Aquifer/Drinking Water Contamination

This is an important finding.   Although we do not understand the process by which waste water buried deep within the ground migrates into aquifers,  evidence suggests that it happens.  Read here.  

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=chemicals-found-in...

Views: 2572

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Brian Oram, PG on October 2, 2010 at 7:17am
The depth of the freshwater aquifer may range from 600 to over 1200 feet depending on the location of the site and the site elevation. The other problem is that there are private wells that are over 1200 feet deep and some very deep geothermal wells. In addition the EPA projects water that has a total dissolved solids of less than 10,000 mg/L - this is water that would be classified as saline - but protected by EPA via deep well injection and finally there is need well injection where we need to protect the confining layers. This is not a simple matter and work needs to be done the right way.
Permalink Reply by Brian Oram, PG on October 17, 2010 at 6:44am
The comments on the lack of impermeable layers is incorrect. Also - as you go deeper any vertical or other fractures or joint cleavage tend to close because of pressure or secondary mineral coatings. There are no underground explosions other than the initial "perforation" of the steel and cemented casing. Hydrofracturing is not and does not create explosions.

I do agree with your last statement - " Bottom line though- we need to be very cautious about potential contamination, whatever the source" - but we should base our concerns on facts.
Whatever the source should include: gasoline stations, fuel spills, improper septic system, stormwater runoff, wastewater, direct discharge of partially treated wastes containing endocrine disruptors from stormwater runoff and secondary wastewater treatment plants, etc.
For reports on the process - you can go to my website - this is not work I have done but links to peer reviewed articles.
http://www.bfenvironmental.com/education-wkshp.php


Brian Oram, PG
Permalink Reply by Joel Caccia on April 21, 2010 at 2:19pm
I understand that the contaminated waste water that is brought up from a well is sent to a "cleansing facility" in New York State from my area in northern Pa. Can you tell me where this place is located and in what condition this cleansed waste water is in. I am told some of the ingredients cant be neutralized? I have just learned the local town is going to use this waste water as brine on the local dirt roads, to keep the dust down. Should I be concerned about this.???
Permalink Reply by Jean Michel LeTennier on April 21, 2010 at 5:59pm
if this is the case (untreatedwater) damn right you should be concerned... and some ingredients are basic elements, which obviously cannot be easily treated...
the best is to recycle on site and remove the solids to a specialized dump...
Permalink Reply by Tom Copley on April 22, 2010 at 1:35pm
Incidently, Range Resources claims to be recycling 100% of their waste water now.

I do have one question though--there appear to be examples of water pollution in Colorado and Wyoming resulting from gas drilling. These get a lot of exposure in Josh Fox's Gaslands film. Fox blames hydro-fracturing, although I'm not sure what proof he has, if any. He does offer quite a bit of anecdotal evidence that at least in a few cases something is making farmers' well water cloudy, stinky and/or undrinkable.

Anyone want to hazard a guess as to what's going on out there, and why the same kinds of things couldn't happen with Marcellus drilling? I'm wondering if the geology is different, or could other factors lead to a higher risk of pollution in Colorado and Wyoming than Pennsylvania or New York?

I have not seen Fox's film, although I did view pieces of it that used to be on youtube before his film premiered. Fox seems sincere enough to me, and originally hails from Wayne Co. However, I'm concerned that he may be a little bit confused or else inadvertently taking things out of context.

BTW, I agree with Daniel that there is a need for tolerance of different viewpoints, but on the other hand don't blame experts and insiders for getting impatient at having to explain the same things over-and-over again to an often clueless public. There is a need for tolerance of every different viewpoint, yet also to respect opinions of folks who have spent years acquiring much specialized knowledge and experience in the industry. --Tom
Permalink Reply by Tom Copley on April 22, 2010 at 2:13pm
Guess, I should have called them "ranchers", not farmers. Sorry.
Permalink Reply by Michael Havelka on April 23, 2010 at 5:58am
Tom

We've done considerable research here and cannot find any data to support the phenomenon of pollutant migration into shallow water wells. Because the drilling and fracking portion of the project is relatively short (at most maybe 6 weeks), it is unlikely that these are the source. Therefore there would have to be a migration from the well at approximately 7000 feel vertical and another 5000 feet horizontal all the way into a shallow well less than 300 feet deep. And then it has to escape the well casing and cement and migrate through thousands of feet of dense strata to contaminate the well.

