Mud Volcano

1. Mud Volcano Was Man-Made, New Evidence
Confirms By Alexis Madrigal February 11, 2010
Mud volcanoes can form in two different ways. New fractures in rock that caps mud
deposits can open, allowing the mud to rise to the surface if it’s under pressure. Or,
an earthquake can liquefy mud that then travels through pre-existing cracks to the
surface.
Davies argues that the “kick” fractured the rock in the area, opening up new
pathways for pressurized mud to come flowing up to the surface. Davies’
team’s research uncovered new evidence from a drilling log that the drilling
company, Lapindo Brantas, pumped drilling mud down their well to try to stop the
mud volcano.
“This was partially successful, and the eruption of the mud volcano slowed down,”
Davies said. “The fact that the eruption slowed provides the first conclusive
evidence that the bore hole was connected to the volcano at the time of eruption.”
The new paper came in response to a paper published by the company’s lead driller
in the same journal. Lapindo Brantas has long maintained that drilling did not cause
the eruption. Instead, the company claims an earthquake that occurred two days
before and about 175 miles away did the damage. Obviously, there are financial
ramifications if the drilling company is found liable for the disaster.
The problem with the earthquake hypothesis is the stress changes caused by the
quake would have been relatively small, too small to cause the volcano, said
Davies’ co-author, University of California at Berkeley geologist Michael Manga.
“There is 1,000 times not enough energy to cause the eruption,” Manga said.
He was drawn into the controversy when the drilling company cited one of his
papers on how earthquakes can cause mud volcanoes and have on 32 occasions. But
Manga noted that based on all the historical examples that scientists have, what the
company claimed happened was impossible.
“So I wrote a one-page paper [in 2007] saying it could not possibly have caused the
mud volcano,” he said.
Other scientists came to similar conclusions, although some doubts remained.

2. An even stronger piece of evidence that the earthquake could not have created the
mud volcano, Manga said, is that in the years before the quake, there were “bigger
and closer earthquakes that did not cause an eruption.”
In fact, the stress changes associated with the tides are larger than the stresses
caused by the earthquake that happened to strike two days before the mud volcano
eruption began.
Still, the editor of the journal in which both the company’s paper and the Manga-
Davies rebuttal was published said that it was possible that the same data could be
subject to multiple interpretations.
“In geology, sometimes it’s not about being right or wrong, it’s about being
reasonable or unreasonable,” said editor Octavian Catuneanu, geologist at the
University of Alberta. “The funny thing is that sometimes datasets can be
interpreted by different people in different ways, and this leads to arguments and
controversies.”
Still, there is a large financial incentive for Lapindo Barantas’ scientists to find that
their company was not responsible. “The drilling company cannot say anything
different, right?” Manga said.
But Catuneanu said that no matter who the scientists were working for, they still
had to meet the scientific standards of the journal.
“I guess there would be some bias there, but as a journal editor, what I need to make
sure is that the authors of an article stick to the science,” he said. “If they want to
have something publishable, they have to bring data and discuss it in a scientific
manner.”
Lapindo Barantas could not be reached for comment.
Questions: Please answer two of the four questions in your journal
1.) Who, What, Where, When, Why?
2.) How did this Mud Volcano happen?
3.) What is the bias that is occurring with the scientist studying this
volcano?
4.) You are the president of the mining company that caused the mud
volcano. What would you do?