Is no one talking about OK earthquakes these days?
- Thread starter kjcba8101
- Start date
We always had them around Ada, but since it's not so highly populated, we never did tie up the lines at the news stations talking about the rattling going on.
pokesfan,
From as long as they've kept records of earthquakes in Oklahoma, the state averaged just two 3.0+ (Richter Scale) earthquakes per year. That's TWO (2) per YEAR.
Last year, the State averaged over TWO such strength earthquakes per DAY!
That's a 42,750% increase.
That's more 3.0+ quakes than every other state located in the Continental US combined.
More than Alaska which is nearly 10 times larger than Oklahoma.
Sorry, but even Ada hasn't "always" had anywhere close to the number of damaging earthquakes that have plagued this state since the numbers started in jumping in 2008.
Going from a 2 on the magnitude scale to a 3 doesn't indicate a "doubling" of strength of a quake, it actually indicates an increase of 10X. (The equation is non-linear) Most 2.0 quakes are not even felt by anyone except those right on top of it. The generally agreed upon number for recognizing when major damage can occur is set at 3.0.
From as long as they've kept records of earthquakes in Oklahoma, the state averaged just two 3.0+ (Richter Scale) earthquakes per year. That's TWO (2) per YEAR.
Last year, the State averaged over TWO such strength earthquakes per DAY!
That's a 42,750% increase.
That's more 3.0+ quakes than every other state located in the Continental US combined.
More than Alaska which is nearly 10 times larger than Oklahoma.
Sorry, but even Ada hasn't "always" had anywhere close to the number of damaging earthquakes that have plagued this state since the numbers started in jumping in 2008.
Going from a 2 on the magnitude scale to a 3 doesn't indicate a "doubling" of strength of a quake, it actually indicates an increase of 10X. (The equation is non-linear) Most 2.0 quakes are not even felt by anyone except those right on top of it. The generally agreed upon number for recognizing when major damage can occur is set at 3.0.
Oh there are people outraged. Lawsuits a plenty these days regarding earthquakes.
Ya the ball is rolling here now. People are just not posting it all over facebook but trust me people are screaming in this state. They just got the Governor to slow salt water wells well the amount they inject underground.
I'm not outraged over it, but my family owns a number of properties and I just wonder what the long term effect of tons of earthquakes is on them. If there's damage over time that's difficult to pin on someone, who's going to eat that bill? Probably me. So when some moron is injecting saltwater with his 700 HP injection pump and earthquakes start popping up all over, I'm starting to ask some questions.
Try getting a new home owners policy that covers earthquakes these days. Most companies will only write a policy if you haven't had significant quake in the last X amount of days within X miles from your location. In other words, basically few if any in-state will qualify under those conditions.
We're one of those tagged to reduce injection. Even though they (corporation commission) don't think we are the culprit we still get lumped in with the big boys. Sucks for now, but we'll survive.
You're likely more informed than I, but on the main board they were discussing insurance policies and the idea that the quakes are man made. Will insurance companies pay out if it can be proven they are man made earthquakes?
Most insurance policies have an exclusion for man made/caused earthquakes.
The insurance commissioner recently asked each company to clarify its position on man-made earthquakes. If you have eq insurance on your home, you should have received your company's position in the mail. I sell for several different home insurance companies in OK that offer eq insurance. My experience has been that a majority of companies I represent and others I am familiar with will cover man-made eq. Keep in mind that eq coverage is provided only as an endorsement on your home policy. It is not a covered peril on a standard home policy.
Deductibles make it difficult to see much value from the eq endorsement. Minimum deductible for most companies is 2% of the dwelling coverage but some go as high as 10% of the dwelling coverage. If your home is insured at 200k, your deductible could be as low as 4k or as high as 20k.
http://www.koco.com/news/oklahomans-confused-about-earthquake-insurance-coverage/37260396
Deductibles make it difficult to see much value from the eq endorsement. Minimum deductible for most companies is 2% of the dwelling coverage but some go as high as 10% of the dwelling coverage. If your home is insured at 200k, your deductible could be as low as 4k or as high as 20k.
http://www.koco.com/news/oklahomans-confused-about-earthquake-insurance-coverage/37260396
Ya I had a quite a few trucking companies insured that hauled the salt water to wells and that has pretty much just stopped. Did they put restrictions on all the injection wells or just picked and choose which ones had restrictions?
