan with some token bumper sticker about green this or that, or, even worse, sustainable this or that.

I always find the sheer average ignorance of the tech field when it comes to issues like sustainability, or, shudder, politics, or, worse, history, to be personally and deeply embarrassing, for example, but that doesn't then mean that I insist on being equally ignorant. So you could point to the intensely sociopathic libertarian tendencies of various tech industry leaders, but that doesn't mean those ideas apply to everyone who works in tech.

[Hawkcreek]

Rock,
If I understand correctly, you are saying that there should be no correlation between the fracked wells (injection of fluids into mostly closed strata - trying to open it up), and injection disposal wells (injection of mostly salt water drilling fluids into strata that are considered open to accepting it).
I contend that both of these injection strategies are open for criticism, and also that both MAY have been responsible for various problems in the area, of which mini-earthquakes are only one. In fact, I can not see how it is impossible that both types of injection in underground strata cannot play a part.
Just another way in which the tragedy of the commons is playing out.
BTW, the depletion of the pure water in the underground aquifers seems not to have been mentioned. Does Ok use the aquifers for irrigation, and could this play a contributing part?

[Synapsid]

ROCKMAN,

The New Madrid fault zone is associated with the old Palaeozoic plate boundary: it extends into the continental crust (into the craton) itself.

Now, am I correct that Oklahoma law restricts injection wells to the sedimentary strata that overlie the continental crust--that drilling into that crust is expressly forbidden? If so, that suggests to me that Oklahoma's geologists have advised the state government of the hazard that the New Madrid fault represents.

[ROCKMAN]

Hawk – “If I understand correctly, you are saying that there should be no correlation between the fracked wells (injection of fluids into mostly closed strata - trying to open it up), and injection disposal wells (injection of mostly salt water drilling fluids into strata that are considered open to accepting it).” What I’m saying is what the articles are referring to: the potential for disposal wells to be causing the increase in OK seismic activity. I don’t mean to be rude but I’m getting a tad pissed for folks not getting the point THE ARTICLE ITSELF IS MAKING: they aren’t speculating that either frac’ng or frac fluids have a f*cking thing to do with the increase in tremors. I don’t know to make the same point over and over again: please read the damn article again and please pay attention. LOL. They are speculating that the increase in tremors might be due to DISPOSAL WELLS…not frac’d wells.

And yes, let me now explain the difference been injecting down a disposal well and frac’ng a well. Perhaps I should have done this earlier but it was so obvious to me but I forget that most here don’t have a sufficient tech background. In the case of disposal wells can you guess how much pressure is being used? Perhaps it will surprise you that many injection wells in the US don’t actually pump with any pressure: they are “gravity drainage” wells. IOW the water is pumped to the disposal and well and it drains down under its own weight. Essentially no different than when you pull the plug on your bath tub full of water. And when it’s actually pumped in is probable being pushed down by just several hundred psi of pressure. The reservoirs these wells inject into are just the opposite of shale formations; they are very high porosity and permeability chosen specifically so little or no pressure is need for injection. Which is at the opposite end of the spectrum from frac’ng a well where injection pressures are many thousands of psi.

So one more F*CKING TIME: how could OK disposal wells have caused an increase in seismic activity just since 2009 when the same wells have pumped TRILLIONS OF GALLONS down the vast majority of those same disposal wells for many years before the tremor increase. Come on, guys, it’s a very simple question that deserves a very simple answer.

[ROCKMAN]

syn - 'Now, am I correct that Oklahoma law restricts injection wells to the sedimentary strata that overlie the continental crust--that drilling into that crust is expressly forbidden? If so, that suggests to me that Oklahoma's geologists have advised the state government of the hazard that the New Madrid fault represents." I doubt the OK regulators are at all concerned about companies trying to dispose of oil field waste fluids into the deep crust because a company would have to be clinically insane to so do. LOL. Most disposal wells are only a few thousand feet deep. Why spend a lot of money to drill such a well deeper than needed? The OK regulators are very concerned about disposal wells being too shallow endangering fresh water aquifers. That's where the regulations are very specific and very closely monitored.

And it isn’t just the depth the regulators control: the injection pressure must be below the normal ground gradient. IOW those pressure MUST NOT BE HIGH ENOUGH TO FRAC THE ROCKS. Which is exactly the point I made to our buddy Hawk. As I told him many disposal wells don’t even pump the fluids down: they simply have a line going to it from the tanks and the fluids go down the disposal well by gravity. IOW why pay for hp to pump the fluid down when Mother Earth provides the energy (i.e. gravity) for free? Remember we’re really f*cking greedy and try our best not to piss money away unnecessarily. LOL.

[Subjectivist]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 's')ub - The Texas Rail Road Commission has for a few years kept track of what's being injected. But in truth what's being injected is of very little concern compared to how it's being injected. As long as the fluids are going ONLY into deep salt water reservoirs no one cares what the exact composition might be. As far a chemical reaction down hole remember that the injected fluids, including frac fluids, are 99%+ water. These are not concentrated chemicals being injected. How fluids are injected and the safeguards to prevent them for getting into fresh water aquifers are much regulated. It would take several thousand words to just cover the Texas regulatory highlights. If you have many free hours go to the TRRC website for the details. Pay particular notice to the public hearing requirements for EVERY PROPOSED injection well. The

And again that's not to say that accidents haven't occurred. That's why they call them accidents. LOL. But they end up being very expensive accidents that companies have to pay for so they really do try very hard to avoid having them. LOL.

And again I’m talking about regs for injection wells which are an entirely different issue the regs for doing frac jobs and the handling of those fluids.

