Menu
18 Feb 2014

As Fracking Booms, Growing Concerns About Wastewater

With hydraulic fracturing for oil and gas continuing to proliferate across the U.S., scientists and environmental activists are raising questions about whether millions of gallons of contaminated drilling fluids could be threatening water supplies and human health.
By roger real drouin

An hour south of Pittsburgh, in Pennsylvania’s Washington County, millions of gallons of wastewater from hydraulic fracturing wells are stored in large impoundment ponds and so-called "closed container" tanks. The wastewater is then piped to treatment plants, where it is cleaned up and discharged into streams; trucked to Ohio and pumped deep down injection wells; or reused in other fracking operations.

But tracking where the fracking wastewater from Washington County and sites across the United States ends up — and how much pollution it causes — is exceedingly difficult. In a study conducted last year, researchers from the environmental consulting firm, Downstream Strategies, attempted to trace fracking water — from water withdrawal to wastewater disposal — at
wastewater recycling facility
Roger Drouin
This mobile water recycling facility treats wastewater so it can be reused in other wells.
several wells in the Marcellus Shale formation in West Virginia and Pennsylvania.

"We just couldn’t do it," said Downstream Strategies staff scientist Meghan Betcher, citing a lack of good data and the wide range of disposal methods used by the industry. What the study did find was that gas companies use up to 4.3 million gallons of clean water to frack a single well in Pennsylvania, and that more than half of the wastewater is treated and discharged into surface waters such as rivers and streams.

Increasingly, the fracking boom in the Marcellus Shale and across the United States is leaving behind some big water worries — concerns that are only growing as shale gas development continues to expand. Pennsylvania, which has experienced a frenzied half-dozen years of hydraulic fracturing, is now the U.S.’s third-largest producer of natural gas. The Downstream Strategies report noted that from 2005 to 2012, Pennsylvania and West Virginia issued permits for nearly 9,000 natural gas wells that use hydraulic fracturing technology, which pumps a high-pressure mixture of water, chemicals, and sand deep into shale formations to extract natural gas.

The vast volume of water needed to extract that natural gas, and the large amounts of wastewater generated during the process, is causing increasing concern among geochemists, biologists, engineers, and toxicologists.

Initially, worries about fracking and water pollution focused largely on leaks of drilling fluids and other contaminants from well casings, which could potentially pollute groundwater supplies. But with engineering improvements that have reinforced well casings and reduced pollution from that source, experts now say fracking’s real pollution danger comes from wastewater.

"I am more worried about wastewater management — handling, storing it, driving across the countryside with it," said Monika Freyman, a senior manager of the water program at Ceres, a nonprofit organization whose mission is to foster sustainable practices in business and industry. Freyman spent months studying the effect of the industry on water resources. "It’s complicated," she said. "There are a lot of different pathways wastewater can go."

A Duke University study conducted last year showed that some of the Marcellus Shale wastewater, tainted by high levels of radioactivity, flows
The oil and gas industry’s 'social license' to use groundwater without limit may no longer be a given.
downstream into water sources for Pittsburgh and other cities, with uncertain health consequences.

The huge amount of fresh water used by the industry is also a concern. The Downstream Strategies report, funded by the Robert & Patricia Switzer Foundation, said that more than 80 percent of the water used in hydraulic fracturing in West Virginia is pulled directly from rivers and streams. Ninety-two percent of that water and drilling fluids remains deep underground, "completely removed from the hydraulic cycle," the report said.

Only 8 percent of those fluids are recaptured, and Betcher’s research team found that because of inadequate state reporting requirements, the fate of 62 percent of that fracking waste is unknown.

Betcher and others note that Pennsylvania and West Virginia are water-rich states, but that in the arid western U.S. some of the nation’s most intense fracking activity is sucking up huge amounts of groundwater for oil and gas operations. In Texas, most of that groundwater is trucked to injection wells, where it is pumped deep underground and thus lost from the already-depleted water supply. Water shortages in Texas could well push companies to recycle more wastewater.

Freyman said that the oil and gas industry’s "social license" to use groundwater without limit in Texas is no longer a given, adding, "When there are restrictions put on homeowners, there is a bit more resentment at the industry’s use of groundwater."

In California, the current drought will shape some of the upcoming debate over planned fracking. "There is a ton of interest because water is already a big issue in California," said Dustin Mulvaney, an assistant professor of environmental studies at San Jose State University.

