The Rise, Peak and Decline of the Seismic Hazard Related to Hydraulic Fracturing Activities in the Duvernay Play, Fox Creek Area, Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We analyze the temporal evolution of the induced seismicity related to hydraulic fracturing activities in the Duvernay Formation, near Fox Creek, Alberta, Canada. For this analysis, we estimate annual Gutenberg‐Richter parameters, ‐ and ‐ values, and then calculate the annual likelihood of earthquakes greater than magnitude from 2014 to 2020. The seismic hazard near Fox Creek has consistently decreased since 2015, from a 95% probability of an earthquake greater than magnitude in 2015 to 4% in 2019 and less than 1% probability in 2020. The induced seismicity in Fox Creek is characterized by two actively seismic regions with distinctive features: (a) an Eastern region (∼220 events ) with lower b‐values and higher hazard; (b) a Western region (∼210 events ) with higher b‐values and lower seismic hazard. In contrast, extensive regions where hydraulic fracturing is performed, particularly East of the seismic cluster, remain non‐seismogenic. The overall decreasing seismic hazard, which contrasts with increasing operator activity, can be associated with (a) the intensification of hydraulic fracturing operations toward areas less susceptible to induced seismicity and (b) the reduction of seismic activity in the Eastern region, which exhibits the highest seismic hazard. We also find evidence of a minimum annual injection volume required to trigger induced seismicity in both the Western and Eastern regions. The minimum injection threshold increases over the years, implying increasingly successful mitigation strategies, likely due to regulatory implementations in the area, which has led the operators to exercise precaution in regions with significant seismic hazard and adapt treatment strategies to avoid triggering moderate magnitude size events during hydraulic fracturing stimulations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".