Any well disposing in the Arbuckle within the "area of interest" has had restrictions placed on them. Not only restrictions, but they want logs run on all of them to determine if they are disposing below the basement of the Arbuckle. If they are they have to be plugged back to come into compliance with their request. They had us do a number of things to our wells in order to establish what exactly our wells were doing. We have already spent a good chunk of change for all this, and it's all voluntary at this point. The guys at the corporation commission are simply trying anything and everything to determine what's going on, and honestly they don't know what this will accomplish.
I personally thinks it's real difficult to pinpoint which company. So who gets Sued? Well, we're included in the suit the Edmond residents filed using Garvin Issacs. He simply took a map that the corporation commission printed in the daily oklahoman with a big 15 mile radius from the epicenter of the big one back in December I believe, and included all injection wells within that circle. We are 15 miles from that epicenter, but included in the suit. So to answer your question, everyone within 15 miles of that epicenter, in this particular case.
How much damage has really been done? I mean people will sue for more then the cost of putting some new bricks up on the outside of their house. That is the problem these people will want pain and suffering also. Buckle up long-duc-dong they are going to come after all of you I fear and there is no way if hell they could ever figure out who caused the problem IMO.
Also they are picking a great time to sue with the oil boom busting and all. I bet most companies declare bankruptcy and move on. Which is really sad because then the rest of us will have to pay more taxes and more people will be unemployed. All this because a few rich peoples homes had minor damage. Sad that no one cared about all the poor people before them.
Let's just say that you own several million dollars worth of homes in OK. Should we sit back and let oil companies do as they please, while putting your assets at risk? The Edmond people could be asking for outrageous demands, I don't know. But, in this case, would you feel that OK oil companies should continue injecting saltwater and putting your properties at risk (although I'm not sure of the severity of the risk)? I'll say this-you can dispute the severity of the quakes, but you can't say that they are good for the long term health of our homes.
IMO it is cost of living in the state. If you don't like it then move some where else. I also have a HUGE problem that this was a non-issue until the richest area of Oklahoma suffered damages. Then suddenly lawsuits and politicians started doing their jobs.
How much damage was done? I would like to see the figures on this. I have a home my parents have a home and have went through all these and there was no damage to my house and just a few minor issues to my parents house. There is all kinds of false info out there and the lawyers are the only ones who are going to get a pay day out this. I expect Oklahoma to go back to the dark ages after all this is said and done. I think the pluses far out weight the minus of having these companies here.
How much damage was done? I would like to see the figures on this. I have a home my parents have a home and have went through all these and there was no damage to my house and just a few minor issues to my parents house. There is all kinds of false info out there and the lawyers are the only ones who are going to get a pay day out this. I expect Oklahoma to go back to the dark ages after all this is said and done. I think the pluses far out weight the minus of having these companies here.
First off, oil companies don't do as they please. Highly regulated, and are injecting what they are permitted to by the corporation commission. Now, I personally feel some of those wells in the Edmond area that are putting 20,000 barrels a day, at high pressures down hole, is a bit excessive and probably not necessary. Those are the wells the occ is really targeting with all these reductions, and the small players like us got pulled into it.
Isn't it just as correct to say that: "It's the cost of doing business in the state, if you don't like it then move your business somewhere else."
Here's the deal, the rule in this country is and always has been (in regards to property rights) you're free to do things with your land for which it is appropriate, HOWEVER, with that right comes an equal amount of responsibility NOT to damage or diminish the value of your neighbors land or encroach upon their peaceable enjoyment of their land. (The same principle as: You're free to swing your arms around as much as you like, but that right stops at someone else's nose.)
Your approach would completely stand about 300 yrs of law regarding property rights on its head.
This isn't like a situation where someone knew there was an existing risk and moved into that area anyway (informed decision) and are now raising a stink. (Like the guy who buys a house next to an existing airport/train track and then bitches about the noise.) This is about people who own homes and buildings well before the oil/gas business caused the number of earthquakes to jump by 47,000+% and who have been damaged as a result of that increased activity.
If your business causes damage to someone else's property do you just expect them to bend over and take in the a** because it may hurt your bottom line?
I know my family has owned the home I'm currently living in since 1953. When the earthquake numbers started jumping, we've had a good half dozen or so that really shook the place good. Now, I've got cracked drywall and spots that are bit "off-kilter" that will need to be repaired. (Damage that certainly did not exist previously) The reality is that I will never be compensated for that damage and I will have to pay for that out of my own pocket. Buy hey, as long as you made some money - I should just accept that right? After all, my parents shouldn't have been so so stupid as to not predict that the oil & gas industry some 58 yrs after the fact would turn this state into the most active earthquake region in the entire world.