According to Betcher, millions of gallons of wastewater used in fracking comes back to the surface in three different forms: flowback fluid returns to the surface for up to a month after the mix of water, sand, and chemicals is forced into porous shale rock; brine continues to come back up after 30 days; and throughout the process drilling debris and fluids are mixed in with the wastewater.

Raina Rippel, director of the nonprofit Southwest Pennsylvania Environmental Health Project in Washington County — which has the second highest number of shale gas wells in Pennsylvania — worries most about the wastewater and potential health impacts from fracking compounds such as arsenic and chloride, as well as naturally-occurring
'It is highly likely that more water is withdrawn and more waste generated than is known,' says a report.
radioactive elements, such as radium, loosened during the fracking process.

Rippel points to instances where homes are sited downhill from impoundment ponds. "In some cases, the [Pennsylvania] DEP [Department of Environmental Protection] has been made aware of contamination," Ripple said. "There are certainly more cases we don’t know of." Ripple is also worried about the ability of newer, closed-container systems to securely store millions of gallons of wastewater. "It’s inevitable that a closed system can only hold so much," she said.

Scott Perry, a deputy secretary of the DEP’s Office of Oil and Gas Management, acknowledged that impoundment spills "have happened on some rare occasions," especially at older impoundments called open "pits."

The industry in Pennsylvania is making a shift to closed systems for holding wastewater before it is treated or shipped out of state. The companies still use large impoundment ponds to store wastewater, but the newer ponds meet stricter requirements enacted in 2012 mandating double-lined walls and spill detection, Perry said.

Wastewater storage, treatment and disposal, however, remains one of the Pennsylvania DEP’s "more significant environmental concerns" when it comes to fracking, Perry said. For that reason, regulators and inspectors have been "pushing the industry as far as anyone has" to improve its handling of wastewater and prevent spills, according to Perry. Industry officials say that rapidly improving treatment and storage technologies mean that the overwhelming majority of drilling operations do not discharge untreated or poorly treated wastewater.

While states such as Pennsylvania and West Virginia, working with industry, have improved reporting and data collection on fracking wastewater, the Downstream Strategies report said that "critical gaps persist," adding, "It is highly likely that much more water is being withdrawn and more waste is being generated than is known."

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has little oversight over fracking fluids and wastewater because a 2005 law exempts the industry from the Safe Drinking Water Act.

David Brown, a toxicologist at the Southwest Pennsylvania Environmental Health Project, said the close proximity of some wastewater sites to homes
New technology includes mobile filtration plants to filter the flowback of fracking fluids.
and schools is cause for concern, especially given the presence of radium and other pollutants in fracking wastewater. According to Brown, more than 50 families have called the center, or were referred by doctors, after experiencing rashes, gastrointestinal conditions, or other health concerns. After ruling out pre-existing conditions or symptoms triggered by other causes, Brown said, the center’s medical staff concluded that 17of the 50 cases may have been caused by exposure to pollutants.

According to Thomas Murphy, co-director of Pennsylvania State University’s Marcellus Center for Outreach and Research, the "technology is improving" for wastewater storage and treatment. In addition, state regulations are changing and becoming more effective, Murphy said.

New industry technology includes mobile filtration plants designed to filter the flowback of fracking fluids. That’s becoming an industry "best practice," said Joe Massaro, a field director with Energy In Depth, a group sponsored by the Independent Petroleum Association of America. For instance, a mobile wastewater treatment facility that Cabot Oil & Gas uses in Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania, treats wastewater in the field so it can be reused in nearby wells.

Massaro acknowledged some initial problems during the fracking rush, but says most companies drilling natural gas are focused on operating cleanly. "Dumping stuff down the [storm] drain, those guys should get the book thrown at them," Massaro said, referring to an Ohio company charged with improper dumping last February. "That is not the case for the whole industry."

A new wastewater treatment facility run by Eureka Resources in Williamsport, Pennsylvania, holds perhaps the most promise for cleaning tainted wastewater. The plant uses a more effective filtering process of distillation to burn off wastewater contaminants, according to Duke University biologist Robert B. Jackson. The newer distillation plants, however, have proven more energy intensive, and thus more expensive, and the Williamsport plant remains the only one of its kind operating in Pennsylvania. The EPA has cited the Eureka facility for air quality violations.

