1983
DOI: 10.1785/gssrl.54.2.3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Denver Earthquake Sequence of March–April 1981

Abstract: The Denver earthquake sequence of March–April 1981 was monitored by a network of four permanent and eight portable seismographs. In addition to the main shock (mb = 4.3) on 2 April, six microaftershocks (M < 2) during the subsequent two-week period were recorded and located. Five of those six events had epicenters within the most active area of the 1967–1968 Rocky Mountain Arsenal (RMA) sequence. A composite focal mechanism solution for the main shock and the six aftershocks showed a combination of reverse … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Coal‐bed methane production and wastewater injection began in 1994 and its increase from ∼2000 to 2002 was accompanied by a rapid increase in seismicity (Figure 1b; Advanced National Seismic System Comprehensive Earthquake Catalog (ANSS ComCat)). Thus, the Raton Basin's rise of induced seismicity was ∼8 years ahead of the central U.S. average (Figure 1), and it is a valuable example of how induced seismicity can persist as injection decreases or potentially cease on local scales (e.g., Healy et al., 1968; Hsieh & Bredehoeft, 1981; Bollinger, et al., 1983). Historically, seismicity in the basin was rare but not absent.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Coal‐bed methane production and wastewater injection began in 1994 and its increase from ∼2000 to 2002 was accompanied by a rapid increase in seismicity (Figure 1b; Advanced National Seismic System Comprehensive Earthquake Catalog (ANSS ComCat)). Thus, the Raton Basin's rise of induced seismicity was ∼8 years ahead of the central U.S. average (Figure 1), and it is a valuable example of how induced seismicity can persist as injection decreases or potentially cease on local scales (e.g., Healy et al., 1968; Hsieh & Bredehoeft, 1981; Bollinger, et al., 1983). Historically, seismicity in the basin was rare but not absent.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%