Contamination of streamwater by fracking waste from injection wells

"Evidence indicating the presence of wastewaters from unconventional oil and gas [UOG] production was found in surface waters and sediments near an underground injection well near Fayetteville, West Virginia, according to two recent studies by the U.S. Geological Survey, University of Missouri, and Duke University.

These are the first published studies to demonstrate water-quality impacts to a surface stream due to activities at an unconventional oil and gas wastewater deep well injection disposal site. ...

The scientists collected water and sediment samples upstream and downstream from the disposal site. These samples were analyzed for a series of chemical markers that are known to be associated with unconventional oil and gas wastewater. In addition, in a just-published collaborative study tests known as bioassays were done to determine the potential for the impacted surface waters to cause endocrine disruption.

Waters and sediments collected downstream from the disposal facility were elevated in constituents that are known markers of UOG wastewater, including sodium, chloride, strontium, lithium and radium, providing indications of wastewater-associated impacts in the stream.

“We found endocrine disrupting activity in surface water at levels that previous studies have shown are high enough to block some hormone receptors and potentially lead to adverse health effects in aquatic organisms,” said Susan C. Nagel, director of the EDC study and associate professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women’s Health at University of Missouri."

quote from: https://www.usgs.gov/news/evidence-unconventional-oil-and-gas-waste...

primary source: "Wastewater Disposal from Unconventional Oil and Gas Development Degrades Stream Quality at a West Virginia Injection Facility", Denise M. Akob, et al., Environmental Science & Technology. http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/acs.est.6b00428

Views: 1288

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mike Fulper on May 27, 2016 at 8:24am

EPA....

nothing about it.. is even close... to Reality...

EPA..... opened that Gold Mine last year and FLOODED a Major river running

thru the Navajo Nation.. NOTHING.. was done...

Wiped out thousands of acres of Navajo Farm land....

Trump.... will CANCEL the Whole EPA.. agency........

total complete Fraud.....

EPA is a.... NGO.. .of the UNITED NATIONS.... duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Totally illegal....

Try and read 'coherent answers"      :)

Permalink Reply by Paul Heckbert on May 27, 2016 at 1:38pm

Mike, somebody is feeding you nonsense.

Yes, the EPA made mistakes while attempting a cleanup of a Colorado mine that had a century of acid-mine-drainage (AMD) problems, it caused a spill in the Animus River in 2015, and the river water was dangerously polluted for a week. To put things in perspective, consider that that spill released 3 million gallons of AMD, while the local mining district has for decades released 5 million gallons a day, every day (until the EPA and others figure out a way to reduce that). See the Denver Post review of the incident: http://www.denverpost.com/2015/10/22/review-gold-king-mine-spill-wa...

Are you aware of all the good that the EPA does?

Close to where I live, residents of Weirton, WV live about 5 years longer because of the Clean Air Act (enforced by the EPA). Forcing steel mills and power plants to cut their sulfur dioxide and particulate pollution reduces cases of emphysema and bronchitis, and the plants can continue to operate without shutting down. The US can lead the way. China can learn from the cleaner US industries, so that it can correct its extreme pollution.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/25/upshot/the-connection-between-cle...

Clean Air Act (enforced by the EPA) has saved the United States $12 trillion over 20 years, and saves 160,000 lives per year.

http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-how-the-clean-air-act-saved-am...

There's reality, Mike, backed up by scientific sources. Do you have scientific sources, or just unsupported anger?

Permalink Reply by Barry D on May 27, 2016 at 3:41pm

Paul,

The pollution of the Animus River is conclusive proof of how inept the EPA has become and in need of extensive reform.

I would also point out the inept study performed by the EPA in Pavillion,WY.

The claim of extension of life by 6 years in Weirton, WV is bogus and unfounded, and unproveable.

The claim is not based on any scientific study. It is based on a computer model, a computer model that has not been peer reviewed or substantiated by field studies.

Computer models are only as reliable as the information entered into the model. And as we know, the EPA is populated with environmental leftists. It's more than possible that these biased people only entered data that supported their biased preconceived conclusions.

It is not the responsibility of our country to teach the Chinese anything; as if they would listen. Especially since that type of lesson would destroy our economy.

I believe the intent of the Clean Air Act is good. However, just as their is no scientific proof of the extension of life in Weirton, WV, there is no proof of the claims you attribute to the Clean Air Act. 

The EPA is a rogue entity under the direction of our American hating President.  The EPA must be reined in before it destroys our economy and way of life.

Your continued misinformation campaign makes me question your patriotism. Have you no love for this country at all?

Permalink Reply by Mike Fulper on May 29, 2016 at 4:15am

PAUL

Try and use some "common sense"

Show me where in the Constitution the Govt has control over Air and Water..

Your pretty well brainwashed on all the Govt BS......

Everyone on this site just laughs at the stupid comments you make about

fracking....but.. hey......its entertaining......

