BLOWOUT IMPACT ON ENVIRONMENT AROUND TENGRATILA (CHATTAK-2) GAS FIELD IN BANGLADESH

1. WELCOME

2. Presented By:
Md. Mehedi Hasan
Reg. No. 2006336008
Dept. of Petroleum and Mining Engineering(PME), SUST
Supervised By: Co-Supervised By:
Dr. M. Farhad Howladar Muhammad Saiful Islam
Assistant professor Assistant Professor
Dept. PME, SUST . Dept. CEE, SUST

3. Presentation Outline
 Introduction
 Objectives
 Elements of environment
 Methods of work
 Results and Discussions
 Conclusions
 Recommendations
 Acknowledgement

4. Introduction
A blowout is the uncontrolled release of crude oil or
natural gas from an oil well or gas well after pressure
control systems have failed.
The blowout is the major hazard in petroleum field.
 It damages the petroleum bearing geologic
formation, structure, local tectonic setting, and
environment and so on.
There are three well known blowout in Bangladesh.
Two blowout occurs in Tengratila (chattak-2)

5. Location of The Gas Field and Sample collection

6. Gas Reserved in Chattak gas field. (Petrobangla)

7. Gas Field Condition After Blowout
(B.Imam)

8. Tengratila well blow out in January
(B.Imam 2005

9. Relief well blow out in June 2005
(Imam , B. 2005)

10. Photographed in September 2005- six month
after the blow out (Imam , B. 2005)

11. Condition of the Field After Blowout
(Imam , B. 2005)

12. Objectives of My Study
 Showing and interpreting over all environmental state before
and after the gas blow out incident.
 Assess and understand the present state of ground water by
analyzing the physical and chemical characters of subsurface
water.
 Understand the previous and present land, water, soil, air, plant,
living beings and the socio-environmental development.
 Necessary recommendations and planning for avoiding such
future problems in the area.

13. Elements of Environment
There are five elements in environment
1) Water
2) Soils
3) Plants
4) Air
5) Animals

14. Methodology
Visit the Study Area
Collect Water
Samples
Take Picture
Questionnaires Survey
Read Various
Newspaper Articles
Laboratory Analysis
Compare Result with WHO ,
EU , EQS and Dinajpur Area
Define Environmental
Impact
Combine
Result

15. Results
 Result of Questionarries Survey
 Review result of Different Newspapers and
Articles.
 Result of Lab Test of Water Samples

16. Result of Questionarries Survey
Q-1:Is fertility of your
agricultural land decrease
due to Blowout?
Q-2:Are your child faceing any
phycological problem after
Blowout?
Q-3:Are your child faceing any
physical problem after
Blowout?
Q-4:Were you facing any
problem in respiration in the
time of Blowout?
Q-5:Were you facing any
problem in respiration after
Blowout?
0
20
40
60
80
Yes
No
No Comment

17. Result of Questionarries Survey (Cont.)
Q-6: Are the productivity of
Animals (cow, goats, sheep,
buffalo etc) decreased after
blowout?
Q-7:Is the water quality change
after blowout?
Q-8:Did the structures (House,
Road, and Bridge) damage due
to Blowout?
Q-9:Were the Blowout had any
impact on plants (depart its life
or productivity decrease) in
your village?
Q-10:Are you felling any
problem now?
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Question
6
question
7
Question
8
Question
9
Question
10
Yes
No
No Comment

18. Result of Questionarries Survey (Cont.)

19. Review result of Different Newspapers and Articles
Variation of Fertility in the agricultural land at Tengratila area*
Elements Before blowout
(2002)
Present
Condition
Green manure Moderate Low
Calcium Low Very low
Magnesium High Very low
Nitrogen Low Very low
Phosphorous Low Very low
Gonddok Moderate Low
Dostta Limited Low
* http://bogranews.blogspot.com/2008/11/tengratila-gas-explotation-impact.html

20. Review result of Different Newspapers and
Articles (Cont.)
Figure: The blowout caused the nearby structures to collapse and a death
sentence for the surrounding forest(The Daily Star 2005)

21. Review result of Different Newspapers and
Articles (Cont.)
Figure:The blowout caused the entire vicinity to be
contaminated as it poisoned both water and soil (The Daily
Star,2005)

22. Review result of Different Newspapers and
Articles (Cont.)
Figure:Increase of pressure underground triggered flow of poisonous water
from tube wells and nearby hoarse after many days of the second blowout on
June 24 (The Daily Star,2005)

23. Result of Lab Test of Water Samples(Turbidity)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1 2 3 4 5 6 WHO EQS 7 8 9 10 11 12
Far From Gas Field (6-7) Standard Near Gas Field (1-6)
Turbidity(NTU)
Sample No

24. Result of Lab Test of Water Samples
(Iron)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
1 2 3 4 5 6 WHO EU EQS 7 8 9 10 11 12
Near Gas Field (1-6) Standard Far From Gas Field (7-12)
Iron(Fe2+)(ppm)
Sample No

25. Result of Lab Test of Water Samples
(Manganese)
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
1 2 3 4 5 6 WHO EU EQS 7 8 9 10 11 12
Near Gas Field (1-6) Standard Far From Gas Field (7-12)
Manganese(Mn2+)(ppm)
Sample No

