Abstract By integrating multiple datasets with relevant theory, covering fluid injection and fracturing, a conceptual model has been developed for the fracture development and induced seismicity associated with the fracking in 2011 of the Carboniferous Bowland Shale in the Preese Hall-1 well in Lancashire, NW England. Key features of this model include the steep fault that has been recognized adjoining this well, which slipped in the largest induced earthquakes, and the presence of a weak subhorizontal ‘flat’ within the depth range of the fluid injection, which was ‘opened’ by this injection. Taking account of the geometry of the fault and the orientation of the local stress field, the model predicts that the induced seismicity was concentrated approximately 700 m SSE of the Preese Hall-1 wellhead, in roughly the place where microseismic investigations have established that this activity was located. A further key observation, critical to explaining the subsequent sequence of events, is the recognition that the fluid injection during stage 2 of this fracking took place at a high net pressure, approximately 17 MPa larger than necessary. As a result, the fluid injection ‘opened’ a patch of the ‘flat’, making a hydraulic connection with the fracture network already created during stage 1. Continued fluid injection thus enlarged the latter fracture network, which ultimately extended southwards far enough to intersect the steep part of the fault and induce the largest earthquake of the sequence there. Subsequent fluid injection during fracking stages 3 and 4 added to the complexity of this interconnected fracture network, in part due to the injection during stage 4 being again under high net pressure. This model can account for many aspects of the Preese Hall record, notably how it was possible for the induced fracture network to intersect the seismogenic fault so far from the injection point: the interconnection between fractures meant that the stage 1 fracture continued to grow during stage 2, rather than two separate smaller fractures, isolated from each other, being created. Calculations indicate that, despite the high net pressure, the project only ‘went wrong’ by a narrow margin: had the net pressure been approximately 15 MPa rather than approximately 17 MPa the induced seismicity would not have occurred. The model also predicts that some of the smaller induced earthquakes had tensile or ‘hybrid’ focal mechanisms; this would have been testable had any seismographs been deployed locally to monitor the activity. The analysis emphasizes the undesirability of injecting fracking fluid under high net pressure in this region, where flat patches of fault and/or subhorizontal structural discontinuities are present. Recommendations follow for future ‘best practice’ or regulatory guidelines. Supplementary material: Background information on the stratigraphy, structural geology, rock-mechanical properties of the study region and its state of stress, as well as theory for fluid injection, hydraulic fracturing and Coulomb failure analysis, is available at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.3781121

Abstract Southwest Bulgaria forms the northern margin of the Aegean extensional province. Since the Early Pliocene ( c. 4 Ma), this region has accommodated southward or SSE extension at several millimetres per year, superimposed on c. 400 m of post-Early Pliocene regional uplift. This sense of deformation superseded earlier extension, oriented ENE— WSW, which is estimated to have begun in the early Late Miocene ( c. 10–9 Ma) and lasted until c. 4 Ma. The regional topography is dominated by NNW—SSE-striking grabens and normal fault escarpments, relics from this time. Normal faults that are now active cut across these older structures, although in some localities normal faults that were oriented obliquely to the earlier extension have remained active, also oblique to the modern extension sense. It is suggested that this present phase of extension relates to the modern sense of deformation throughout the Aegean region and to the modern geometry of the North Anatolian Fault Zone (NAFZ), which is independently inferred to have existed since c. 4 Ma. The earlier ENE—WSW extension is inferred to have involved two phases, the first predating the NAFZ and the second synkinematic with its initial phase of slip during c. 7–4 Ma, when its geometry and the overall sense of deformation in the Aegean region were different from at present. Some previous studies have inferred that SW Bulgaria experienced large-scale extension on low-angle normal faults in the Mid-Miocene or earlier. However, the limited evidence in support of this view is open to other interpretations, and after due consideration can be discounted.