Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
![First thumbnail for: Comment on “Estimating the Maximum Magnitude of In...]()
![Second thumbnail for: Comment on “Estimating the Maximum Magnitude of In...]()
![First thumbnail for: Ground‐Motion Attenuation, Stress Drop, and Direct...]()
![Second thumbnail for: Ground‐Motion Attenuation, Stress Drop, and Direct...]()
![Third thumbnail for: Ground‐Motion Attenuation, Stress Drop, and Direct...]()
![First thumbnail for: Time–Space Evolution of the Groningen Gas Field in...]()
![Second thumbnail for: Time–Space Evolution of the Groningen Gas Field in...]()
![Third thumbnail for: Time–Space Evolution of the Groningen Gas Field in...]()
![Spatial distribution of earthquake epicenters associated with the Groningen gas field from May 1991 to August 2022 (location shown in the inset, spatial boundaries of the gas field given as the red polygon). The largest earthquake (16 August 2012 M 3.6 Huizinge) is denoted as a star. The lower magnitude threshold is M0 1.5. Symbol sizes denote magnitudes.]()
![Spatial distribution of earthquake epicenters with magnitude ≥1.5 at the Groningen gas field from 12 May 1991 until 22 November 2021 in Dutch grid (also called Amersfoort) coordinates. Magnitudes m ≥ 3 are given as triangles and the largest earthquake (Huizinge, 16 August 2012, m = 3.6) as a star. The gray color denotes the area associated with the Groningen gas field.]()
![(a) Example acceleration time series of the 2012 ML 3.6 Huizinge earthquake recorded at station 15 (GARST), 14 km from the epicenter. The periods highlighted in red indicates the signal and in blue the noise. (b) Fourier amplitude spectrum of the acceleration time series. Black: as recorded at the surface; grey: deconvolved to the NS_B; solid blue: recorded noise; dotted blue: noise after deconvolution to the NS_B and low-frequency adjustment; the frequency range highlighted in red shows the FAS used in inversions (SNR > 3).]()
![First thumbnail for: Estimating the Maximum Magnitude of Induced <span ...]()
![Second thumbnail for: Estimating the Maximum Magnitude of Induced <span ...]()
![Third thumbnail for: Estimating the Maximum Magnitude of Induced <span ...]()
![First thumbnail for: The Groningen Case: When Science Becomes Part of t...]()
![Second thumbnail for: The Groningen Case: When Science Becomes Part of t...]()
![(a) Vertical: Maximum peak ground acceleration (PGAmax) and maximum peak ground velocity (PGVmax) as a function of local earthquake magnitude (ML, horizontal) for 55 earthquakes with ML≥2.0, as registered in KNMI (2024b) from September 2013 until 1 January 2025, and the Huizinge‐3.6 event in August 2012. Illustrative events are indicated by location and month/year of occurrence (G’wolde = Garmerwolde). The dashed lines indicate a (modest: 54% explained variance) linear statistical trend for PGAmax and a (fairly strong: 78%) quadratic trend for PGVmax, respectively. For Mmax=4, 4.5, and 5, projected values for PGVmax (only) are shown, with 95% confidence margins (two standard errors of estimation [SEE]) indicated by double vertical stripes. See further explanation in the text. (b) Results of similar analyses as underlying Figure 2a, but limited to 22 earthquakes with 2.4≤ML≤3.6. Fitted linear PGAmax=5.16ML−10.31, with R2=0.30. Quadratic PGAmax=0.70ML2+0.99ML−4.19, with R2=0.30. Fitted linear PGVmax=2.22ML−5.33, with R2=0.65 and SEE = 0.585. Quadratic PGVmax=1.71ML2−7.96ML+9.61, with R2=0.70 and SEE = 0.544. The color version of this figure is available only in the electronic edition.]()
![First thumbnail for: Framework for a Ground-Motion Model for Induced Se...]()
![Second thumbnail for: Framework for a Ground-Motion Model for Induced Se...]()
![Third thumbnail for: Framework for a Ground-Motion Model for Induced Se...]()
![First thumbnail for: Reflections and Some Questions about Assessing the...]()
![Second thumbnail for: Reflections and Some Questions about Assessing the...]()
