Assuming you weren't joking, I'm only guessing but the amount of pressure fracking releases is tiny. For example assuming there is pressure for a magnitide 7 earthquake building up, to stop it you need 1000 level 4 quakes or 10000 level 3 quakes, or 100000 level 2 quakes or a million level 1 quakes. Believe fracking is even below that (and my numbers are probably off)
For the moment magnitude scale, I believe the (typical; it doesn’t actually correspond directly to energy release) ratio is even steeper than that, at around a 32x factor for each point in the scale. So to equal the energy of a 7 you’d need roughly 1 billion magnitude-1 quakes.
If you have seen how hard Oklahoma has bit the dust in recent decades from local and macroeconomic changes, the place doesn't need anything more working against it --- least of all more "make a buck today at the expense of tomorrow." Allowing itself to incur damage to low-value buildings whose owners can barely afford to maintain them sounds like a self-inflicted wound. Even in spite of this recent extraction boom, schools are operating four days a week instead of five. What's going on is resource extraction exploitation with the costs externalized --- plain and simple.
It's incomprehensible. That place needs to modernize and adapt but without petroleum and its trappings. It's had 35-50 years to adapt from these changes; why should I believe that petroleum will be this place's saviour again?
I grew up with pumpjacks operating down the street (their ambient background sound as natural as the crickets and katydids and cicadas). The smell of petroleum, too. It wasn't until I moved away and returned to see how unnatural this was.
Because having more earthquakes on-top of the natural ones, in addition to all the other negative side-effects like pollution, isn't exactly a great situation for the people affected by it.