[ROCKMAN]

sub - As far as the Gulf coast including the offshore all the reservoirs below the shallow fresh water aquifers are filled with salt water. Essential hundreds of thousands on such zones are filled with salt water. The base of potable fresh water varies but typically between 500' and 2,500' but most often above 1,500'. That's part of the process when applying for all drill permits and not just a disposal well. You give the location to the Texas Water Board and they tell you how deep you have to set "surface casing" to protect the aquifers from the drilling mud. Both running and cementing it has to be certified by an independent third party. The protection aspects are even more strenuous for a disposal well when it comes to isolating the fresh water column. For instance any well ever drilled within 1/2 mile of my disposal well that has ever penetrated my disposal zone has to have a certified record showing it was plugged according to the rules. If it can't be verified you have to dig up the cut off casing, weld on new casing and go down hole to confirm a proper plugging. Accidents do happen (mostly with very old wells) but rather rare. And if a company does have an accident the penalties are very, very expensive.

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 's')ub - As far as the Gulf coast including the offshore all the reservoirs below the shallow fresh water aquifers are filled with salt water. Essential hundreds of thousands on such zones are filled with salt water. The base of potable fresh water varies but typically between 500' and 2,500' but most often above 1,500'. That's part of the process when applying for all drill permits and not just a disposal well. You give the location to the Texas Water Board and they tell you how deep you have to set "surface casing" to protect the aquifers from the drilling mud. Both running and cementing it has to be certified by an independent third party. The protection aspects are even more strenuous for a disposal well when it comes to isolating the fresh water column. For instance any well ever drilled within 1/2 mile of my disposal well that has ever penetrated my disposal zone has to have a certified record showing it was plugged according to the rules. If it can't be verified you have to dig up the cut off casing, weld on new casing and go down hole to confirm a proper plugging. Accidents do happen (mostly with very old wells) but rather rare. And if a company does have an accident the penalties are very, very expensive.

[ROCKMAN]

T - Depends on what your objective might be. there's a lot of different info in you search "brine wells". Often the target source isn't salt (sodium chloride) but other compounds. For instance here's what they are doing in Michigan:

Liquid Calcium Chloride for Dust Control: Calcium Chloride has been produced commercially for over 100 years and is well recognized for its dust and ice control properties. Dart Oil & Gas Corporation (DO&G) operates three mineral brine wells that produce naturally occurring liquid with a large concentration of calcium chloride. This is from the Sylvania sandstone formation located approximately one mile below ground level. Liquid Calcium Chloride is hygroscopic meaning that it can absorb water vapor from the air and liquid water from the road bed thereby matting down the dust for prolonged periods to keep a dustless and stabilized surface on unpaved roads. It is the most cost effective way to reduce dust. In addition, liquid calcium chloride treated roads need less maintenance than roads treated with other materials and can reduce gravel replacement costs.

If you're just looking for table salt it really is "dirt cheap" to dig it out of an existing salt mine. A few years ago I was drilling wells close to a very active salt mine north of Houston.

[ROCKMAN]

T - I forgot to mention I'm drilling 17,000' deep oil wells in Mississippi. The formation water is so salty (over 230,000 parts per million) that as soon as it moves up hole and cools off a bit it crystalizes and plugs some of the down hole equipment. We occasionally have to pump fresh water down to dissolve it. Folks go on and on about oil/NG pollution but salt water is a much more serious problem that almost no one outside the oil patch is very aware of. I've personally seen much more environment damage from salt then oil. But SALT just doesn't have the MSM draw as OIL. When was the last time you saw a news video of someone washing salt water of a duck? LOL.

[dinopello]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'W')hen was the last time you saw a news video of someone washing salt water of a duck? LOL.

[Yukon fisher]

It is dangerous to take analogies too far, but I'm going to anyway. In the example of smoking, it is not unusual for a population to smoke to smoke for years, even decades before anyone gets cancer. Similarly, it seems logical that we could abuse the ground through waste water injection for years, even decades, before the effects are felt. In addition, it has only been one decade or so of massive fracking.

[Hawkcreek]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'H')awk – “If I understand correctly, you are saying that there should be no correlation between the fracked wells (injection of fluids into mostly closed strata - trying to open it up), and injection disposal wells (injection of mostly salt water drilling fluids into strata that are considered open to accepting it).” What I’m saying is what the articles are referring to: the potential for disposal wells to be causing the increase in OK seismic activity. I don’t mean to be rude but I’m getting a tad pissed for folks not getting the point THE ARTICLE ITSELF IS MAKING: they aren’t speculating that either frac’ng or frac fluids have a f*cking thing to do with the increase in tremors. I don’t know to make the same point over and over again: please read the damn article again and please pay attention. LOL. They are speculating that the increase in tremors might be due to DISPOSAL WELLS…not frac’d wells.

And yes, let me now explain the difference been injecting down a disposal well and frac’ng a well. Perhaps I should have done this earlier but it was so obvious to me but I forget that most here don’t have a sufficient tech background. In the case of disposal wells can you guess how much pressure is being used? Perhaps it will surprise you that many injection wells in the US don’t actually pump with any pressure: they are “gravity drainage” wells. IOW the water is pumped to the disposal and well and it drains down under its own weight. Essentially no different than when you pull the plug on your bath tub full of water. And when it’s actually pumped in is probable being pushed down by just several hundred psi of pressure. The reservoirs these wells inject into are just the opposite of shale formations; they are very high porosity and permeability chosen specifically so little or no pressure is need for injection. Which is at the opposite end of the spectrum from frac’ng a well where injection pressures are many thousands of psi.

So one more F*CKING TIME: how could OK disposal wells have caused an increase in seismic activity just since 2009 when the same wells have pumped TRILLIONS OF GALLONS down the vast majority of those same disposal wells for many years before the tremor increase. Come on, guys, it’s a very simple question that deserves a very simple answer.