All valid points, but how do you determine who's to blame for a particular earthquake that caused the damage to your home? I would argue you can't. It's not possible to pinpoint which well caused the earthquake or even if injection wells are the culprit. I don't expect anyone to just bend over and take it in the a** because their property is damaged by earthquakes, but I do expect them to use rational thought, and not emotion to determine who is to blame.
I will be sure to send China the bill if any damage happens to my house this year from storms since their pollution is causing this year to be a warmer one on record. Hell I might just send the bill to anyone polluting the Earth. You know when I was born this warming wasn't happening... Your a hoot sometimes Hollywood albeit an educated hoot though. I suggest you talk to your congress men about the problem. Did the oil companies break any laws?
You don't have to break any laws in order to be responsible for damages you cause.
Look, we know that there was no intent to damage property by using these injection wells. But that is not the end of the story, once the specific cause of the increased earthquakes can be pinpointed with some accuracy, then those doing the damage can be held responsible for that damage. (Unlike your China example which is not much more than pure speculation and a complete red herring in this discussion.)
You don't get to skate simply because you didn't break any laws, that is not, nor has it ever been the legal standard.
As others have noted, finding a particular culprit and holding them responsible is almost certainly going to a task in vain. Thus, the reality is that hundreds of thousands of people who have had their houses and other property damaged by this massive swarm of earthquakes are going to be F'd. Meanwhile, those who in turn profited by this activity are not going to pay out one thin dime.
So, what we have here is a scheme by where we end up with "Privatized Profits, and Socialized Risks."
One group gets to make money, while many, many others end up paying the price. So, don't bitch too much about those who are wanting to be compensated for the damages done to them, ultimately you know (as well as I do) that those who got the $ are almost certainly never going to pay the price for the damages they caused.
Look, we know that there was no intent to damage property by using these injection wells. But that is not the end of the story, once the specific cause of the increased earthquakes can be pinpointed with some accuracy, then those doing the damage can be held responsible for that damage. (Unlike your China example which is not much more than pure speculation and a complete red herring in this discussion.)
You don't get to skate simply because you didn't break any laws, that is not, nor has it ever been the legal standard.
As others have noted, finding a particular culprit and holding them responsible is almost certainly going to a task in vain. Thus, the reality is that hundreds of thousands of people who have had their houses and other property damaged by this massive swarm of earthquakes are going to be F'd. Meanwhile, those who in turn profited by this activity are not going to pay out one thin dime.
So, what we have here is a scheme by where we end up with "Privatized Profits, and Socialized Risks."
One group gets to make money, while many, many others end up paying the price. So, don't bitch too much about those who are wanting to be compensated for the damages done to them, ultimately you know (as well as I do) that those who got the $ are almost certainly never going to pay the price for the damages they caused.
One more thing. These people that filed this lawsuit are not looking for someone to simply repair their damaged homes they are looking for someone's head, and big bad oil is that proverbial head. They want a jury trial and punitive damages. They want to prove a point. They claim "great mental and emotional anguish" due to negligence, and simply repairing their homes will not suffice.
long-duc-dong,
And you and I both know that "wanting" something in a lawsuit is not the same as "getting" what you request.
Under Oklahoma law it's going to be a virtual impossibility to recover for emotional distress or receive punitive damages under these circumstances. Given that the standard here is almost certainly going to be "negligence" that's not going to cut it to support enhanced damages.
Their attorneys would have to show some willfulness or intent to support a claim of "Gross" Negligence and I just don't see them being able to do that. Without that, at most they will recover the repair costs to their homes. And that's if the companies who caused the damages don't shut-down, reincorporate under a different name or simply go BK.
And you and I both know that "wanting" something in a lawsuit is not the same as "getting" what you request.
Under Oklahoma law it's going to be a virtual impossibility to recover for emotional distress or receive punitive damages under these circumstances. Given that the standard here is almost certainly going to be "negligence" that's not going to cut it to support enhanced damages.
Their attorneys would have to show some willfulness or intent to support a claim of "Gross" Negligence and I just don't see them being able to do that. Without that, at most they will recover the repair costs to their homes. And that's if the companies who caused the damages don't shut-down, reincorporate under a different name or simply go BK.
This I am not talking about repairing their homes here Hollywood. These people want a pay day.
The suit claims willful intent by us because we knew what we were doing and knew injecting water at high volumes and high pressures would lead to this happening. I agree with you it'll be hard for them prove.
I'm calling BS on that unless you can prove otherwise. It doesn't make sense, economically, for a producer to truck their flowback and produced water long distances.
