{"id":14309,"date":"2013-05-16T09:15:10","date_gmt":"2013-05-16T14:15:10","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/oklahoma\/?p=14309"},"modified":"2014-01-02T10:49:48","modified_gmt":"2014-01-02T16:49:48","slug":"oklahomas-response-to-manmade-quakes-is-more-passive-than-other-states","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/oklahoma\/2013\/05\/16\/oklahomas-response-to-manmade-quakes-is-more-passive-than-other-states\/","title":{"rendered":"Oklahoma’s Response to Man-made Quakes is More Passive Than Other States"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Phil Masturzo \/ Akron Beacon Journal\/MCT\/Landov<\/p>\n

Roger Root stands next to an wastewater holding tank near an injection well on his Newton, Ohio farm. Ohio banned wastewater injection wells in risky areas after a series of earthquakes in 2010 and 2011.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

The 5.7-magnitude earthquake that damaged 14 homes and injured two Oklahomans in November 2011 was the nation’s largest quake linked<\/a> to injecting wastewater from oil and gas production deep underground. But neither that quake near Prague, nor Oklahoma’s recent spike in seismic activity<\/a>,\u00a0has provoked lawmakers or regulators here to write rules to protect public safety.<\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n

By contrast, a number of states that experienced smaller quakes linked to oil and gas activity are taking or considering more forceful steps intended to prevent them from happening again. That includes neighboring states like Arkansas, which has placed a moratorium<\/a> on disposal well operations in a seismically active part of the state, and Colorado, which requires a seismic review before disposal well permits are issued.<\/p>\n

StateImpact reviewed the rules and laws in a half-dozen states where seismologists have linked wastewater disposal wells to earthquakes: Arkansas, Colorado, Ohio, Texas and West Virginia. That review, along with interviews with oil and gas authorities and geoscientists, shows a more ambivalent approach to the issue in Oklahoma than elsewhere, and considerable reluctance to conclude that man-made earthquakes are a problem at all.<\/p>\n

Oklahoma regulators have begun a process of crafting voluntary guidelines for disposal well operators to follow if they wish. These “best practices,” if adopted, would lack the regulatory teeth of some of the policies in place or under consideration in the other states.<\/p>\n

Other States<\/h3>\n

In Ohio, a series of earthquakes shook the ground near Youngstown in December 2011 and January 2012. The swarm peaked with a 4.0-magnitude tremor, and regulators responded with what they bragged in a press release<\/a> were among the “nation’s toughest” rules on brine disposal.<\/p>\n

Ohio regulators have banned disposal wells in areas with certain geologic formations that have a higher earthquake risk. And before new disposal wells are permitted, regulators review geologic data \u201cfor known faulted areas,\u201d and require operators to install electronic sensors and follow other procedures to better track and monitor injection pressures and volumes.<\/p>\n

\n

\n

Related<\/h4>\n
\n
Posts<\/h5>\n