Denise M. Onyskiw, P.E.

Onyskiw Engineering, LLC

Water Management for Shale Plays

May 30, 2014
Agenda

 History of injection induced seismicity

 Current injection-induced seismic events

 Review of major publications

 Going forward – best practices
History of Injection Induced 

Seismicity

 Rocky Mountain Arsenal, CO

 Basel, Switzerland

 Rangely Field, CO

 Paradox Valley, CO
Rocky Mountain Arsenal, CO

 12,045 feet deep

 Bottomed into 75 feet of highly fractured preCambrian gneiss

 Injection pressure peaked at 1050 psi

 Maximum rate was 300 gallons per minute

 710 Denver-area earthquakes

 Most with epicenters within 5 miles of injection well
Earthquake Frequency vs. Waste 

Injected

From National Academy of Sciences

Induced Seismicity Potential in Energy Technologies
Rangely Field, CO

 Tertiary recovery field

 Injection pressures were in excess of 3730 psi

 Earthquake occurrence was reduced after pressures 

were reduced below 3450 psi

 Today, pressures are below 2000 psi
Paradox Valley, CO

 16,000 feet deep – world’s deepest injection well

 Desalinates the Colorado and Dolores rivers in order to 

meet water usability agreement with Mexico

 Inject 110,000 tons of salt per year

 Injection pressure is 5350 psi

 Injection rate was 345 gallons per minute and 70% 

brine/30% water

 Injection protocol altered to 230 gallons per minute 

and 100% brine to reduce earthquake occurrence
Paradox Injection Well

From Bureau of Reclamation

UC Today February 2013
Current Injection-induced Seismic 

Events

 West Virginia

 Texas

 Arkansas

 Ohio
Major Publications

 National Academy of Science Report – Induced 

Seismicity Potential in Energy Technologies

 Environmental Protection Agency – Minimizing and 

Managing Potential Impacts of Induced-Siesmicity

from Class II Disposal Wells: Practical Approaches –

still in draft
Sample Risk Analysis

From National Academy of Sciences

Induced Seismicity Potential in Energy Technologies
Davis and Frohlich Ten-Point 

Checklist – Background Seisimicity

 Are large earthquakes (M >=5.5) known in the region 

(within several hundred km)?

 Are earthquakes known near the injection site (within 

20 km)?

 Is rate of activity near the injection site (within 20 km) 

high?
Davis and Frohlich Ten-Point 

Checklist – Local Geology

 Are faults mapped within 20 km of the site?

 If so, are these faults known to be active?

 Is the site near (within several hundred km of) 

tectonically active features?
Davis and Frohlich Ten-Point 

Checklist – State of Stress

 Do stress measurements in the region suggest rock is 

close to failure?
Davis and Frohlich Ten-Point 

Checklist – Injection Practices

 Are (proposed) injection practices sufficient for 

failure?

 If injection has been ongoing at the site, is injection 

correlated with the occurrence of earthquakes?

 Are nearby injection wells associated with 

earthquakes?
Example of Traffic Light System 

Used for Hydraulic Fracturing in 

England
Traffic Light System

 Green - injection proceeds as planned

 Yellow – injection proceeds with caution, 

possibly at reduced rates; monitoring is 

intensified

 Red – injection is suspended immediately
Induced Seismicity - Primer

 Human activity that causes seismic events (energy 

release) beyond ‘historical’ baseline level.

 Elevated pore pressure causing shear failure –

potential scenario associated with fluid injection 

into existing fault.

Source: DOE, LBNL 

http://esd.lbl.gov/research/projects/induced_seismicity/
 Confirmed prior instance of induced seismicity in 

immediate area/formation 

 Any recognized Neogene (< 25 mya) faults in the area?

 Linear elements in surface topography suggesting possible 

unmapped faults?

 Any historic earthquakes recorded in the area?

 Fault character relative to depth of proposed injection and 

stratigraphy

 Peak ground acceleration (PGA)

 Existing injection wells and historical volumes

Induced Seismicity Risk Evaluation
Known Faults & Historical 

Earthquakes

• CGS Late Cenozoic Fault, Fold & Earthquake Database 

http://geosurvey.state.co.us/hazards/Earthquakes/Pages/Maps.aspx • USGS Quaternary Fault & Fold Database

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults/
Induced Seismicity Risk Evaluation – Example
Seismic Risk – Recommendations

 Seismic monitoring might be prudent if earthquake 

triggering is deemed possible.

 Mitigation strategies might be considered prior to 

injection.

 If significant changes in baseline seismic activity 

are recorded at any point after an injection 

program begins, a more detailed seismicity 

investigation may be warranted.
Denise M. Onyskiw, P.E.

Onyskiw Engineering, LLC

720-260-2963

denise@onyskiwengineering.

com