Geology topics

Morgan T. Page

Publications and source records attributed to Morgan T. Page.

45 records · Page 3Linked to original sources

USGS2016

Induced earthquake magnitudes are as large as (statistically) expected

A major question for the hazard posed by injection-induced seismicity is how large induced earthquakes can be. Are their maximum magnitudes determined by injection parameters or by tectonics? Deterministic limits on induced earthquake magnitudes have been proposed based on the size of the reservoir or the volume of fluid injected. However, if induced earthquakes occur on tectonic faults oriented favorably with respect to the tectonic stress field, then they may be limited only by the regional tectonics and connectivity of the fault network. In this study, we show that the largest magnitudes observed at fluid injection sites are consistent with the sampling statistics of the Gutenberg-Richter distribution for tectonic earthquakes, assuming no upper magnitude bound. The data pass three specific tests: (1) the largest observed earthquake at each site scales with the log of the total number of induced earthquakes, (2) the order of occurrence of the largest event is random within the induced sequence, and (3) the injected volume controls the total number of earthquakes rather than the total seismic moment. All three tests point to an injection control on earthquake nucleation but a tectonic control on earthquake magnitude. Given that the largest observed earthquakes are exactly as large as expected from the sampling statistics, we should not conclude that these are the largest earthquakes possible. Instead, the results imply that induced earthquake magnitudes should be treated with the same maximum magnitude bound that is currently used to treat seismic hazard from tectonic earthquakes.

Journal of Geophysical Research B: Solid Earth↗

USGS2016

The Earthquake‐Source Inversion Validation (SIV) Project

Finite‐fault earthquake source inversions infer the (time‐dependent) displacement on the rupture surface from geophysical data. The resulting earthquake source models document the complexity of the rupture process. However, multiple source models for the same earthquake, obtained by different research teams, often exhibit remarkable dissimilarities. To address the uncertainties in earthquake‐source inversion methods and to understand strengths and weaknesses of the various approaches used, the Source Inversion Validation (SIV) project conducts a set of forward‐modeling exercises and inversion benchmarks. In this article, we describe the SIV strategy, the initial benchmarks, and current SIV results. Furthermore, we apply statistical tools for quantitative waveform comparison and for investigating source‐model (dis)similarities that enable us to rank the solutions, and to identify particularly promising source inversion approaches. All SIV exercises (with related data and descriptions) and statistical comparison tools are available via an online collaboration platform, and we encourage source modelers to use the SIV benchmarks for developing and testing new methods. We envision that the SIV efforts will lead to new developments for tackling the earthquake‐source imaging problem.

Seismological Research Letters↗

USGS2015

The petroleum geologist and the insurance policy

In a recent study, Hough and Page (2015) presented several lines of evidence suggesting that most of the significant earthquakes in Oklahoma during the twentieth century, including the M w 5.7 El Reno earthquake of 9 April 1952, were likely induced by wastewater injection and possibly secondary oil recovery operations. We undertook an archival search for accounts of this event, which unearthed a newspaper article published immediately following the El Reno earthquake regarding a prominent petroleum geologist in the area who took out a rare earthquake insurance policy less than 60 days before the earthquake struck. In this study we present a historical context for this intriguing coincidence. We present a retrospective of oil industry practices in the early‐ to mid‐twentieth century, gleaned from court records and other industry reports, that potentially bear on the interplay between oil exploration activities and earthquakes, focusing on the Oklahoma City region. We describe events of the day that could plausibly have alerted a geologist to the possibility of induced earthquakes, although there is no indication that the potential for induced earthquakes was widely recognized within the industry at that time.

Oklahoma↗

USGS2015

A century of induced earthquakes in Oklahoma?

