Regulatory Considerations for Evaluating the Potential for Induced Seismicity of a Class I Non-Hazardous Disposal Well

Transcription

1 Regulatory Considerations for Evaluating the Potential for Induced Seismicity of a Class I Non-Hazardous Disposal Well Chad Milligan, P.G.-SCS Engineers Craig Pangburn, P.G.-T&C Consulting Many Options With One Hat

2 Who is UCS, LLC, and what do we do? Underground Cavern Stabilization, LLC - (commercial Class V emplacement facility) Founded April 19, 2011 Permitted August 24, 2012 Provide a commercial facility to backfill, emplace, and contain non-hazardous semi-solid and/or solid material into underground cavern wells. Drilling Muds Cement Slurry Salt Impacted Soil Nearby Mining/Storage Brine Pond Solids Former LPG Storage Facility Solution Mined Salt Caverns

3 Benefits of UCS, LLC Provide landfills more airspace for disposal. Provides an alternative to landfarming or landspreading at Exploration and Production (E & P) locations. Especially important in areas that are ground water sensitive Locations where the landowner opposes landfarming or landspreading.

4 Why Class I Disposal Well?

5

6 Regulatory Considerations Item 11J: Provide descriptions and maps of faulting and fracturing or lineations in the area and discussion of the seismic history and activity of the area. Structural Features Earthquake Potential Evaluate the Potential of Induced Seismicity

7 Structural Features

8 Earthquake Potential

9 Earthquake Potential Locations of Earthquakes from 1989 to April 2014.

10 Evaluation of Induced Seismicity Recent Seismic activity in Oklahoma and south-central Kansas has heightened concerns that human activities might be causing felt earthquakes. Induced seismicity in other states has been linked to reservoirs (lakes), geothermal development, and waste disposal (KCC1). Therefore, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback established a task force in February 2014 to study and develop a state action plan for induced seismic activity related to oil and gas activities in Kansas (KCC2). Representatives from the Kansas Corporation Commission (KCC), Kansas Geological Survey (KGS), and the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) comprise the task force.

11 Evaluation of Induced Seismicity Three UIC Wells Classes with Greatest Potential to Induce Seismicity: Class V Class II Class I Credit: Graphic by Al Granberg for ProPublica Sources: R. Laurence Davis, Ph.D., University of New Haven; E.P.A ProPublica

12 Evaluation of Induced Seismicity Three Instances of Known Induced Seismic Activity: Rocky Mountain Arsenal, Prague, Oklahoma, 2010, 2011 Youngstown, Ohio, 2010 Map data 2016 Google, INEGI Imagery 2016 Source: Google Maps ( YashY.kkcYF03JfK8)

13 Evaluation of Induced Seismicity Rocky Mountain Arsenal, Class I Precambrian basement Injection began March 8, 1962 Pressure from March 1962 to October 1963 Gravity From August 1964 to April 1965 Pressure to February 1966 Seismic activity continued through 1967 Contributing Factors Injection into fractured crystalline bedrock Injection under pressure Decrease in seismic activity during gravity injection Activity increased as injection pressures increased

14 Evaluation of Induced Seismicity Prauge, Oklahoma 2011 Class II EOR Hunton Limestone Oil Production began 1950 s Injection began 1993 Initially under gravity to 2001 Maximum pressure in 2006 November 5 (5.0), 6 (5.7), and 8 (5.0), 2011 February 2010 (4.1) Contributing Factors Volume of injected fluids exceeded volume of extracted oil Close Proximity to the Wilzeta Fault System Increase in injection pressures Numerous wells injecting fluids

15 Evaluation of Induced Seismicity Youngstown, Ohio 2011 Commercial Class II Knox Group, and Mt Simon Sandstone Injection began early 2011 First documented Earthquakes March 12, 2011 Connection Made December 31, 2011 (4.0) Contributing Factors Injection under pressure Potentially drilled into PC basement

16 Evaluation of Induced Seismicity 2014 Conclusions No known structural features within the AOR No observed seismic activity Injecting under gravity: Increase in formation pressures minimal Potential for induced seismicity is minimal

17 Future Considerations Kansas Task Force

18 Future Considerations Kansas Task Force

19 Future Considerations Kansas Task Force

20 Future Considerations USGS, Rangely, Colorado, 1969 Response to Rocky Mountain Arsenal Rangely is a water flood O&G field Injection began 1957 First documented Earthquakes 1962 Monitor activity, adjust formation pressures, observe resulting activity Confirmed that increases in formation fluid pressure from injection triggers earthquakes. Concluded that seismic activity can be controlled where formation fluid pressure is controllable

21 References Healy, J. H.; Rubey, W.W; Griggs, D. T.; and Raleigh, C.B The Denver Earthquakes. Science, Volume 161, Number 3848, pp Raleigh, C.B., Healey, J.H., Bredehoft, J.D An Experiment in Earthquake Control at Rangely, Colorado. Science, Volume 191, pp Kansas Corporation Commission 1, 2014, Induced Seismicity State Task Force Meeting: Draft State Action Plan. Kansas Corporation Commission 2, February 17, 2014, Media Release: Governor Sam Brownback names task force to develop State Action Plan for induced seismicity. Merriam, Daniel F., reprint edition 1988, The Geologic History of Kansas: State Geological Survey of Kansas, Bulletin 162. Jewett, John M., 1951, Geologic Structures of Kansas: State Geological Survey of Kansas, Bulletin 90, Part 6. Holubnyak, Yevhen, others, Update on Induced Seismicity Studies by the Kansas Geological Survey. December 9, 2015 to the Kansas Geological Society.