![Third thumbnail for: Reflections and Some Questions about Assessing the...]()
![First thumbnail for: A database of ground motion recordings, site profi...]()
![Second thumbnail for: A database of ground motion recordings, site profi...]()
![Third thumbnail for: A database of ground motion recordings, site profi...]()
![First thumbnail for: Seismicity Scenarios for the Remaining Operating P...]()
![Second thumbnail for: Seismicity Scenarios for the Remaining Operating P...]()
![Third thumbnail for: Seismicity Scenarios for the Remaining Operating P...]()
![First thumbnail for: Reply to “Comment on ‘Estimating the Maximum Magni...]()
![Second thumbnail for: Reply to “Comment on ‘Estimating the Maximum Magni...]()
![First thumbnail for: A Note on the Estimation of the Maximum Possible <...]()
![Second thumbnail for: A Note on the Estimation of the Maximum Possible <...]()
![Third thumbnail for: A Note on the Estimation of the Maximum Possible <...]()
![First thumbnail for: The Groningen Gasquakes: Foreseeable Surprises, Co...]()
![Second thumbnail for: The Groningen Gasquakes: Foreseeable Surprises, Co...]()
![First thumbnail for: A Probabilistic Model to Evaluate Options for Miti...]()
![Second thumbnail for: A Probabilistic Model to Evaluate Options for Miti...]()
![Third thumbnail for: A Probabilistic Model to Evaluate Options for Miti...]()
![First thumbnail for: A Monte Carlo Method for Probabilistic Hazard Asse...]()
![Second thumbnail for: A Monte Carlo Method for Probabilistic Hazard Asse...]()
![Third thumbnail for: A Monte Carlo Method for Probabilistic Hazard Asse...]()
![First thumbnail for: Probabilistic Moment Tensor Inversion for Hydrocar...]()
![Second thumbnail for: Probabilistic Moment Tensor Inversion for Hydrocar...]()
![Third thumbnail for: Probabilistic Moment Tensor Inversion for Hydrocar...]()
1-20 OF 33 RESULTS FOR
Huizinge earthquake 2012
Results shown limited to content with bounding coordinates.
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
1
Journal Article
Comment on “Estimating the Maximum Magnitude of Induced Earthquakes in the Groningen Gas Field, the Netherlands” by Julian Bommer, Jan van Elk, and Mark Zoback Available to Purchase
Publisher: Seismological Society of America
Published: 14 February 2025
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2025) 115 (2): 707–714.
... assessment of the expected frequency, severity, and duration of further earthquake activity. It might well be that actual M max will never get higher than the historical M L 3.6 near Huizinge in 2012, which has overturned long‐held attitudes and policies about the Groningen gas field...
FIGURES
Journal Article
Ground‐Motion Attenuation, Stress Drop, and Directivity of Induced Events in the Groningen Gas Field by Spectral Inversion of Borehole Records Available to Purchase
Publisher: Seismological Society of America
Published: 28 July 2020
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2020) 110 (5): 2077–2094.
... has increased, coinciding with an increase in production of the field ( De Waal et al. , 2015 ; Nepveu et al. , 2016 ) and culminating, on 16 August 2012, in an M L 3.6 earthquake near Huizinge ( Dost and Kraaijpoel, 2013 ), which is the largest event occurred to date. The event, largely...
FIGURES
Includes: Supplemental Content
Journal Article
The Maximum Possible and the Maximum Expected Earthquake Magnitude for Production‐Induced Earthquakes at the Gas Field in Groningen, The Netherlands Available to Purchase
Publisher: Seismological Society of America
Published: 18 October 2016
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2016) 106 (6): 2917–2921.
... in the occurrence of the 2012 M w 3.6 Huizinge earthquake. At least since this event, a detailed seismic hazard and risk assessment including estimation of the maximum earthquake magnitude is considered to be necessary to decide on the future gas production. In this short note, we first apply state‐of‐the‐art...
