Search USGSSearch

USGS · 70184483

Rapid response, monitoring, and mitigation of induced seismicity near Greeley, Colorado

Abstract

On 1 June 2014 (03:35 UTC), an M w 3.2 earthquake occurred in Weld County, Colorado, a historically aseismic area of the Denver–Julesburg basin. Weld County is a prominent area of oil and gas development, including many high‐rate class II wastewater injection wells. In the days following the earthquake, the University of Colorado, with support from the U.S. Geological Survey and Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology–Portable Array Seismic Studies of the Continental Lithosphere, rapidly deployed six seismic stations to characterize the seismicity associated with the 1 June earthquake (the Greeley sequence) and to investigate its possible connection to wastewater disposal. The spatial and temporal proximity of earthquakes to a high‐rate wastewater disposal well strongly suggests these earthquakes were induced. Scientific communication between the university, state agencies, and the energy industry led to rapid mitigation strategies to reduce the occurrence of further earthquakes. Mitigation efforts included implementing a temporary moratorium on injection at the well, cementing the bottom portion of the disposal well to minimize hydrologic connectivity between the disposal formation and the underlying crystalline basement, and subsequently allowing injection to resume at lower rates. Following the resumption of wastewater disposal, microseismicity was closely monitored for both increases in earthquake rate and magnitude. Following mitigation efforts, between 13 August 2014 and 29 December 2015, no earthquakes larger than M 1.5 occurred near the Greeley sequence. This study demonstrates that a detailed and rapid characterization of a seismic sequence in space and time relative to disposal, combined with collaboration and communication between scientists, regulators, and industry, can lead to objective and actionable mitigation efforts that potentially reduced the rate of earthquakes and the possible generation of larger earthquakes.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 40.35596325640413° to 40.531545551348394° latitude; -104.82536315917967° to -104.47792053222656° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

William L. Yeck, A.F Sheehan, Harley M. Benz, Matthew Weingarten, Jenny Nakai. 2016-06-15. Rapid response, monitoring, and mitigation of induced seismicity near Greeley, Colorado. https://doi.org/10.1785/0220150275

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Digitizer Suite: The Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory Digitizer Testing Suite

Laboratory testing of digitizers and seismometers helps ensure that prior to deployment the instrumentation can produce high quality data and is operating within specifications. In this work we detail the software package called: the Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory (ASL) Digitizer Test Suite. This Java software package provides several algorithms to verify various performance parameters of digitizers commonly used for recording analog seismic instruments. The goal of these tests is not to be exhaustive, but to identify common failures that could compromise the integrity of seismic data being recorded on the digitizer. For example, Sandia National Laboratories (e.g., Slad and Merchant, 2018) routinely do comprehensive testing of digitizers for various monitoring missions. While these tests reports are valuable for comprehensively characterizing a recording system, it would be resource intensive to conduct such tests on every seismic recorder used in a network. We focus on tests that include ways to estimate the sensitivity, timing, self-noise, and clip-level of the digitizer, as well as the fidelity of the signal being recorded. The software is publicly available and provides a way for the community to verify the integrity of a digitizer using a minimum amount of outside equipment.

Seismological Research Letters

The digital archivist: Automating legacy macroseismic data processing using large language models

Macroseismic data are a key resource to investigate shaking and damage from preinstrumental and early instrumental eras. However, data are often stored as inconsistently formatted reports describing observed shaking and damage, making manually parsing and interpreting accounts labor‐intensive. We introduce a novel workflow using Google’s Gemini 2.5 Pro large language model (LLM) to automate the extraction and structuring of macroseismic observations from summary reports. We apply this workflow to the 22 March 1957 M 5.3 Daly City, California, earthquake as a case study. We used Gemini to extract addresses, originally assigned modified Mercalli intensity values, and descriptions from each report. To address coordinate precision limits, addresses were geocoded via Google’s Geocoding application programming interface. This workflow yielded over 2300 geocoded intensity reports for the Daly City earthquake. We use the geocoded accounts, with the original report intensity assignments, to develop a shaking intensity map that in some respects rivals modern Did You Feel It? Maps. We also extract and present data for the 9 February 1971 M L 6.7 Sylmar, California, earthquake. Our results demonstrate the potential of LLMs for reliably extracting and analyzing large, unstructured macroseismic datasets. LLMs offer a scalable solution for rapidly digitizing macroseismic archives, enabling their broader use to constrain ground‐motion models in modern seismic hazard analysis and to improve our understanding of site effects in urban areas. The concepts explored here may also be applied to the handling of other legacy seismological and earth science data.

Seismological Research Letters