Comment: So your idea was genuinely

(See in situ)


So your idea was genuinely

So your idea was genuinely unique, before NatGeo published its article?
NRDC had a blog post with a similar theory, posted over 13 months ago. The idea that "fracking" is a direct cause to tremors isn't as new as you are claiming it to be either. This blog made a post about it in 2011 and I sincerely doubt she thought of the idea on her own out of the blue.
Though I am linking to these blog posts I have a high amount of skepticism that their authors understand the fracturing work flow process past what MSNBC, FOX, or the editor at HuffPo allowed to be printed.

Let's start with the NatGeo article.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2013/03/13032...

The data showed that the initial rupture reached incredibly close to an active well—within 660 feet (200 meters)—and the majority of the aftershocks were located within the same level of sedimentary rock as the wastewater injection wells.

Non-sequitur and misleading. The epicenter of the earthquake was at 35.537°N, 96.747°W at a depth of 3.1 miles. The closest well, API# 35081235610001 in Lincoln County near Prague Lake, is 7198 feet in depth with a second, API# 3508123561, at only 4583 feet. The earthquake was 16368 feet, another 2 miles deeper. This is misleading because the well is in lateral proximity to the epicenter but 2 miles deeper.

(You can search for wells by API here )

The second statement about the aftershocks is downright silly, “… were located within the same level of sedimentary rocks as the wastewater wells.” Oh really? Where at? In the same county? The state of Oklahoma? China? The well operates within the Arbuckle formation, which is comprised of Proterozoic era rocks and I doubt, and know for a fact, that South Central Oklahoma is not the only home to such a formation. The author is obviously new to scientific writing because claiming, “within the same level of sedimentary rocks…” can be interpreted to mean at any location on the planet at the same geologic horizon! We should have expected this with his first misleading statement that the epicenter was “near” the well.

That's because injection wells receive far more water than fracking sites, said Katie Keranen, lead author of the Geology study.

-and-

Fracking is one major cause of the increase in energy production wastewater. Although the process may not be the direct cause of the quakes, each drill site requires between 3 to 5 million gallons of water per frack, much of which is later disposed of underground.

The first well’s SPUD date was June 27th, 2000 and was cemented and completed one month later . The well was designed to hold 14,500 gallons of water, a pretty small amount. (8.35 lbs/ gallon, 121075 lbs, or 60 tons. Sound like a lot? Not really, 14000 gallons will fill one of these. Not exactly, the 3-5 million gallons the author is alluding to. He is trying to deceive the reader into thinking that the actual fracking process caused the tremor, not the disposal well. Read his statement, “Fracking is one major cause of the increase in energy production wastewater. Although the process may not be the direct cause of the quakes, ( but you certainly are alluding to that aren’t you Joe?) each drill site requires between 3-5 million gallons of water per frack. It is painfully obvious this cartoonist only saw the disposal well on the map without checking its logs before he read his verdict on the quake’s cause. Are we to assume then that this disposal well whose volume the author failed to report, could, probably, may (all words used frequently in the NatGeo article) contain upwards to 5 million gallons of water? The first statement quoted from the Journal of Geology article throws all of Joe Eaton’s credibility out the window. Surely the author would want to clarify on a statement to build on his credibility as a scientific writer as all he would have had to do was check the well logs to see that particular well was only going to hold 14,500 gallons. In Nat Geo’s world of arithmetic, 14,500 gallons > 3-5 million gallons.

John Bredehoeft, a geological expert at the Washington State research firm Hydrodynamics Group, said scientists have long known that wastewater injection cause earthquakes. "There is no question about that anymore," he said.
But Bredehoeft, who held research and management positions during a 33-year career at the U.S. Geological Survey, said the overwhelming majority wastewater wells in the United States appear to be safe. The problem, he said, is scientists have no way of determining which of the roughly 30,000 wells are likely to trigger earthquakes.
"We don't know enough about the earth's crust to know where it will happen," Bredehoeft said. "Almost nowhere do we have enough data to do that."

This isn’t helping your claim that you were the original owner of the idea of waste water wells causing tremors; apparently it has been around long enough to make an entire business out of it. I would like to clarify that I too believe waste water wells can cause tremors but I have a problem with the author’s statement of, “…The problem, he said, is scientists have no way of determining which of the roughly 30,000 wells are likely to trigger earthquakes. – Bredehoeft” Joe Eaton, why are you citing someone that goes against your articles’ thesis? It was bad enough you left the reader in doubt with many sentences in the passive voice. Bredehoeft goes on to say that they do not have enough data to determine which wells will cause earthquakes or not. A geoscientist with 33 years of experience in the USGS is saying this, yet our author continues to push his wish washy theory, through the journal article, that they surely must be directly related. For some reason though, he never comes out and clearly states this as to leave himself plenty of wiggle room as a defense to rebuttals from his peers. Which is it? Does he actually believe what he is writing or not?

Rubbish article.

Sources:
http://imaging.occeweb.com/imaging/OGWellRecords.aspx?api=08...
http://www.ogs.ou.edu/pubsscanned/InfSeries/IS11.pdf
http://www.okgeosurvey1.gov/media/OGS_PragueStatement201303.pdf
http://www.okgeosurvey1.gov/media/research/OGSPositionInduce...
http://www.occeweb.com/rules/Web%20Ready%20Ch10%20FY13%2007-...
http://www.owrb.ok.gov/studies/groundwater/arbuckle_simpson/...

Southern Agrarian