Try and study reality.......

By the way.... show me.... ONE INSTANCE... of the EPA........having

a trial.... by "jury"  on anything.......

You cant... there has NEVER  been a Trial by Jury on any EPA claim of

damage to the environment......

If the EPA would go to a Jury trial... it would be "exposed"  for the fraud

that it is...

Ok... big guy...... with all of the statistics..... bring on a  "jury trial"  result

of a EPA charge to anyone person... or business.....

That's.... "transcript" of the Jury trial......

Were waiting...

0ym9x5ag7ury2Permalink Reply by 0ym9x5ag7ury2 on May 26, 2016 at 6:19am

Ohio doesn't have this issue. The "Out Of Towners" did a study to prove it.

0ym9x5ag7ury2Permalink Reply by 0ym9x5ag7ury2 on May 26, 2016 at 6:37am

Who cares about aquatic organisms having health problems anyway.

Now that's exactly what that EPA Man was saying about dumping frack fluids in the Mahoning River, they are safe when diluted.

He said they would watch the aquatic life to determine when humans were in danger. Time to watch the larger mammals so Oil & Gas can have their way in Appalachian Basin. 

Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on May 26, 2016 at 7:05am

Ron H.,

Now no one here that's posted has indicated that they didn't care about the environment / it's pollution / the various life forms affected by environmental pollution - have they ? 

We're all concerned but that's not a reason to abandon our industrial endeavors - is it ?

It's like saying because people are injured by way of  plane / train / truck / auto / motorcycle / bicycle  / etc. accidents that we ought to not build / sell / service those industrial endeavors.  Where is the sense in thinking like that ?  I can't find it myself. That's because there is none.  There is no sense to be found in nonsense.

We have to do it all but safely and responsibly.

JMHOs

Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on May 26, 2016 at 10:30pm

If problematic contain it, clean it up and GO ON !

If problematic  a good reason to further develop and improve the 'Waterless Fracturing' alternatives / techniques.

JMHOs

Permalink Reply by Paul Heckbert on May 27, 2016 at 5:32am

Considering injection wells generally (not just those for oil & gas fracking wastewater):

"From late 2007 to late 2010, one well integrity violation was issued for every six deep injection wells examined — more than 17,000 violations nationally. More than 7,000 wells showed signs that their walls were leaking. Records also show wells are frequently operated in violation of safety regulations and under conditions that greatly increase the risk of fluid leakage and the threat of water contamination. ...

In 2010, contaminants from such a well bubbled up in a west Los Angeles dog park. Within the past three years, similar fountains of oil and gas drilling waste have appeared in Oklahoma and Louisiana. In South Florida, 20 of the nation's most stringently regulated disposal wells failed in the early 1990s, releasing partly treated sewage into aquifers that may one day be needed to supply Miami's drinking water. ...

"In 10 to 100 years we are going to find out that most of our groundwater is polluted," said Mario Salazar, an engineer who worked for 25 years as a technical expert with the EPA's underground injection program in Washington. "A lot of people are going to get sick, and a lot of people may die." "

https://www.propublica.org/article/injection-wells-the-poison-benea...

Such cases are rare, so far, but they're not something that society should sweep under the rug.

Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on May 27, 2016 at 5:55am

No injection Wells then.

Economical 'Waterless (Non-Polluting) Fracturing' seems to me is becoming more of a necessity as opposed to a luxury.

Still think capturing atmospheric / free Carbon Dioxide / CO2 is a great idea as it does not contribute / add to the overall atmospheric quantity.  Also thinking capturing  (since it's inert and representative of roughly 80% of the air we breathe) atmospheric / free Nitrogen / N2 would be cool. Needing an economical way to do that seems to me is the bugaboo.

Thinking we need some scientists / chemical types to step up to the plate and develop some economical methodology on these ideas.

Permalink Reply by Barry D on May 27, 2016 at 7:46am

Paul,

propblica is not a reliable source of info. It is blatantly biased against oil and gas development.

The info published on the site is cherry picked to support the anti oil and gas bias.

i.e. Mario Salazar and his apocalyptic claims have been repeatedly debunked.

 

0ym9x5ag7ury2Permalink Reply by 0ym9x5ag7ury2 on May 28, 2016 at 5:06am

Paul,

     This response isn't because you posted it, it's because I find Propublica and Abram Lustgarten to be concise, to the point, the truth, with actual names and details of those cheated by our domestic O&G companies.

Everyone quotes Propublica, including Farm & Dairy. If I ever get a fair royalty I intend to give first to the Animal Shelters in counties around me, then Propublica will get a donation.

They put me on to what is really going on in the US including PA, before I got my first theft, I mean royalty check.

Folks, please go to propublica.org and read the truth about what domestic O&G, Wall Street, and all those who have turned a blind eye to our underpaid royalties have planned for us.

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service