Industry officials say that as much as 90 percent of Pennsylvania’s fracking wastewater is either reused or treated before it is released back into
Levels of radium 200 times higher than normal were found in sediment downstream.
streams or other water sources. But while there have been improvements in storage and treatment technology, there hasn’t been "an overall industry solution for flowback in Pennsylvania and Ohio," said Anthony Ingraffea, an engineering professor at Cornell University. "In Pennsylvania, disposal of wastewater has been and will remain a chronic problem because they produce it in very large quantities," Ingraffea said.

Violations issued in Washington County, show the scale of the problem. In the last 12 months, Pennsylvania DEP’s Office of Oil and Gas Management found 27 violations in the county, of which 10 involved improper treatment or storage of fracking wastewater.

During testing from 2010 to 2012, Jackson and fellow Duke scientists made an alarming discovery at the Josephine Brine Treatment Facility, a disposal site on Blacklick Creek, which feeds into water sources for Pittsburgh and other cities. The researchers found that the facility did a poor job of filtering chloride and that levels of radium 200 times higher than normal were present in the sediment downstream, Jackson said. The plant had contributed about four-fifths of the downstream chloride content, and bromide was also found downstream, posing a possible health risk for drinking water, Jackson said.

The dangerous releases at the Josephine plant have ended. In May, 2013, Fluid Recovery Services, the facility’s operator, signed an agreement to stop accepting or discharging wastewater from Marcellus Shale wells until it installs technology to remove toxic and radioactive compounds.

But Freyman predicts that municipalities will begin legislating to keep fracking a safe distance from population centers and their water supplies, as Dallas, Texas has done. "There needs to be more discussion and more transparency before we as a society decide what the tradeoffs are and how to mitigate the risks," she said.



ABOUT THE AUTHOR


Roger Real Drouin is a journalist who covers environmental issues. His articles have appeared in Grist.org, Mother Jones, The Atlantic Cities, and other publications.

SHARE: Tweet | Digg | Del.icio.us | Reddit | Mixx | Facebook | Stumble Upon

COMMENTS


Nice summary. Add to this the question of using acid mine drainage water in fracking, as Pennsylvania now proposes to do, and it's quite a problem.

Readers interested in fracking wastewater and water-related issues can visit ShaleReporter.com, which covers the Marcellus Shale and beyond. Reporter Rachel Morgan, the "From the Ground Up" bloggers (including — full disclosure — myself), and others take a look from many angles.

Thanks,
Miranda Spencer
mirandacspencer@gmail.

Posted by Miranda Spencer on 18 Feb 2014


I am wondering how fracking wastewater can be treated and released into streams safely. Do the treatment plants know all the chemicals that are used in the hydraulic fracturing process and how to remove those chemicals? My understanding is the names of some of those chemicals are protected by trade secret laws, and that many of them have not been subject to toxicity, epidemiological or exposure studies. I have also heard that local authorities do not always know how to detect the presence of some of these chemicals in the environment.

Is this true?
Posted by Tim Whitehouse on 18 Feb 2014


Very informative article. Makes us think twice about what we are doing to earth. Thank you.
Posted by Anna Dinatali on 18 Feb 2014


By passing the Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act our society demonstrated that it already knew better than to allow the massive and deliberate contamination of increasingly limited and highly critical freshwater supplies. The 2005 law that exempts fracking from the CWA is criminal behavior that is now inflicting massive, permanent damage in huge areas of the United States.

Fracking is inherently destructive to such an extreme degree that the industry knew that the process would never be allowed unless the law was changed. After the 2004 election the Bush administration spent some of its political capital and Dick Cheney got the oil and gas industry its exemption. There is no reconciling the fracking process with a livable world. Trillions of gallons of freshwater are being permanently contaminated by a secret mixture of chemicals. The current gas boom will give way to permanent impoverishment of areas affected.

Many localities are already permanently contaminated but some areas have not yet been destroyed. I have to wonder if there is any sunset on the fracking exemption. I have to wonder what the fracking boom will look like in retrospect, in 20-50 years. It will be a thirsty future, full of regret and cancer.
Posted by Charles Fox on 18 Feb 2014


Tim, that’s an important question. My reporting has shown there is considerably more known now than just a few years ago about the mix of compounds and chemicals used during the process of hydraulic fracturing. That information has been gathered through various research and an ongoing EPA study. As part of the agency's study probing the potential impact of fracking on water, it has been gathering more data. According to a 2012 progress report, the EPA, relying on mostly industry-supplied data, has already identified 1,000 chemicals that are used during the overall process of hydraulic fracturing. However, the trade secrets exemption still applies, and companies are not required to reveal chemicals that are considered “trade secrets.” Another concern, that doesn’t appear to have been addressed, is that it remains unknown how some chemicals react — for instance whether some chemicals are susceptible to “volatizing,” or vaporizing, off wastewater streams or impoundment ponds before wastewater is processed.

