Fault lines: Seismicity and the fracturing of energy narratives in Oklahoma

Abstract Oklahoma is an oil and gas state where residents have historically been supportive of the industry. However, a dramatic increase in seismic activity between 2009 and the present, widely attributed to wastewater injection associated with oil and gas production, is a new and highly salient consequence of development. This research engages Oklahoma residents through open-ended interviews on their experience of and reaction to earthquakes. We use these interviews to characterize how energy narratives emerge in response to conflict between environmental outcomes and economic interest associated with a long-standing industry that is personally important to many in the state. We find that seismicity has fractured the dominant narrative of oil and gas development as important for the state into descendant narratives framing seismicity as a minor problem that will be resolved without affecting the oil and gas industry significantly, as a major problem that warrants opposition to the oil and gas industry, or as a problem that needs to be addressed, but not at the cost of all oil and gas development. Trust and a sense of personal efficacy are important in determining people’s reactions, and loss of trust in government is more widely observed than loss of trust in industry.

[1]  Derek Roger,et al.  Uncertainty, stress, and health , 2003 .

[2]  Emily Grubert,et al.  Improving Produced Water Management: A Case Study of Designing an Inland Desalination Pilot Project , 2015 .

[3]  Jessica Rolston,et al.  Mining Coal and Undermining Gender: Rhythms of Work and Family in the American West , 2014 .

[4]  R. Lejano,et al.  What’s the story? Creating and sustaining environmental networks , 2014 .

[5]  L. Glenna,et al.  The Relationship between Marcellus Shale Gas Development in Pennsylvania and Local Perceptions of Risk and Opportunity , 2013 .

[6]  S. Ge,et al.  High-rate injection is associated with the increase in U.S. mid-continent seismicity , 2015, Science.

[7]  Chelsea Schelly,et al.  To frack or not to frack: Perceptions of the risks and opportunities of high-volume hydraulic fracturing in the United States , 2016 .

[8]  Mark D. Zoback,et al.  Oklahoma’s recent earthquakes and saltwater disposal , 2015, Science Advances.

[9]  Susanne C. Moser,et al.  Communicating adaptation to climate change: the art and science of public engagement when climate change comes home , 2014 .

[10]  Matthew R. Lee,et al.  It's Not Whether You Win or Lose, It's How You Place the Blame: Shifting Perceptions of Recreancy in the Context of the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill† , 2016 .

[11]  P. Stern,et al.  Eliciting public concerns about an emerging energy technology: The case of unconventional shale gas development in the United States , 2015 .

[12]  E. Grubert,et al.  Villainous or valiant? Depictions of oil and coal in American fiction and nonfiction narratives , 2017 .

[13]  K. McComas,et al.  Public perceptions and acceptance of induced earthquakes related to energy development , 2016 .

[14]  Amanda D. Boyd,et al.  Conflicted or constructive? Exploring community responses to new energy developments in Canada , 2015 .

[15]  Mark D. Zoback,et al.  How will induced seismicity in Oklahoma respond to decreased saltwater injection rates? , 2016, Science Advances.

[16]  I. Kelman,et al.  Arctic petroleum’s community impacts: Local perceptions from Hammerfest, Norway , 2016 .

[17]  L. Hermwille.  The role of narratives in socio-technical transitions—Fukushima and the energy regimes of Japan, Germany, and the United Kingdom , 2016 .

[18]  Geoboo Song,et al.  Making Sense of Climate Change: How Story Frames Shape Cognition , 2014 .

[19]  G. Winkel.  When the pendulum doesn’t find its center: Environmental narratives, strategies, and forest policy change in the US Pacific Northwest , 2014 .

[20]  Gwen Ottinger,et al.  Refining Expertise : How Responsible Engineers Subvert Environmental Justice Challenges , 2013 .

[21]  D. P. Ferguson,et al.  “Fracking democracy”: Issue management and locus of policy decision-making in the Marcellus Shale gas drilling debate , 2013 .

[22]  G. Abers,et al.  Potentially induced earthquakes in Oklahoma, USA: Links between wastewater injection and the 2011 Mw 5.7 earthquake sequence , 2013 .

[23]  Julian J. Bommer,et al.  Induced seismicity associated with Enhanced Geothermal Systems , 2007 .

[24]  A. Corner,et al.  Public engagement with climate change: the role of human values , 2014 .

[25]  J. Jenkins,et al.  Boom and bust methodology: Opportunities and challenges with conducting research at sites of resource extraction , 2015 .

[26]  Kim de Rijke.  Coal seam gas and social impact assessment: an anthropological contribution to current debates and practices , 2013 .

[27]  Steve Mann,et al.  Research Interviews: Modes and Types , 2016 .

[28]  Suraje Dessai,et al.  Does tomorrow ever come? Disaster narrative and public perceptions of climate change , 2006 .

[29]  Andreas Hoffbauer,et al.  Social and political convergence on environmental events: the roles of simplicity and visuality in the BP Oil Spill. , 2014, Canadian review of sociology = Revue canadienne de sociologie.

[30]  Paul W. O’Brien,et al.  Warnings during disaster: normalizing communicated risk , 1992 .

[31]  Aysha Bodenhamer.  King Coal: A Study of Mountaintop Removal, Public Discourse, and Power in Appalachia , 2016 .

[32]  Anne Jerneck,et al.  Searching for a Mobilizing Narrative on Climate Change , 2014 .

[33]  A. Castellanos-Navarrete,et al.  Oil palm expansion without enclosure: smallholders and environmental narratives , 2015 .

[34]  Matthew Adams.  Inaction and environmental crisis: Narrative, defence mechanisms and the social organisation of denial , 2014, Psychoanalysis, Culture & Society.

[35]  Brenda Mason.  Beauty is Precious, Knowledge is Power, and Innovation is Progress: Widely Held Beliefs in Policy Narratives about Oil Spills , 2015 .

[36]  J. Kjaerulff.  Cultures of Energy: Power, Practices, Technologies , 2015 .