Yeah right, give us a ‘reason’ that we can feel comfortable with; the first post denied there was an earthquake……………
Well, maybe fracking is building up pressures in new places, or extending pressures to areas which could “slip”?
Aren’t small earthgquakes part of what happens with fracking? It does appear there is a correlation, which may be temporal not causal. Except they stop when the fracking stopped…
To be determined. (And Phillie may be too far away?)
usgs says a 1.7.
Yeah right, give us a ‘reason’ that we can feel comfortable with; the first post denied there was an earthquake……………
Well, maybe fracking is building up pressures in new places, or extending pressures to areas which could “slip”?
Aren’t small earthgquakes part of what happens with fracking? It does appear there is a correlation, which may be temporal not causal. Except they stop when the fracking stopped…
To be determined. (And Phillie may be too far away?)
Yep, it was an earthquake.
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsus/Quakes/ld60017566.php
However, it’s not surprising that there was some confusion. Dynamiting in a quarry, for example, can reach about the same magnitude, as shown in this event from a quarry above Cupertino, Ca:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsus/Quakes/nc71578695.html
The PG&E pipeline blast in San Bruno, Ca. also appeared on the USGS earthquake maps.