I am not a geolist, I am chemist. It might be possible but it seems highly unlikely. I believe there is contamination in the well, but I can't buy the story that is "seeping' from a shale well. My two cents.

Cheers
Permalink Reply by Jean Michel LeTennier on April 23, 2010 at 7:36am
For what it is worth , I agree with you after all teh landowenrs I have spoken to in TExas and Louisiana.. there is a however a high risk of contamination from bad Drillers and the lack of care in cleaning up after them selves.. as well as not properly disposing of the Frac water.. and there is a great deal of bad blood "if not Effect" about the Burnoff of extra elements...
then there is the very fact that the Shale up here in ther north east is close to the surface that teh gas comes into contact naturally anyway..
a number of my neighbors have a second pipe for their wells to burn off the natural gas that comes out..
in WAlton NY, you can litteraly turn on the FAucet in ay home and you get both GAS and Water.. you can litteraly light the glass of water from the tap..
Permalink Reply by Nancy Famiola on April 26, 2010 at 10:11am
Hey Jean,

I'm wondering if you picked up on what Aubrey McClendon from Chesapeake said about this new ban. This watershed by the way is right by where you claim the core of the Marcellus is, haha....

"And Chesapeake Energy Corp, which holds drilling leases near the Catskills watershed said, “We can do it safely, but the rock quality is not there, and we said we wouldn’t, so we won’t."

This is coming from the CEO of a company that would basically drill anything that even remotely looked like a gas or oil shale. Yet, he says "The rock quality is not there". Haha. So, not only is it not core, but it isn't even economic. They tested their Northeastern limit of the shale in that well they drilled in Wayne county - didnt even bother fracking it because it was so bad. What would ever make you think going farther north, and farther east that it would be better???

Companies wouldnt take your lease if you gave it to them for free.
Permalink Reply by Jean Michel LeTennier on April 26, 2010 at 3:31pm
Nancy, first of all I don't claim anything.. you foolish woman.. I simply state what every other geologist puts in their documents and presenations.. so argue with them.. not me.. Secondly they are not banning the drilling, they are imposing strickter restrictions and doing this on a case by case basis.. if you could reads , it would be helpful..
Thirdly.. many of the Gas companies are buying up old well sites throughout NYS to drill the Marcellus anyway , as they don't require permits..
fourthly , they cannot ban driling anywhere, even if they wanted to, It's against the LAW of "USE of Property" so there are several land coalitions within NYS alreaday watering at the mouth with a lawsuits against the State and the City..
Now imagine the land owners in the Watershed, getting paid "not" to Drill where you in PA have to DRILL.. and run risks..
GROW UP>>>
Permalink Reply by Tom Copley on April 25, 2010 at 9:42am
Michael-- Thanks for the verification. I hear you--it seems to defy all logic. It will be interesting to see what the EPA study comes up with. --Tom
Permalink Reply by Robin Fehrenbach Scala on May 1, 2010 at 4:00am
Tom,
About Josh Fox and his film...bad news. He is affiliated with all the most extreme obstructionist orgs and he has no real knowledge of fact. I questioned him once about his claims, first that he is a landowner (no deed into him) and then about various supposed incidents in the film that I already researched and knew to be false. He is rabid.

While I was at the NY DEC hearing in NYC the whole crew of NYH2O and Damascus Citizens and ProPublica were there and Josh was in the mix to try making their points. It was the largest crowd of educated people acting insane that I ever saw. I'm sure you will understand if you see the film.

RSS

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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service