Seismicity rates have increased sharply since 2009 in the central and eastern United States, with especially high rates of activity in the state of Oklahoma. Growing evidence indicates that many of these events are induced, primarily by injection of wastewater in deep disposal wells. The upsurge in activity has raised two questions: What is the background rate of tectonic earthquakes in Oklahoma? How much has the rate varied throughout historical and early instrumental times? In this article, we show that (1) seismicity rates since 2009 surpass previously observed rates throughout the twentieth century; (2) several lines of evidence suggest that most of the significant earthquakes in Oklahoma during the twentieth century were likely induced by oil production activities, as they exhibit statistically significant temporal and spatial correspondence with disposal wells, and intensity measurements for the 1952 El Reno earthquake and possibly the 1956 Tulsa County earthquake follow the pattern observed in other induced earthquakes; and (3) there is evidence for a low level of tectonic seismicity in southeastern Oklahoma associated with the Ouachita structural belt. The 22 October 1882 Choctaw Nation earthquake, for which we estimate Mw 4.8, occurred in this zone.

Oklahoma↗

USGS2015

Southern San Andreas Fault seismicity is consistent with the Gutenberg-Richter magnitude-frequency distribution

The magnitudes of any collection of earthquakes nucleating in a region are generally observed to follow the Gutenberg-Richter (G-R) distribution. On some major faults, however, paleoseismic rates are higher than a G-R extrapolation from the modern rate of small earthquakes would predict. This, along with other observations, led to formulation of the characteristic earthquake hypothesis, which holds that the rate of small to moderate earthquakes is permanently low on large faults relative to the large-earthquake rate (Wesnousky et al., 1983; Schwartz and Coppersmith, 1984). We examine the rate difference between recent small to moderate earthquakes on the southern San Andreas fault (SSAF) and the paleoseismic record, hypothesizing that the discrepancy can be explained as a rate change in time rather than a deviation from G-R statistics. We find that with reasonable assumptions, the rate changes necessary to bring the small and large earthquake rates into alignment agree with the size of rate changes seen in epidemic-type aftershock sequence (ETAS) modeling, where aftershock triggering of large earthquakes drives strong fluctuations in the seismicity rates for earthquakes of all magnitudes. The necessary rate changes are also comparable to rate changes observed for other faults worldwide. These results are consistent with paleoseismic observations of temporally clustered bursts of large earthquakes on the SSAF and the absence of M greater than or equal to 7 earthquakes on the SSAF since 1857.

California↗

USGS2015

Long‐term time‐dependent probabilities for the third Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF3)

The 2014 Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP 2014) presents time-dependent earthquake probabilities for the third Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF3). Building on the UCERF3 time-independent model, published previously, renewal models are utilized to represent elastic-rebound-implied probabilities. A new methodology has been developed that solves applicability issues in the previous approach for un-segmented models. The new methodology also supports magnitude-dependent aperiodicity and accounts for the historic open interval on faults that lack a date-of-last-event constraint. Epistemic uncertainties are represented with a logic tree, producing 5,760 different forecasts. Results for a variety of evaluation metrics are presented, including logic-tree sensitivity analyses and comparisons to the previous model (UCERF2). For 30-year M≥6.7 probabilities, the most significant changes from UCERF2 are a threefold increase on the Calaveras fault and a threefold decrease on the San Jacinto fault. Such changes are due mostly to differences in the time-independent models (e.g., fault slip rates), with relaxation of segmentation and inclusion of multi-fault ruptures being particularly influential. In fact, some UCERF2 faults were simply too long to produce M 6.7 sized events given the segmentation assumptions in that study. Probability model differences are also influential, with the implied gains (relative to a Poisson model) being generally higher in UCERF3. Accounting for the historic open interval is one reason. Another is an effective 27% increase in the total elastic-rebound-model weight. The exact factors influencing differences between UCERF2 and UCERF3, as well as the relative importance of logic-tree branches, vary throughout the region, and depend on the evaluation metric of interest. For example, M≥6.7 probabilities may not be a good proxy for other hazard or loss measures. This sensitivity, coupled with the approximate nature of the model and known limitations, means the applicability of UCERF3 should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS2015

