Fracking up Drinking Water presented at Watertech 2012

2,054 views

Published on

Presentation of a case study investigation of a frack event linked to impacts on a residential water well. Presentation stresses the importance of collecting the proper data for the targeted analysis of frack fluid components and ensuring that data is interpreted correctly as to not mis-lead the investigation.

Published in: Environment, Business
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,054
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
334
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
10
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Untargeted routine analyses is NOT the answer Don’t collect data to collect data
  • Lots of meaningless data to be explained
  • The toxic thing identified not even correct!
  • Fracking up Drinking Water presented at Watertech 2012

    1. 1. “Fracking Up” Drinking Water? Court D. Sandau, PhD, PChem Watertech 2012 – Banff, AB April 11, 2012
    2. 2. Recent Headlines December 8, 2011EPA says fracking likely polluted Wyomingaquifer
    3. 3. Recent Headlines December 15, 2011Marcellus firm pays $93K for foulingClearfiled County Stream January 17, 2012Regulators say hydraulic fracturing may havecaused oil spill on farm near Innisfail
    4. 4. Dont miss: Live chat @ 2 p.m.: Flames vs. Mighty Ducks Recent Headlines Easter week around the world Calgary Stampede 2012 Alberta Election 2012 Cultural Calgary 2012» Tighter shale-gas exploration rules recommended http://www.calgaryherald.com/technology/Tighter+shale+explor... April 3, 2012Tighter shale-gas exploration rules recommended “Fracking,” a technique in which water, sand and chemicals are pumped underground to break apart natural gas-rich shale, has drawn criticism in the U.S. and Quebec. Photograph by: Julia Schmalz , Bloomberg News file photo QUEBEC — A committee named by Quebec Environment Minister Pierre Arcand to determine whether shale gas can be extracted while respecting the environment released plans Tuesday for further study and recommended the minister not authorize hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, even for research purposes. Arcand, in announcing the strategic environmental assessment last May, had said fracking would be allowed for research purposes. Committee chair Robert Joly said in his report that Quebec could rely on laboratory experiments on fracking. He announced the committee would order several more studies with a deadline of next spring. He said the final report would be completed sometime in 2013. Joly reported that the committee learned a lot from public hearings held from November 2011 to January 2012 and said there would be further hearings, targeted at specific sectors including agriculture.Postmedia News April 3, 2012 Committee members would also travel to Alberta and British Columbia, and to -Ohio, Pennsylvania and New York where there are also shale-gas deposits. © Copyright (c) The Montreal Gazette 7 of 18 12-04-07 8:42 AM Re co m m e n d Tweet 3 April 5, 2012 0 Story Photos ( 1 )Quebec bans any fracking pending studies
    5. 5. Sun Run Student videos Ski Guide Todays Paper Video Recent Headlines» February 6, 2012Most Canadians oppose natural-gas frackingIn B.C., 67 per cent support moratorium on controversial extraction methodin shale depositsBy Natalie Stechyson, Postmedia News February 6, 2012 Re co m m e n d Tweet 24Comment 2 December 12, 20111The majority of Canadians and a strong majority of British Columbians oppose hydraulic fracturing - better known as"fracking" - and would sup-port a moratorium on the natural gas extraction method, a poll reveals. Encana slams EPA’s Wyoming fracking findingThe Environics Research poll, commissioned by the Council of Canadians, found that 62 per cent of the Canadians polledsupported a moratorium on all fracking for natural gas until all environmental reviews are complete.B.C. residents, at 67 per cent, were most likely to support a moratorium on fracking. B.C. was followed by Atlantic Canada,where 66 per of those polled supported a moratorium, then Ontario (65 per cent), Manitoba/Saskatchewan (64 per cent),Alberta (57 per cent) and Quebec (55 per cent).
    6. 6. Dealing with Landowner Claims • Landowners with O&G knowledge can take advantage • Guilty until proven innocent • Insufficient data and lack of information on fluids is problematic
    7. 7. Methods for Identifying Fluids • Frack fluids are complex! • Over 1000 compounds identified in fluid below • Analyzed by GC-TOF-MS QuEChERS Extract Few OH’s Sulfur’sCourtesy of Frank Dorman PhD,Penn State University Aliphatics, OH’s, esters, COOH’s, etc… Liquid/Liquid Extract Heavier OH’s Mid OH’s Sulfur
