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 Joseph-Ohio on May 25, 2016 at 10:39pm

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

If problematic  a good reason to further develop and improve the 'Watrrless Fracturing' alternatives.

Permalink Reply by Paul Heckbert on May 26, 2016 at 2:05am

And if you can't contain it or clean it up, then what?

Permalink Reply by Barry D on May 26, 2016 at 2:08am

Paul this is an old story and much of the information is hyperbole and misleading.

Just like your question.

The issue was not with the well, it was the containment compounds.

The State of WV has dealt with this and moved on.

Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on May 26, 2016 at 3:30am

Paul Heckbert,

It MUST BE Contained.

If it exists it MUST BE cleaned up.

Try not to let it happen again.

Time to use the brain - Yankee Ingenuity.

Those activities themselves will provide jobs.

You write : '..........then what?'

Contain it - Clean it up - then continue - Go On - this is the U.S.A. - the Cradle of Industry - there is nothing wrong with Industry - it provides jobs - jobs that must be done to have an economy - a base  economy - jobs that must be done and done right.

Base economies need support from the professions - all would prosper.

A stagnant economy does not work to those ends.

The economy must burgeon to match the burgeoning population and workforce.

A blind man even can see that.

An idiot can understand it.

Permalink Reply by Jack Young on May 26, 2016 at 2:17am

This report doesn't actually implicate the injection well very effectively - most likely any waste water in the stream was spilled upstream, and that can definitely be stopped. There's no mechanism for water from injection wells to reach the surface, so the contamination almost can't be from that source. Injection wells are typically depleted producing wells, and if there was a path to the surface through fractures etc., the oil and or gas would have escaped that way eons earlier! That's pretty basic stuff, but the differences between correlation and causation seem to have escaped the authors.

It's just hard to read report after report like this written by people who don't understand the industry or the geology but are determined to find something to attack the business with. If these people were focused on improving existing energy production systems that would bring benefits to everyone, but bogus attacks that don't rely on the science are pushing everything in the wrong direction. And Paul apparently doesn't mind spreading misinformation, so is a small part of the problem himself. I'm sure he means well, but he clearly hasn't learned enough to have the ability to tell reality from fiction on this subject.

Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on May 26, 2016 at 3:10am

We're on your bus Jack Young - we're on your bus.

Permalink Reply by Barry D on May 26, 2016 at 3:24am

Jack,

In fact other articles indicate your point exactly.

There are other industrial activities near the stream including coal mining.

As I said this is just Paul continuing his fear mongering campaign.

Permalink Reply by Jim Litwinowicz on May 26, 2016 at 6:18am

This more than just Paul. The misinformation campaign is massive and the very few people hear all the facts. The O & G industry does a poor job of pushing back. Most people are misinformed and thus influence legislation in a bad way.

Permalink Reply by Barry D on May 27, 2016 at 1:23am

Jim,

It begins with calling everything associated with shale development "fracking". Hydraulic Fracturing (fracking) is only one process of many in the development process.

I recently spoke to a guy who swears that the cracks in the walls of his house were caused by "fracking" of a shale well.. I asked when he first noticed them? His reply, 1999. That's how effective the misinformation campaign by fractivists is.

Jim, you are correct, the industry does little to combat this massive misinformation campaign.

Just look at this post and others posted by Paul; he is an educated person and he has been so brainwashed by the misinformation campaign that he spreads the nonsense himself.

Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on May 27, 2016 at 1:36am

Pardon my interjection but all I see is 'motive' at play here myself.

Permalink Reply by william Allen. Ladd on May 30, 2016 at 1:27pm

A neighbor of mine was telling me of his workplace. It seems that a time study was done by a young man who had a very good education concerning better arrangements and being more efficient  in moving their products through their facility. His recommendations were put into practice. After all he was highly educated in these time studies and was well qualified in his job.

A few months later he was called back by the owner of the facility and they went thru the plant.  As they walked thru the plant the time study expert was heard to say, "I don't understand why your production has dropped so drastically. I have spent years and years going to various schools to study the problems of processing and moving raw material to useable and valuable products! I do not understand it at all!"

Production had dropped at least 50 percent since his time study was put into place.

One of the older workers made this observation out loud.  He said, "Well sir, it just goes to prove that there are a lot of educated fools trying to improve things!"

The next week the owner told his workers to go back to their previous ways of running their various operations. Production soon increased back to its former rate before the time study.

Bill L.

Permalink Reply by Paul Heckbert on May 27, 2016 at 5:20am

Jack Young says "There's no mechanism for water from injection wells to reach the surface". I guess he means other than corroding casings, faulty cement jobs, underground pressure, seismic activity, and all those other "out of sight, out of mind" factors.

In 1989, the US Government Accountability Office concluded:

"Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program, focusing on: (1) whether evidence exists of drinking water contamination from injection wells used in oil and gas production, known as Class II wells, and if so, the causes and actions taken to prevent similar occurrences; and ...

GAO found that: (1) there were 23 cases of drinking water contamination, but the full extent of contamination was unknown; (2) EPA estimated that there are about 1.2 million abandoned oil and gas wells in the United States, 200,000 of which may be improperly plugged, and 3 of the 4 states reviewed said that the numbers of improperly plugged wells are increasing; ..." http://www.gao.gov/products/RCED-89-97

We need more funding for health and environmental investigation of the oil and gas industry so that studies like this can be updated. If EPA isn't regulating these industries closely enough, then the American citizens need to know about that.

RSS

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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service