New Study Predicts Frack Fluids Can Migrate To Aquifers Within Years

OPB News ^ | 1 May 2012 | Abrahm Lustgarten

[Erik Latranyi]

A new study has raised fresh concerns about the safety of gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale, concluding that fracking chemicals injected into the ground could migrate toward drinking water supplies far more quickly than experts have previously predicted.

More than 5,000 wells were drilled in the Marcellus between mid-2009 and mid-2010, according to the study, which was published in the journal Ground Water two weeks ago. Operators inject up to 4 million gallons of fluid, under more than 10,000 pounds of pressure, to drill and frack each well.

Scientists have theorized that impermeable layers of rock would keep the fluid, which contains benzene and other dangerous chemicals, safely locked nearly a mile below water supplies. This view of the earth's underground geology is a cornerstone of the industry's argument that fracking poses minimal threats to the environment.

But the study, using computer modeling, concluded that natural faults and fractures in the Marcellus, exacerbated by the effects of fracking itself, could allow chemicals to reach the surface in as little as "just a few years."

"Simply put, [the rock layers] are not impermeable," said the study's author, Tom Myers, an independent hydrogeologist whose clients include the federal government and environmental groups.

"The Marcellus shale is being fracked into a very high permeability," he said. "Fluids could move from most any injection process."

The research for the study was paid for by Catskill Mountainkeeper and the Park Foundation, two upstate New York organizations that have opposed gas drilling and fracking in the Marcellus.

[philman_36]

Uh-oh... However, the EPA states the information source was from the State Engineer and homeowner interviews (EPA p 2). It is unclear whether both were used for each well. It is my experience that homeowners have a poor concept of the depth of their well unless they have paperwork that documents it.

And you just have to admire the EPA for going to a place that would cause doubt on the whole enterprise...

Fracking has also occurred for up to 40 years, so the pathways could have required up to 40 years for transport.
The EPA didn't go where new fracking methods were used, they went to one of the oldest fracking areas in the nation.

Overall, lot's of speculation and plenty of...you need to make a better survey and report.

[philman_36]

From the initial EPA report... Detection of high concentrations of benzene, xylenes, gasoline range organics, diesel range organics, and total purgeable hydrocarbons in ground water samples from shallow monitoring wells near pits indicates that pits are a source of shallow ground water contamination in the area of investigation. When considered separately, pits represent potential source terms for localized ground water plumes of unknown extent. When considered as whole they represent potential broader contamination of shallow ground water. A number of stock and domestic wells in the area of investigation are fairly shallow (e.g., < 30 meters below ground surface) representing potential receptor pathways. Determination of the sources of inorganic and organic geochemical anomalies in deeper ground water was considerably more complex than determination of sources in shallow media necessitating the use of mulitiple lines of reasoning approach common to complex scientific investigations. pH values in MW01 and MW01 are highly alkaline (11.2-12.0) with up to 94% of the total alkalinity contributed by hydroxide suggesting addition of a strong base as the causative factor. Reaction path modeling indicates that sodium-sulfate composition of ground water typical of deeper portions of the Wind River Formation provides little resistance to elevation of pH with small addition of potassium hydroxide. Potassium hydroxide was used in a crosslinker and in a solvent at this site.

Oh, yeah, modeling. That's really worked in the area of global warming hasn't it.
Sounds to me like somebody was making a bunch of WAGs (wild a$$ guesses).

From the third link...

EPA added that Encana is currently engaged in investigating and remediating several pit areas. Encana has contributed to the cost of furnishing alternate supplies of drinking water to some Pavillion citizens while its investigation continues as part of the stakeholder group.18 Encana acquired the natural gas field and its infrastructure in 2004; however, drilling for natural gas began in the 1960s and the surface pits were excavated prior to 2004.19
The EPA Draft Report does not discuss the shallow groundwater contamination in much detail, and it does not indicate that the source of the contaminants in shallow groundwater is anything other than the surface pits. Reactions to the report and commentary by stakeholders also have not focused on the shallow groundwater issues, or on the surface pits as likely sources of contaminants.

Of course not, when your agenda is to cast doubt on fracking overall. It's all the fault of fracking, don't ya know, not 40+ year old pits.

[hinckley buzzard]

Water might seep upward by capillary action if the stone is just right, although fracking would probably reduce the potential for that. And it still does not explain how water could traverse impermeable rock formations capping the Marcellus, and which themselves would not be fracked at all.

This is a paid for "computer model" devoid of actual data, by a known envirowacko hired gun. It has no meaning.

[jdsteel]

Methane has seeped into ground water in certain areas of PA as a matter of historical fact. People could light the water from a tap for at least the last 60 years, probably as far back as when the water was first tapped. It has nothing to do with fracking. Don’t tell the idiots that made “Gasland” though. Their minds are already made up.