Janice R. Andrews
A sequence of unnerving earthquakes has regularly disturbed the peace in the quiet suburb of Edmond, Oklahoma, leaving the locals confused and fearful. Although not unusual in the area, the number and severity of these seismic occurrences have recently increased, raising questions and concerns among scientists and residents alike.
The aforementioned seismic events, which sprang from a series of earthquakes that occurred earlier in the year, have rekindled conversations about their underlying origins and possible consequences. The core of this seismic activity is located in northeast Edmond, where more than 150 aftershocks have been reported since January, according to Jake Walter, Oklahoma’s state seismologist.
Oklahoma’s complicated connection with oil and gas development is entwined with the story of these tremors. The state has historically served as a hub for these kinds of operations due to the enormous deposits that are hidden beneath the surface. But there has long been debate over the relationship between induced seismicity and oil and gas activities.
Following years of study that connected the discharge of wastewater to increased seismic activity, the Oklahoma Corporation Commission acted decisively around 10 years ago. Wastewater discharge into the Arbuckle formation—a geological strata that spans the state’s underground depths—was specifically prohibited. An important turning point in the attempts to mitigate seismic activity was reached in 2017 when all of the Arbuckle disposal wells in the Edmond area ceased operating.
Notwithstanding these steps, there are still unanswered concerns about how much recent seismic activity has been influenced by oil and gas operations. Although there haven’t been any generated earthquakes in Edmond this year due to hydraulic fracturing, more research are being conducted to determine the potential influence of other factors, including as past drilling techniques and geological conditions.
The Oklahoma Corporation Commission’s Matt Skinner highlights the cooperative efforts between research institutions and regulatory agencies. “The Oklahoma Geological Survey and the Oklahoma Corporation Commission’s Induced Seismicity Department are still studying the activity in the area,” Skinner states emphatically, demonstrating the dedication to thorough investigation and well-informed decision-making.
But it would be oversimplifying things if we said that Edmond’s seismic disturbances were entirely caused by humans. Walter clarifies that although human activity might intensify seismic activity, the underlying geological terrain is crucial. “It has just been a particularly active small fault zone that sometimes produces magnitude 4.0 earthquakes,” Walter clarifies. “These faults are inherently unstable.”
Walter warns against becoming overly complacent in the near future, pointing out that aftershocks are certain to occur in the upcoming months. This grim lesson emphasizes how important it is to maintain constant watchfulness and take preventative action to protect populations from seismic threats.
It is crucial to address the problem from a balanced angle as Edmond deals with the fallout from these earthquakes—one that recognizes how human activity and natural processes interact to shape the seismic environment of the area. Stakeholder participation and scientific research should be prioritized in order to map a more resilient and clear course forward.
