This thesis aims to advance the methods of quantitative acoustic emission (AE) analysis by calibrating sensors, characterizing sources, and applying the results to solve engineering problems. In the first part of this thesis, we built a calibration apparatus and successfully calibrated two commercial AE sensors. The ErgoTech sensor was found to have broadband velocity sensitivity and the Panametrics V103 was sensitive to surface normal displacement. These calibration results were applied to two AE data sets from rock fracture experiments in order to characterize the sources of AE events. The first data set was from an in situ rock fracture experiment conducted at the Underground Research Laboratory (URL). The Mine-By experiment was a large scale excavation response test where both AE (10 kHz - 1 MHz) and microseismicity (MS) (1 Hz - 10 kHz) were monitored. Using the calibration information, magnitude, stress drop, dimension and energy were successfully estimated for 21 AE events recorded in the tensile region of the tunnel wall. Magnitudes were in the range -7.5 < M_w < -6.8, which is consistent with other laboratory AE results, and stress drops were within the range commonly observed for induced seismicity in the field (0.1 - 10 MPa). The second data set was AE collected during a true-triaxial deformation experiment, where the objectives were to characterize laboratory AE sources and identify issues related to moving the analysis from ideal in situ conditions to more complex laboratory conditions in terms of the ability to conduct quantitative AE analysis. We found AE magnitudes in the range -7.8 < M_w < -6.7 and as with the in situ data, stress release was within the expected range of 0.1 - 10 MPa. We identified four major challenges to quantitative analysis in the laboratory, which inhibited our ability to study parameter scaling (M₀ ∝ f_c⁻³ scaling). These challenges were (1) limited knowledge of attenuation which we proved was continuously evolving, (2) the use of a narrow frequency band for acquisition, (3) the inability to identify P and S waves given the small sample size, and (4) acquisition using a narrow amplitude range given a low signal to noise ratio. Moving forward to the final stage of this thesis, with the ability to characterize the sources of AE, we applied our method to study an engineering problem. We chose hydraulic fracturing because of its obvious importance in the future of Canadian energy production. During a hydraulic fracture treatment, whether in a lab or in the field, energy is added to the system via hydraulic pressure. The injection energy, which is on the order of 10 J in the lab and and 100 GJ in the field, is used in the creation of new fracture surface area, the radiation of elastic waves, and aseismic deformation. In the field, it has been consistently shown that the amount of induced seismic energy radiated is between 1e-7 % and 1e-3 % of the injection energy. We tested these findings by calculating the AE energy as a percentage of the injection energy and found that for eight laboratory hydraulic fracture experiments, the seismic energy ranged from 7.02e-08 % to 1.24e-04 % of the injection energy. These results support those made in the field, which concludes that seismic energy projection is a very small component of the hydraulic fracture energy budget and that the dominant energy budget term is aseismic deformation.