英国诱发地震活动的红灯阈值

Ryan Schultz, Brian Baptie, Benjamin Edwards, Stefan Wiemer
{"title":"英国诱发地震活动的红灯阈值","authors":"Ryan Schultz, Brian Baptie, Benjamin Edwards, Stefan Wiemer","doi":"10.26443/seismica.v2i2.1086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Induced earthquakes pose a serious hurdle to subsurface energy development. Concerns about induced seismicity led to terminal public opposition of hydraulic fracturing in the UK. Traffic light protocols (TLPs) are typically used to manage these risks, with the red-light designed as the last-possible stopping-point before exceeding a risk tolerance. We simulate trailing earthquake scenarios for the UK, focusing on three risk metrics: nuisance, damage, and local personal risk (LPR) – the likelihood of building collapse fatality for an individual. The severity of these risks can spatially vary (by orders-of-magnitude), depending on exposure. Estimated risks from the Preston New Road earthquakes are used to calibrate our UK earthquake risk tolerances, which we find to be comparable to Albertan (Canadian) tolerances. We find that nuisance and damage concerns supersede those from fatality and that the safest regions for Bowland Shale development would be along the east coast. A retrospective comparison of our TLP result with the Preston New Road case highlights the importance of red-light thresholds that adapt to new information. Overall, our findings provide recommendations for red-light thresholds (ML 2-2.5) and proactive management of induced seismicity – regardless of anthropogenic source.","PeriodicalId":498743,"journal":{"name":"Seismica","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Red-light thresholds for induced seismicity in the UK\",\"authors\":\"Ryan Schultz, Brian Baptie, Benjamin Edwards, Stefan Wiemer\",\"doi\":\"10.26443/seismica.v2i2.1086\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Induced earthquakes pose a serious hurdle to subsurface energy development. Concerns about induced seismicity led to terminal public opposition of hydraulic fracturing in the UK. Traffic light protocols (TLPs) are typically used to manage these risks, with the red-light designed as the last-possible stopping-point before exceeding a risk tolerance. We simulate trailing earthquake scenarios for the UK, focusing on three risk metrics: nuisance, damage, and local personal risk (LPR) – the likelihood of building collapse fatality for an individual. The severity of these risks can spatially vary (by orders-of-magnitude), depending on exposure. Estimated risks from the Preston New Road earthquakes are used to calibrate our UK earthquake risk tolerances, which we find to be comparable to Albertan (Canadian) tolerances. We find that nuisance and damage concerns supersede those from fatality and that the safest regions for Bowland Shale development would be along the east coast. A retrospective comparison of our TLP result with the Preston New Road case highlights the importance of red-light thresholds that adapt to new information. Overall, our findings provide recommendations for red-light thresholds (ML 2-2.5) and proactive management of induced seismicity – regardless of anthropogenic source.\",\"PeriodicalId\":498743,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Seismica\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Seismica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26443/seismica.v2i2.1086\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seismica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26443/seismica.v2i2.1086","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

诱发地震对地下能源开发构成严重障碍。在英国,对诱发地震活动的担忧导致公众最终反对水力压裂。交通灯协议(TLPs)通常用于管理这些风险,红灯被设计为超过风险承受能力之前的最后一个可能的停车点。我们模拟了英国的地震情景,重点关注三个风险指标:滋扰、破坏和当地个人风险(LPR)——建筑物倒塌导致个人死亡的可能性。根据暴露程度的不同,这些风险的严重程度可能在空间上有所不同(按数量级)。普雷斯顿新路地震的估计风险被用来校准我们的英国地震风险承受能力,我们发现这与阿尔伯塔省(加拿大)的承受能力相当。我们发现,对妨害和损害的担忧取代了对死亡的担忧,鲍兰德页岩开发最安全的地区将是东海岸。回顾性比较我们的TLP结果与普雷斯顿新路案例突出了红灯阈值适应新信息的重要性。总的来说,我们的研究结果提供了红灯阈值(ML 2-2.5)和主动管理诱发地震活动的建议-无论人为来源如何。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Red-light thresholds for induced seismicity in the UK
Induced earthquakes pose a serious hurdle to subsurface energy development. Concerns about induced seismicity led to terminal public opposition of hydraulic fracturing in the UK. Traffic light protocols (TLPs) are typically used to manage these risks, with the red-light designed as the last-possible stopping-point before exceeding a risk tolerance. We simulate trailing earthquake scenarios for the UK, focusing on three risk metrics: nuisance, damage, and local personal risk (LPR) – the likelihood of building collapse fatality for an individual. The severity of these risks can spatially vary (by orders-of-magnitude), depending on exposure. Estimated risks from the Preston New Road earthquakes are used to calibrate our UK earthquake risk tolerances, which we find to be comparable to Albertan (Canadian) tolerances. We find that nuisance and damage concerns supersede those from fatality and that the safest regions for Bowland Shale development would be along the east coast. A retrospective comparison of our TLP result with the Preston New Road case highlights the importance of red-light thresholds that adapt to new information. Overall, our findings provide recommendations for red-light thresholds (ML 2-2.5) and proactive management of induced seismicity – regardless of anthropogenic source.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信