Induced or Natural? Toward Rapid Expert Assessment, with Application to the Mw 5.2 Peace River Earthquake Sequence

Abstract

Abstract Based on information available at the time, several questionnaire-based schemes have been developed to provide a qualitative assessment of whether a specific earthquake (or earthquake sequence) was likely induced by anthropogenic activities or is inferred to be natural. From a pragmatic perspective, the value of this assessment is arguably the greatest in the immediate aftermath of an event (hours to days), because it could then better serve to guide regulatory response. However, necessary information is often incomplete or uncertain, and there remains a lack of scientific consensus on the most distinctive attributes of induced (vs. natural) earthquake sequences. We present a case study of the Mw 5.2 Peace River earthquake sequence (Alberta, Canada), evaluated using two published frameworks for origin interpretation. The Alberta Energy Regulator initially considered the sequence to be natural, but a study published ~4 mo later came to the opposite interpretation. Prior to this publication, we convened a panel of experts who completed questionnaires as set out by the frameworks; results using both schemes indicate that experts believe the sequence was likely induced. Based on these expert responses, we critically evaluate information that was available publicly in the weeks to months following the mainshock on 30 November 2022; reassess the relative importance of various components of the questionnaires from a parsimonious, rapid-response perspective; and consider other types of information that could be critical for near-real-time assessment of whether an event was induced or natural.