Posted by Roger Real Drouin on 18 Feb 2014


An interesting article. For more information, see New Solutions: A Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety, Vol 23(1) - special issue that is available for free download at: http://baywood.metapress.com/link.asp?id=tn6551r70125

Scientific, Economic, Social, Environmental, and Health Policy Concerns Related to Shale Gas Extraction
Posted by Craig Slatin on 18 Feb 2014


Agree with you 100 percent. Very eye-opening article!
Posted by Ive Anderson on 20 Feb 2014


I will wager that some of you still think that we have the ability to impact the warming of the earth, too?
Posted by tom on 21 Feb 2014


Not that I am for or against, but I wonder about the growth of technology to help us handle these issues.

I read somewhere that said the energy sector is actually the fastest growth sector for technology.

I remember hydraulic fluid leaks were the biggest problem, not that the wastewater issues were not a problem then either, but will advances in technology help us here, too?

Initially, worries about fracking and water pollution focused largely on leaks of drilling fluids and other contaminants from well casings, which could potentially pollute groundwater supplies. But with engineering improvements that have reinforced well casings and reduced pollution from that source, experts now say fracking’s real pollution danger comes from wastewater.

Thanks for keeping me up to date on this difficult issue we face.

Mark Contorno
A Creeklife supporter
www.creeklife.com


Posted by Mark on 22 Feb 2014


I worked on oil sites as a frac tank operator in the early 1990s. There are many risks when fracking waste water is is stored in frac tanks. Waste water can escape many different ways as it is held on-site to be trucked for disposal. I have seen how easy it is for someone to hide spills if a leak has happened. Just because someone drills a well using the frac process does not mean that they are really concerned about waste water; they are mainly focused on what makes the world go round...the all-mighty dollar. A lot of the people working on sites are not well trained and educated. The workers on sites are paid labor and many don't possess a GED or high school diploma.

I know of a new system that can be used on-site where the waste water can be permanently sealed up. There will no longer be the need to truck waste water to another site for disposal. If any companies are interested I can refer them to the people that have a US patent on this brand new technology. I would like for our country to use our huge amount of natural gasreserves and free us from having to be dependent on foreign oil companies that hold us hostage for our energy. If any one wants help with frac waste disposal I may be emailed at jamespmaginness@aol.com. I will refer you to the people who can explain this new process and the benefits and downfalls of this new technique for disposal on-site at frac wells.
Posted by pat maginness on 26 Aug 2014



 

RELATED ARTICLES


Innovations in Energy Storage Provide Boost for Renewables
Because utilities can't control when the sun shines or the wind blows, it has been difficult to fully incorporate solar and wind power into the electricity grid. But new technologies designed to store the energy produced by these clean power sources could soon be changing that.
READ MORE

With the Boom in Oil and Gas, Pipelines Proliferate in the U.S.
The rise of U.S. oil and gas production has spurred a dramatic expansion of the nation's pipeline infrastructure. As the lines reach into new communities and affect more property owners, concerns over the environmental impacts are growing.
READ MORE

He's Still Bullish on Hybrids, But Skeptical of Electric Cars
Former Toyota executive Bill Reinert has long been dubious about the potential of electric cars. In an interview with Yale Environment 360, he talks about the promise of other technologies and about why he still sees hybrids as the best alternative to gasoline-powered vehicles.
READ MORE

Beyond Treaties: A New Way of Framing Global Climate Action
As negotiators look to next year’s UN climate conference in Paris, there is increasing discussion of a new way forward that does not depend on sweeping international agreements. Some analysts are pointing to Plan B — recasting the climate issue as one of national self-interest rather than global treaties.
READ MORE

Oil Companies Quietly Prepare For a Future of Carbon Pricing
The major oil companies in the U.S. have not had to pay a price for the contribution their products make to climate change. But internal accounting by the companies, along with a host of other signs, suggest that may soon change — though the implications of a price on carbon are far from clear.
READ MORE


SEARCH


Donate to Yale Environment 360


ABOUT

Menu

SUPPORT E360

Menu

TOPICS

Menu

DEPARTMENTS

Menu

HOME PAGE

Menu