Journal Article
Time–Space Evolution of the Groningen Gas Field in Terms of b ‐Value: Insights and Implications for Seismic Hazard Available to Purchase
Journal: Seismological Research Letters
Publisher: Seismological Society of America
Published: 14 April 2023
Seismological Research Letters (2023) 94 (4): 1807–1820.
... in the location of the 2012 M 3.6 Huizinge earthquake. In the last 10 yr, the mapped b ‐values are more homogeneous throughout the field. The spatial and temporal evolution of the b ‐value in the field in this study is shown to be quite complex, and systematically linked it to the evolution of fault loading...
FIGURES
Image
Spatial distribution of earthquake epicenters associated with the Groningen... Available to Purchase
in Seismicity Scenarios for the Remaining Operating Period of the Gas Field in Groningen, Netherlands
> Seismological Research Letters
Published: 14 December 2022
Figure 1. Spatial distribution of earthquake epicenters associated with the Groningen gas field from May 1991 to August 2022 (location shown in the inset, spatial boundaries of the gas field given as the red polygon). The largest earthquake (16 August 2012 M 3.6 Huizinge) is denoted as a star
Image
Spatial distribution of earthquake epicenters with magnitude ≥1.5 at the Gr... Available to Purchase
in A Note on the Estimation of the Maximum Possible Earthquake Magnitude Based on Extreme Value Theory for the Groningen Gas Field
> Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
Published: 27 April 2022
Figure 1. Spatial distribution of earthquake epicenters with magnitude ≥1.5 at the Groningen gas field from 12 May 1991 until 22 November 2021 in Dutch grid (also called Amersfoort) coordinates. Magnitudes m ≥ 3 are given as triangles and the largest earthquake (Huizinge, 16 August 2012, m
Image
(a) Example acceleration time series of the 2012 M L 3.6 Huizinge eart... Available to Purchase
in Framework for a Ground-Motion Model for Induced Seismic Hazard and Risk Analysis in the Groningen Gas Field, The Netherlands
> Earthquake Spectra
Published: 01 May 2017
Figure 5. (a) Example acceleration time series of the 2012 M L 3.6 Huizinge earthquake recorded at station 15 (GARST), 14 km from the epicenter. The periods highlighted in red indicates the signal and in blue the noise. (b) Fourier amplitude spectrum of the acceleration time series. Black
Journal Article
Estimating the Maximum Magnitude of Induced Earthquakes in the Groningen Gas Field, the Netherlands Available to Purchase
Publisher: Seismological Society of America
Published: 14 August 2024
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2024) 114 (6): 2804–2822.
... that has occurred was the Huizinge event that took place in August 2012 and was M L 3.6 or M 3.5; on average, the two magnitude scales are nearly equivalent in Groningen for the events of magnitude ≥ 2.5 ( Dost et al. , 2018 , 2019 ). The second largest event was the Westerendem earthquake...
FIGURES
Includes: Supplemental Content
Journal Article
The Groningen Case: When Science Becomes Part of the Problem, Not the Solution Available to Purchase
Journal: Seismological Research Letters
Publisher: Seismological Society of America
Published: 03 October 2018
Seismological Research Letters (2018) 89 (6): 2001–2007.
.... , 2018 ). The scientific discussion on the maximum expected and maximum possible magnitude also turned out to have a negative effect on the overall inflated perceived risk among the people in Groningen. At first, prior to the 2012 Huizinge earthquake and the subsequent research program, no one had...
