Oklahoma Oil and Gas

timhowardlaw

I Was in the Oklahoma Earthquake

The morning of Saturday, September 3, the house shook at about 7:02 am.Earthquake, 5.6 magnitude on the Richter scale.  The rumbling lasted for several seconds.  I was in Tulsa and the epicenter was near Pawnee, about 56 miles away.  In Tulsa the earthquake was notable; in Pawnee some buildings were damaged or even destroyed.

Some were quick to charge fracing as the causation culprit.  The earthquake was felt over an area of several states, so many people involved and much attention.  In fact the incidence of earthquakes in Oklahoma has reduced recently.  So has the amount of wastewater injection into deep wells, and the location of the active injection wells.  Oklahoma has always been seismically active.  But this big one, occurring at this time, will spark anew the debate about fracking and wastewater disposal.

I was there.  The ground shook.  But the shake-up, economically and socially, from reduced oil and gas drilling and production in Oklahoma will dwarf even those tremors.

timhowardlaw

Scientific American article analyzes earthquakes and drilling

Anna Kuchment’s March 2016 article in Scientific American, “Drilling for Earthquakes”* analyzes the geophysical background connecting injection wells and seismic activity.  She follows by critiquing the regulatory response.  Ms Kuchment is a science writer for the Dallas Morning News. Her interest in the subject springs from her current writing.  She connects the history of seismicity and deep injection wells with the current debate, adding detail not commonly considered.  For that reason alone her article is worth reading.  Charts, graphics and photos punctuate her discussion and accentuate the human and practical elements that her reporter’s eye finds.  She is more interested in the regulatory response than in the issues of legal liability for earthquakes allegedly caused by injection wells, but private liability is never far from this discussion.

*The article is available on the Scientific American website, http://www.scientificamerican.com   Various other bloggers have commented, see engineeringethicsblog.blogspot.com  post of Monday, June 20, 2016.

timhowardlaw

Oklahoma Corporation Commission Restricts Disposal Wells

The Oklahoma Corporation Commission has regulatory jurisdiction over oil and gas activities in Oklahoma.  The Commission has been challenged to regulate “fracking” wells but has declined.  On Monday, March  7, however, the Commission restricted the disposal of wastes (primarily salt water) produced as a result or byproduct of drilling and production activities.  The restriction covers two significant sized areas of the state.  The Commission did not ban oil or gas production nor the disposal process; but the restrictions are significant enough that production activity will be curtailed.

Parties dispute whether “fracking” itself or the production of hydrocarbons cause earthquakes.  The best evidence says that production does not cause, but also indicates that the deep injection of waste may migrate to the fault lines between geologic plates and increase the possibility that those plates slip against each other, causing earthquakes.

Regulating injection disposal wells will reduce the amount of production from fracking activities because fracking involves large amounts of water.  Oklahoma’s economy is significantly dependent on oil and gas, but political and social pressure about earthquake activities has been mounting.  Oklahoma is seismically active, even without fracking or disposal wells.  If the earthquakes continue the political pressure will increase.

timhowardlaw

Oklahoma allows private cause of action for alleged “fracking earthquakes”

The Oklahoma Supreme Court on June 30 ruled that private parties may bring tort lawsuits alleging damages caused by fracking.  Ladra v. New Dominion,  LLC (2015 OK 53, not yet published).  Plaintiff Sandra Ladra was a resident of Prague, Oklahoma and was injured in the “Prague Earthquake” of November 5, 2011 – 5.0 magnitude.  Her home suffered extensive damage.  Her lawsuit was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds early in the proceeding, the district court holding that the Oklahoma Corporation Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over oil and gas related matters.  She appealed on a point of error.  The Supreme Court reversed the district court, holding that private tort actions are exclusively within the jurisdiction of the district courts, even if those actions involve damages allegedly directly caused by oil and gas operations.  Plaintiff in this case alleged that fracking by a number of companies in the area around Prague caused the earthquake.  The Court remanded for further proceedings.  In a footnote, the Court stated that the Court was not deciding whether or not the plaintiff’s complaint was sufficient to state a claim.  Plaintiff must show causation of the earthquake by fracking and then the actions of the various defendants in the fracking operations.  The case is significant in this:  the doors to the district courts in Oklahoma are now open to plaintiffs alleging damages from earth movement and further alleging that the earth movement is caused by fracking.  The incidence of earthquakes in Oklahoma has greatly increased in recent years; will these lawsuits increase accordingly?