Best practice procedures are being developed and implemented to deal with hazard mitigation of the effects of induced seismicity. Improved protocols and practical strategies are required to gain public acceptance. Developing such protocols is an important research objective ( ). The strategies build on better understanding of the triggering mechanisms, and the underlying causes of induced seismicity. Some of the key questions that remain to be fully addressed are as follows:

  1. What methods can be used to differentiate between triggered, induced and natural seismicity?
  2. How can we improve estimations of the damaging potential of triggered earthquakes?
  3. How can we mitigate the seismic hazard due to resource exploitation?
  4. How should a monitoring network be optimally designed to deliver the required information for seismic hazard mitigation?
  5. How can an exploitation strategy be optimally designed to avoid causing large earthquakes?
  6. What decisions are influenced by the micro-seismic monitoring and interpretation results? [For example: stimulation optimization, reservoir production/injection management, or make-up drilling targets.]
  7. What are the best ways to build public acceptance for resource utilisation?

Based on experience gained from many decades of geothermal exploration and development, often within earthquake-prone geological settings, these major questions regarding induced seismicity are discussed from the end-user point-of-view. Those issues which require more research are identified. Suggestions are offered to facilitate better cooperation between academic institutions and industry partners to foster information exchange and better serve public and company interests.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Baisch, S. and Vörös, R.
    [2010] Reservoir induced seismicity: Where, when, why and how strong?Proc. of the World Geothermal Congress 2010, Bali, Indonesia, Paper 3160, 5p.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bommer, J., Oates, S., Cepeda, J. M., Lindholm, C., Bird, J., Torres, R., Marroquin, G., and Rivas, J.
    [2006] Control of hazard due to seismicity induced by a hot fractured rock geothermal project, Engineering Geology, 83, 287–306.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bromley, C.J., and Mongillo, M.A.
    [2008] Geothermal energy from fractured reservoirs – Dealing with induced seismicity. Open Energy Technology Bulletin, 48, 7p. www.iea.org/impagr/cip/pdf/Issue48Geothermal.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bromley, C.J., and Majer, E.L.
    [2012] Geothermal induced seismicity: risks and rewards, Proceedings 34th New Zealand Geothermal Workshop, 19–21 November, 7 p.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Cladouhos, T., Petty, S., Foulger, G., Julian, B., and Fehler, M.
    [2010] Injection induced seismicity and geothermal energy. Geothermal Research Council Transactions, 34, 1213–1220.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Evans, K.F., Zappone, A., Kraft, T., Deichmann, N., and Moia, F.
    [2012] A survey of the induced seismic responses to fluid injection in geothermal and CO2 reservoirs in Europe. Geothermics, Vol.41, p30–54.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Majer, E.L., Baria, R., Stark, M., Oates, S., Bommer, J., Smith, B., and Asanuma, H.
    [2007] Induced seismicity associated with Enhanced Geothermal Systems, Geothermics, 36, 185–222. (2007).
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Majer, E., Nelson, J., Robertson-Tait, A., Savy, J., and Wong, I.
    [2011] Protocol for addressing induced seismicity associated with enhanced geothermal systems (EGS). http://www1.eere.energy.gov/geothermal/pdfs/egs-is-protocol-final-draft-20110531.pdf.
  9. McClure, M, and Horne, R.
    [2010] Numerical and analytical modeling of the mechanisms of induced seismicity during fluid injection. Geothermal Resource Council Transactions, 34, 381–394.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Mena, B., Wiemer, S., and Bachmann, C.
    [2013] Building robust models to forecast the induced seismicity related to geothermal reservoir enhancement. Bull. Seismol.Soc. Am. 103, 383–393, http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/0120120102.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Mignan, A., Landtwing, D., Kastlii, P., Mena, B., and Weimer, S.
    [2014] Induced seismicity risk analysis of the 2006 Basel, Switzerland, Enhanced Geothermal System project: Influence of uncertainties on risk mitigation. Geothermics, 53, 133–146, DOI: 10.1016/j.geothermics.2014.05.007.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geothermics.2014.05.007 [Google Scholar]
  12. Sepulveda, F. Andrews, J., Alvarez, M., Montague, T. and Mannington, W.
    [2013] Overview of Deep Structure Using Microseismicity at Wairakei, Proc. 35th New Zealand Geothermal Workshop, 8p.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Sewell, S. M., Cumming, W., Bardsley, C.J., Winick, J., Quinao, J., Wallis, I.C., Sherburn, S., Bourguignon, S., Bannister, S.
    [2013] Microseismicity at Rotokawa Geothermal Field, 2008 to 2012, Proceedings, 35th New Zealand Geothermal Workshop, 8p.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Shapiro, S.A., KrugerO.S., DinskeC., and LangenbruchC.
    [2011] Magnitudes of induced earthquakes and geometric scales of fluid-stimulated rock volumes. Geophysics76, Issue 6, WC55.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Sherburn, S., Bromley, C., Bannister, S., Sewell, S., Bourguignon, S.
    [2015] New Zealand Geothermal Induced Seismicity: an Overview. Submitted toProc. WGC2015, Melbourne, April 2015, #24009.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error