FIGURES
Image
![(a) Vertical: Maximum peak ground acceleration (PGAmax) and maximum peak ground velocity (PGVmax) as a function of local earthquake magnitude (ML, horizontal) for 55 earthquakes with ML≥2.0, as registered in KNMI (2024b) from September 2013 until 1 January 2025, and the Huizinge‐3.6 event in August 2012. Illustrative events are indicated by location and month/year of occurrence (G’wolde = Garmerwolde). The dashed lines indicate a (modest: 54% explained variance) linear statistical trend for PGAmax and a (fairly strong: 78%) quadratic trend for PGVmax, respectively. For Mmax=4, 4.5, and 5, projected values for PGVmax (only) are shown, with 95% confidence margins (two standard errors of estimation [SEE]) indicated by double vertical stripes. See further explanation in the text. (b) Results of similar analyses as underlying Figure 2a, but limited to 22 earthquakes with 2.4≤ML≤3.6. Fitted linear PGAmax=5.16ML−10.31, with R2=0.30. Quadratic PGAmax=0.70ML2+0.99ML−4.19, with R2=0.30. Fitted linear PGVmax=2.22ML−5.33, with R2=0.65 and SEE = 0.585. Quadratic PGVmax=1.71ML2−7.96ML+9.61, with R2=0.70 and SEE = 0.544. The color version of this figure is available only in the electronic edition.](https://gsw.silverchair-cdn.com/gsw/Content_public/Journal/bssa/115/2/10.1785_0120240208/2/s_0120240208fig2.png?Expires=2147483647&Signature=avqnGYpOnymCEYbnhK8YI1JINNGJpiKGSkpcxT7Xp8Cc~OsGmnoV8qPgMLq0J-rBFKoJZu~OLBAw1mg-y5baoa8HqkkaFD3fQ58XhEhSA8u8f-FSzskgGpRd7n9PEQ568cgOLTejVZep-VftF7MJl0sOidNk4PL1vSm5VL0tO8QXPTRSoNnKa3GziNaMf2F8UfXmvv2kyE56wq3o9JJxjL8U1ID0XGy5fvJ1ix7XNneHkXjYzwmjyPgZq7M~2vFfiMzFGZqwRNe0VgexecOlgERk~B6vjCfajTHcjbRUy3Hi2phhUBVeGJmuPau-yDf~U6uscOLYPOmvWv2RO7T52A__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAIE5G5CRDK6RD3PGA)
(a) Vertical: Maximum peak ground acceleration ( PGA max ) and maxim... Available to Purchase
in Comment on “Estimating the Maximum Magnitude of Induced Earthquakes in the Groningen Gas Field, the Netherlands” by Julian Bommer, Jan van Elk, and Mark Zoback
> Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
Published: 14 February 2025
until 1 January 2025, and the Huizinge‐3.6 event in August 2012. Illustrative events are indicated by location and month/year of occurrence (G’wolde = Garmerwolde). The dashed lines indicate a (modest: 54% explained variance) linear statistical trend for PGA max and a (fairly strong: 78
Journal Article
Framework for a Ground-Motion Model for Induced Seismic Hazard and Risk Analysis in the Groningen Gas Field, The Netherlands Available to Purchase
Journal: Earthquake Spectra
Publisher: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
Published: 01 May 2017
Earthquake Spectra (2017) 33 (2): 481–498.
...Figure 5. (a) Example acceleration time series of the 2012 M L 3.6 Huizinge earthquake recorded at station 15 (GARST), 14 km from the epicenter. The periods highlighted in red indicates the signal and in blue the noise. (b) Fourier amplitude spectrum of the acceleration time series. Black...
FIGURES
Journal Article
Reflections and Some Questions about Assessing the Maximum Possible Earthquake in the Long‐Exploited Groningen Gas Field Available to Purchase
Journal: Seismological Research Letters
Publisher: Seismological Society of America
Published: 01 August 2023
Seismological Research Letters (2023) 94 (5): 2469–2478.
... about 50% reservoir pressure depletion from the original 350 bar in 1960. Especially since August 2012, when a widely damaging earthquake with magnitude M 3.6 occurred near the village of Huizinge, various parties involved are wondering how many earthquakes could still occur and, particularly, what...
FIGURES
Journal Article
A database of ground motion recordings, site profiles, and amplification factors from the Groningen gas field in the Netherlands Open Access
Journal: Earthquake Spectra
Publisher: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
Published: 01 February 2023
Earthquake Spectra (2023) 39 (1): 687–701.
...-scale data acquisition program carried out by the field operator, NAM, in collaboration with KNMI, which operates the networks, following the August 2012 Huizinge earthquake. The names of the stations were also modified during the upgrade. The accelerographs are located on the ground floor of small...