Artificial seismic acceleration

In their 2013 paper, Bouchon, Durand, Marsan, Karabulut, 3 and Schmittbuhl (BDMKS) claim to see significant accelerating seismicity before M 6.5 interplate mainshocks, but not before intraplate mainshocks, reflecting a preparatory process before large events. We concur with the finding of BDMKS that their interplate dataset has significantly more fore- shocks than their intraplate dataset; however, we disagree that the foreshocks are predictive of large events in particular. Acceleration in stacked foreshock sequences has been seen before and has been explained by the cascade model, in which earthquakes occasionally trigger aftershocks larger than themselves4. In this model, the time lags between the smaller mainshocks and larger aftershocks follow the inverse power law common to all aftershock sequences, creating an apparent acceleration when stacked (see Supplementary Information).

Nature Geoscience↗

USGS2014

The UCERF3 grand inversion: Solving for the long‐term rate of ruptures in a fault system

We present implementation details, testing, and results from a new inversion‐based methodology, known colloquially as the “grand inversion,” developed for the Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF3). We employ a parallel simulated annealing algorithm to solve for the long‐term rate of all ruptures that extend through the seismogenic thickness on major mapped faults in California while simultaneously satisfying available slip‐rate, paleoseismic event‐rate, and magnitude‐distribution constraints. The inversion methodology enables the relaxation of fault segmentation and allows for the incorporation of multifault ruptures, which are needed to remove magnitude‐distribution misfits that were present in the previous model, UCERF2. The grand inversion is more objective than past methodologies, as it eliminates the need to prescriptively assign rupture rates. It also provides a means to easily update the model as new data become available. In addition to UCERF3 model results, we present verification of the grand inversion, including sensitivity tests, tuning of equation set weights, convergence metrics, and a synthetic test. These tests demonstrate that while individual rupture rates are poorly resolved by the data, integrated quantities such as magnitude–frequency distributions and, most importantly, hazard metrics, are much more robust.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS2013

Uniform California earthquake rupture forecast, version 3 (UCERF3): the time-independent model

In this report we present the time-independent component of the Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, Version 3 (UCERF3), which provides authoritative estimates of the magnitude, location, and time-averaged frequency of potentially damaging earthquakes in California. The primary achievements have been to relax fault segmentation assumptions and to include multifault ruptures, both limitations of the previous model (UCERF2). The rates of all earthquakes are solved for simultaneously, and from a broader range of data, using a system-level "grand inversion" that is both conceptually simple and extensible. The inverse problem is large and underdetermined, so a range of models is sampled using an efficient simulated annealing algorithm. The approach is more derivative than prescriptive (for example, magnitude-frequency distributions are no longer assumed), so new analysis tools were developed for exploring solutions. Epistemic uncertainties were also accounted for using 1,440 alternative logic tree branches, necessitating access to supercomputers. The most influential uncertainties include alternative deformation models (fault slip rates), a new smoothed seismicity algorithm, alternative values for the total rate of M≥5 events, and different scaling relationships, virtually all of which are new. As a notable first, three deformation models are based on kinematically consistent inversions of geodetic and geologic data, also providing slip-rate constraints on faults previously excluded because of lack of geologic data. The grand inversion constitutes a system-level framework for testing hypotheses and balancing the influence of different experts. For example, we demonstrate serious challenges with the Gutenberg-Richter hypothesis for individual faults. UCERF3 is still an approximation of the system, however, and the range of models is limited (for example, constrained to stay close to UCERF2). Nevertheless, UCERF3 removes the apparent UCERF2 overprediction of M6.5–7 earthquake rates and also includes types of multifault ruptures seen in nature. Although UCERF3 fits the data better than UCERF2 overall, there may be areas that warrant further site-specific investigation. Supporting products may be of general interest, and we list key assumptions and avenues for future model improvements.

California↗