Some critics of hydraulic fractures are really all kinds of criticisms of hydrocarbons.
Although their counteraction to fracking shows in many places and in different ways, this group is not great, it is interested in the different interests and disadvantages of the discussions. Instead, they continue to look for the most effective methods to convince others that fracking or oil and gas in general should be abandoned.
In this context, it is easy to see the Fragment in Oklahoma, which causes a more frequent earthquake as a series of long-lasting arguments that the opponent has to do with varying degrees of accuracy, accusing the process of changing the phenomenon. from climate change to superficial pollution.
First, revelation. My company owns several oil and gas partners for our customers. These partners have been involved in drilling technology for many years. Though one can reasonably conclude that it gives me some degree of outlook on the subject, it also gives an opportunity to the technological and geological problems that play in this debate.
True, Oklahoma has seen seismic activity. The small town of Cushing, the center of North America's largest commercial oil storage facility, lasted several miles during a few small earthquakes, the largest of which is the Richter Scale 4.5. Bloomberg reports that the growth of Oklahoma and seismic activity corresponds to the increase in oil extraction and fracking. (1)
The evidence for this is quite clear that some processes are associated with deep-seated wastewater treatment, which, in some other cases, abandoned wells can be driven by machines and can sometimes be measured by perceptible people. In extreme cases, some of this movement may even drown in the house or crumble a plate.
But this is a long way from broken dishes for the threat to national security, which Bloomberg described the situation. (1)
Kushing tank farmers and pipelines sit in the earliest granddaughter area of the nation. They also have an obvious terrorist purpose in the 9/11 era. After the September 11 attacks, tanks paid special attention to law enforcement agencies. they are about 6 times more oil these days than in 2001. They are an important resource, and they must be absolutely protected.
However, it is ridiculous that at the level of scientists, seismic activity can cause fracking or other related drilling activities, which threatens the people and for physical or economic security.
In the context of the controversy, consider the 4.5 magnitude earthquake, which is the largest in Cushing. It is classified as a "light" earthquake. Though people can and have noticed the shift in that level, these earthquakes usually cause only minor damage. About 30,000 countries are estimated to be between 2.5 and 5.4 in the Richter scale throughout the year. 2) We do not hear about these events on average over 80 per day because they are very small and common.
There are no injuries or injuries of 4.5 magnitude near Cushing. Because of the low levels of low levels of seismic activity, the injuries were few. Courts allowed at least one woman to try and demand a court hearing that the oil company is responsible for earthquake-related injuries. The 2011 earthquake, which he was wound up, reached a height of 5.0m above Cushing's point of departure, but still between "light" and "moderate".
As for the larger events. According to a study published in October, a magnitude 5.6 magnitude earthquake could be benefited from the Cushing storage facility. If such an event took place, "it could cause moderate damage to Cushing tanks depending on the height, diameter and percentage of the tank." These tanks are full of these days. The magnitude 5.6 magnitude earthquake in the immediate vicinity of the facility may, of course, cause some major problems, although the authors of the study have no mention of the likelihood of such an event.
We should not bury our heads in oil sands and ignore this question. Fracking, as with any petrol development, must be made responsible. This includes removal of wastewater from the rocks, which probably leads to considerable damage. The study notes, for example, after a 4.0-magnitude earthquake, Oklahoma's inspectors discovered that waste is injected below the targeted rock layer. The mysterious liquid was surrendered to more sinners by raising the potential of the earthquake. You should pay attention to the reduction of such scenarios. And, if necessary, we must necessarily prove that Cushing and other sensitive areas are tanks, pipelines and other infrastructures in order to sustain the growing potential of the ground.
But let me say that in Franklin, the fringe raises some of the risk of major earthquakes there, ridiculous. Frequency is not the same as the gravity, and the argument that the problem arises from the national security level, in fact, is that tornadoes should also be viewed in that way.
Argument does not cover the discussion on coverage, and does not lead to rational choice. But when it is done by some parties it does not mean that. It is a narrow tactic of seismic proportions.
1) Bloomberg, "Earthquake Earthquakes are a Threat to National Security"
2) UPSeis, "Earthquake Magnitude / Earthquake Amount"