FIGURES
Journal Article
Seismicity Scenarios for the Remaining Operating Period of the Gas Field in Groningen, Netherlands Available to Purchase
Journal: Seismological Research Letters
Publisher: Seismological Society of America
Published: 14 December 2022
Seismological Research Letters (2023) 94 (2A): 805–812.
...Figure 1. Spatial distribution of earthquake epicenters associated with the Groningen gas field from May 1991 to August 2022 (location shown in the inset, spatial boundaries of the gas field given as the red polygon). The largest earthquake (16 August 2012 M 3.6 Huizinge) is denoted as a star...
FIGURES
Journal Article
Reply to “Comment on ‘Estimating the Maximum Magnitude of Induced Earthquakes in the Groningen Gas Field, the Netherlands’ by Julian J. Bommer, Jan van Elk, and Mark D. Zoback” by Charles Vlek Available to Purchase
Publisher: Seismological Society of America
Published: 14 February 2025
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2025) 115 (2): 715–720.
... the M L 3.6 Huizinge event of August 2012. Vlek (2024b) identifies 55 of the 58 listed earthquakes on the portal as being from Groningen, whereas zooming out to the full map display shows that six of the earthquakes are not within the Groningen field. The freely available database of Groningen...
FIGURES
Journal Article
A Note on the Estimation of the Maximum Possible Earthquake Magnitude Based on Extreme Value Theory for the Groningen Gas Field Available to Purchase
Publisher: Seismological Society of America
Published: 27 April 2022
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2022) 112 (4): 1825–1831.
...Figure 1. Spatial distribution of earthquake epicenters with magnitude ≥1.5 at the Groningen gas field from 12 May 1991 until 22 November 2021 in Dutch grid (also called Amersfoort) coordinates. Magnitudes m ≥ 3 are given as triangles and the largest earthquake (Huizinge, 16 August 2012, m...
FIGURES
Journal Article
The Groningen Gasquakes: Foreseeable Surprises, Complications of Hard Science, and the Search for Effective Risk Communication Available to Purchase
Journal: Seismological Research Letters
Publisher: Seismological Society of America
Published: 06 March 2019
Seismological Research Letters (2019) 90 (3): 1071–1077.
..., debate, and decision making. Soon after the worrying 3.6 earthquake near the village of Huizinge in August 2012, SodM (2013) recommended a considerable reduction in annual extraction, as well as the reinforcement of thousands of vulnerable buildings; see also Muntendam‐Bos and De Waal (2013...
FIGURES
Journal Article
A Probabilistic Model to Evaluate Options for Mitigating Induced Seismic Risk Available to Purchase
Journal: Earthquake Spectra
Publisher: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
Published: 01 May 2019
Earthquake Spectra (2019) 35 (2): 537–564.
... as being of meteorological origin (B. Dost, pers. comm. , 2017). In August 2012, the area's largest induced earthquake occurred close to the village of Huizinge, in the center of the Groningen field. This M L 3.6 event was widely felt and led to numerous claims for minor damage to buildings and long...
FIGURES
Journal Article
A Monte Carlo Method for Probabilistic Hazard Assessment of Induced Seismicity due to Conventional Natural Gas Production Available to Purchase
Publisher: Seismological Society of America
Published: 19 May 2015
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2015) 105 (3): 1721–1738.
... ), using seismicity data up to the 2012 M L 3.6 Huizinge event, concluded that the frequency–magnitude distribution of observed earthquakes for the Groningen gas field do not provide any evidence for a reliable upper bound on the maximum magnitude earthquake that Groningen gas production may induce...
FIGURES
Journal Article
Probabilistic Moment Tensor Inversion for Hydrocarbon‐Induced Seismicity in the Groningen Gas Field, The Netherlands, Part 1: Testing Available to Purchase
Publisher: Seismological Society of America
Published: 11 August 2020
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2020) 110 (5): 2095–2111.
... in earthquake analysis; for instance, for the largest event in the field, to date, the 16 August 2012 M w 3.6 Huizinge event, an attempt was made to recover the focal mechanism, but no stable solution could be found ( Dost and Kraaijpoel, 2013 ). Since 2015, the network was upgraded extensively...
FIGURES
1