    8. 8. Case Study• November – baseline water well sampling• January – CBM well drilling completed• February – fracking begins (1.4 km away from landowner’s home)• Early March – fracking complete• End of March – residential water complaint
    9. 9. Case Study• June to July – client hired consultant to collect water samples for analysis – Eight ‘untargeted’ sampling events – Routine analysis – CBM package – Some samples sent to Health Unit for analysis – July – fibrous (non-soluble) material reported in water – sent to a petrology lab
    10. 10. Results from Preliminary Work • Toluene found in water well • Several exceedances of ‘natural’ components – Turbidity, TDS, Total Fe, Total Mn, Na • White fibrous material identified as: “TRIOXANE!”Symptoms: (includes breakdown into formaldehyde) Nausea Vomiting Headaches Dizziness Pain in mouth Difficulty Urinating Convulsions Coma Genotoxic Fetotoxic Death
    11. 11. Case Study• July – preliminary results reported to landowner and regulators• August – brought onto case, might go legal• August – regulator involvement begins Let’s Review
    12. 12. Next Thought?
    13. 13. Data Review• Fibrous material Trioxane cannot be Trioxane MW: 90.08 g/mol Solubility: 17.2 g/100 mL• Solubility too high White crystalline solid Inherent toxicity
    14. 14. Data Review• Petrology lab should not be determining source – XRD/XES not specific enough – Used elemental identification• Trioxane dissolves in acid and base, this material did not 16 % Quartz 84 % Trioxane = ( )n Polyacetal by FTIR
    15. 15. Developed a More Formalized Approach• Routine analysis does not help for frack fluids• What should be looked for? – Look at MSDS and find target compounds• Determined an approach – Legal sample water wells and surface water – Camera for well integrity & well cleaning – Legal sampling water wells and surface water
    16. 16. Useless MSDS Information Use Frack Fluid 1 Frack Fluid 2• Frack company not very forth coming• Assured us that they do not use Trioxane• Relunctantly supplied samples
    17. 17. Determining Analytical Program and Results of Investigation Product Name Ingredients % Related Analysis Water Sample Results Product 1 Proprietary Unknown Alkanolamine Not Detected Trade Potassium Metaborate Secr Routine water chemistry No Indication of Impact et Product 2 Potassium Hydroxide 0.1 to 25 Routine water chemistry No Indication of Impact Ethylene Glycol 0.1 to 25 Glycol screen Not Detected No hazardous materials are contained in Product 3 Unknown N/A N/A this product Secondary Alcohol Proprietary Alcohol screen Not Detected VOCs / TEHs/ Mineral Oil and Essential Oils Proprietary Not Detected Grease Alcohols Proprietary Alcohol screen Not Detected Product 4 Low levels of toluene detected in Alkyl Alkoxylate Proprietary VOCs / TEHs main well, source identified (next slide) Organic Polyol Proprietary Glycol / Alcohol screen Not DetectedRoutine CBM Routine Water Chemistry, BTEX, No Concern, stable pre and post Testing N/A N/A F1-F2, Coliforms, Metals, PAH’s conditions /Additional Dissolved Polyacetal and Trioxane Trioxane not detected Parameters
    18. 18. Legal Sampling• Legal sampling important• Data can stand scrutiny of litigation proceedings (if necessary)• Process documents integrity of sampling procedures as well as of the samples
    19. 19. Sampling Events• Regulators wanted to take independent samples to analyze themselves• Sampling over long weekend, regulator left landowner with sample bottles!!• Legally defensible?
    20. 20. Field Notes & DocumentationExperimental Procedure• 200mL of HPLC water and ~2.0g of tape, were • Field notessonicated together for 1 hour • Observations from• 5mL of the tape extracts was analyzed for BTEX experiment• Using the exact tape mass, the concentration oftoluene was calculated to be 290 mg/kg
    21. 21. Conclusions• Investigations can go sideways quickly – hire the right consultant to take to completion• Frack fluid composition needs to be available to client• Analyze for appropriate, targeted analytes – Routine parameters not sufficient – Target most soluble, most mobile, and highest concentration components
    22. 22. Conclusions• Trioxane was a polymer, likely the pump breaking down• Toluene from electrical tape on pump• No constituents from frack fluids detected in water samples• Remaining analytes within normal limits – Better characterization of well water would have helped
    23. 23. Results• Too much ‘bad’ data• Timing of poor water quality still coincidence to fracking?• Settled with landowners
    24. 24. Questions?Contact Info:Chemistry MattersCourt Sandaucsandau@chemistry-matters.comwww.chemistry-matters.comTwitter – EnviroCertainty

    ×