26. Result of Lab Test of Water Samples
(Total Solids)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Near Gas Field (1-6) Far From Gas Field (7-12)
TotalSolids(ppm)
Sample No

27. Result of Lab Test of Water Samples
Components Near Well
tube wells
Far Well tube
wells
Standard Value Dinajpur
Area
WHO
(2007)
EU
(2008)
EQS
(2010)
PH 7.5-8.1 7.5-7.8 6.5-8.5 6.5-8.5 6.5-8.5 6.3-7.5
EC ( µs/cm) 70-150 170-250 250 250 * 93-193
Alkalinity 53-67 65-81 * * * 31.6-62.4
Ca2+ (ppm) 18-31.6 9.6-29 75-200 * * 4.6-14.5
Mg2+ (ppm) 2.6-5.1 3.8-7.2 50-150 * 30-50 5.3-11.2
Cl- (ppm) 8-25 9.5-18 250 250 150-600
Free CO2
(ppm)
8.5-14 4.5-8.5 * * * Not
measured
DS (ppm) 32-40.5 22.6-38.5 500 500 500 77-110
SS (ppm) 2-10.5 2-5.2 500 500 500 7.10-36.5
TH (ppm) 55-165 75-130 150-500 40-180 Not
measured
* Not Found

28. Discussions
 Blowout Impact on Water Resources
 Blowout Impact on Soil
 Blowout Impact on Plants and Air
 Blowout Impact on Human and Wildlife
 Blowout Impact on Socio-economic

29. Blowout Impact on Water Resources (Based on
Lab Test and Questionnaries)
Environmental
component
Positive or
negative impact
Comments
Water resources Negative
 Avarage value of Turbidity (5.55 NTU) of water in
the area are greater than WHO’s (5.00 NTU) given value.
 The iron concentration in the near field tube wells of
the study area ranges from 0.10 ppm to 1.95 ppm [WHO=
0.3 ppm , EQS=0.3-1.0 ppm]
 About 78% local people told that the water quality
decreased where only 12% told no changed in water
quality
 The values of Manganese of near well tube
wells(.0.010 to 0.135 ) is higher than far wells tube wells
(wells 0.018 to 0.037 ppm)

30. Blowout Impact on Soil (Based on Questionarries
Survey,Site Visit and Reading Newspapers)
Environmental component
Environmental
component
Positive or negative
impact
Comments
Soil fertility Negative
About 73% people of the area told that the
fertility of their land decreased.
Near about 15078 tons of different fertile
are needed to recover the fertility of the land.
It needs approximately 50 years to recover
the fertility.
 The Economical values of the fertilizer is
169,53,105 BD taka ( $0.22 million ) ($1 =
80 BD taka.

31. Blowout Impact on Plants and Air (Based on
Questionarries and Site Visit)
Environmental
component
Positive or
negative impact
Comments
Plants
Negative
 Lots of trees are burnt during blowout.
 As the fertility of the land decreased, the
productivity of the plant may decrease, because
productivity directly related with the soil and
water condition.
Air quality Impact not
measurable, may be
negative
 There was 280,828 tons (3.0 bcf gas burnt)
carbon dioxide emitted through the atmosphere
which affects the sequestration benefit
 During blowout enormous amount dust
produced.

32. Blowout Impact on Human and Wildlife
(Based on Questionarries and Site Visit)
Environmental
component
Positive or
negative impact
Comments
Human Negative  About 65% people told that their children
facing physiological problem
 About 85% present told they and their
family are facing physical problem
Fish and wildlife Negative  Natural fish production has to be protected
by controlling water pollution
 The gas field burnt a long day that’s time a
huge amount of birds died.

33. Blowout Impact on Socio-economic (Based on
Questionarries Surveyand Site Visit)
Environmental
component
Positive or
negative
impact
Comments
Socio-economic
 Employment
 Infrastructure
 Life style
 Communication
Positive
 Increased the employment.
 The Niko Company constracted so many roads to
transport their equipments.
 Approximately 2800 trees as part of ongoing
rehabilitation
 Upgrade of two rural school computers for student use.
 Provision of free doctor services to local villagers (770
patient visits)
 The company paid near about 100,000-180,000 BD
taka as compensation, per local businessman of the
Tengratila Bazaar.

34. Conclusions
 The Blowout has a great impact on the ground water
quality.
 The fertility of the soil of the area is decreased.
 The children of the area are suffering various
physiological and physical problems.
 Lots of trees were burnt during Blowout.
 The socio-economic condition improved after blowout

35. Recommendations
 For water treatment, water treatment plant needed to
establish.
 To recover the gas seepage, new wells are needed to drill.
 To recover the soil fertility huge amount of different
fertilizers are needed
 Tree plantation programme is needed
 Improved hospitalized services are needed for health
sector.

36. Acknowledgement
 Dr. M. Farhad Howladar
 Muhammad Saiful Islam
 Dr. Md Shofiqul Islam
 Dr. Mohammad Aktarul Islam Chowdhury
 All the Teachers of PME Department.
 The lab assistants of Civil and Environmental Engineering
department.

37. Thanks to All