Fracking leaves legacy of pollution

guywhofishes

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Posts
28,714
Likes
4,107
Points
958
Location
Faaargo, ND
Somebody needs to write the tribune and complain about the "k" used in fracking. Ha ha ha.

http://m.bismarcktribune.com/news/s...cle_d62aaa65-c9ff-5ddb-bb40-8e0983efdde3.html
[h=1]Study indicates lingering saltwater contamination in oil patch[/h]

A published and peer-reviewed Duke University study finds that thousands of saltwater and frack flowback spills throughout the oil patch have left a legacy of toxic contamination, including radioactive soils and polluted streams unsafe for human consumption and aquatic health.
54c87148913d9.image.jpg






The Duke team of researchers, which advocated that more study is needed, published the findings Wednesday in the Environmental Science & Technology journal. Funding for the project came from the National Science Foundation and the Natural Resources Defense Council.


A North Dakota health official said the study only looked at spills still being remediated, not sites that have been cleaned up.



Avner Vengosh, professor of geochemistry and water quality at Duke, said the magnitude of 9,700 new wells drilled over the decade in North Dakota is the reason why the contamination is so widespread, compared to other regions.



“This massive development has led to more than 3,900 brine spills, mostly coming from faulty pipes built to transport fracked wells’ flowback water,” said Vengosh, adding that his researchers have been studying frack-related science for six years across the country and the magnitude of spills is unprecedented.


“It’s a phenomenon we’ve never seen before,” he said.


A lead study author, Nancy Lauer, said the metals and salts in the brine spills don’t break down in soil, unlike oil.



“This has created a legacy of radioactivity at spill sites,” she said.


The State Health Department’s environmental chief David Glatt said findings that brine water spills are highly mineralized is no surprise and the department’s always maintained it would rather deal with spilled oil than produced water.



That said, he says the study looks at three spill sites that are still being remediated and one legacy spill at an injection well that he says needs to be addressed, but doesn’t look at spill sites that have been cleaned by removing contaminated soil and flushing with fresh water. One of the sites, near Bottineau, has been in remediation for four years; another for two, he said.



“To say the whole Bakken is a concern, that’s a stretch. The vast majority of spills have been cleaned up and (the contaminants) are a lot closer to (normal) background levels,” Glatt said. “I wish we would have been contacted. We’ve done a lot of things and a lot of follow up to make sure companies get right on it. The vast majority don’t become a problem.”



In an interview with the Tribune, Vengosh said the study is based on hard data and objective science and that state health and oil officials shouldn’t be surprised by the outcome.


“Didn’t they think this would be?” he said.










Dakota Resource Council members agreed their land, impacted by the spills, could be used for the study. DRC organizer Nicole Donaghy, if it's truly a question of "remediated" versus "unremediated" sites, "We'd be happy to submit samples of fully remediated sites at saltwater spills."



The study mapped the 3,900 recorded spills and involved complex measurements from four spills — two major, two minor — that occurred over the past four years in the Bakken and Bottineau fields. Vengosh said the study didn’t go wide across spills, but deep into characteristic ones. The samples were taken to the lab to identify specific isotopes for “fingerprints” or “tracers” to distinguish them in soil and water.


He said the study should be a wakeup call, because the persistent presence of the toxins, even four years after a spill, means there’s been no effective cleanup.



“There needs to be much more monitoring and evaluation to protect drinking water. North Dakota needs to address this and take steps to avoid it,” he said.



Alison Ritter, spokeswoman for the state's Oil and Gas Division, said an analysis of spills and brine water pipelines led to new rules to expand the division’s jurisdiction. Those rules, still in the proposal stage, require bonding, more inspection and enforcement and prior notice of pipeline installation. She said the department also wants to increase diking requirements so spills are better contained.


“Remedies to the issues raised in the study have been in the works since the 2015 Legislature,” said Ritter, adding that the state is looking at implementation in October.


The study authors conclude that the resistance of contamination to biodegradation and its persistence in the environment “suggest that contamination from brine spills in North Dakota will continue to impact nearby water resources for years to come.”



More study is recommended, and Vengosh said his team plans to follow up work in North Dakota.


Darrell Dorgan, chairman of the North Dakota Energy Industry Waste Coalition, said the study is no surprise to anyone who has followed the state’s failure to regulate the oil industry.


He said the study makes new health department rules to allow disposal of radioactive waste even more alarming.


“If people think this study points to a building tragedy, just wait. The new rules allow radioactive waste that is 10 times more dangerous,” Dorgan said.
 




guywhofishes

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Posts
28,714
Likes
4,107
Points
958
Location
Faaargo, ND
So, this just describes a method with no spill tests? Is that referenced in our original post? Like I said, I'm not bothering reading it.

I see that other citation went sailing over your head. Maybe read it more carefully. (wink wink)

Here's the journal article citation regarding the original post. http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acs.est.5b06349 As usual I don't think newspaper article did a decent job of framing the study's findings.

This graphic from the article is shocking - as produced oil sky rocketed the spills of saltwater skyrocketed. :cool:

es-2015-06349f_0006.gif
 

Account Deleted

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 20, 2015
Posts
4,641
Likes
50
Points
246
I only read the abstract. The last sentence is what I was referring to that they say it should be able to translate to field studies.

The graphic makes perfect sense but that is a function of oil production in general, not just fracking.
 

eyexer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Posts
13,730
Likes
708
Points
438
Location
williston
stupid ass hats. has nothing to do with fracing. and the majority of the flow back is fresh/frac water. they just use "fracing" to excite people because fracing is a bad word. What they are finding is "production" water. Nothing to do with fracing per se. Man stupid asses like this piss me off.
 

guywhofishes

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Posts
28,714
Likes
4,107
Points
958
Location
Faaargo, ND
I don't think they're laying it at the feet of fracing - they're saying fracing has generated huge production - and spills scale with huge production - and brine spills are recalcitrant as all get out. The newspaper article is guilty of slanting the study IMO.

- - - Updated - - -

and like all good researchers - they conclude they should get funded - to study it more :D

I've done that maybe 100 times in my R&D career - hee hee hee
 

eyexer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Posts
13,730
Likes
708
Points
438
Location
williston
I don't think they're laying it at the feet of fracing - they're saying fracing has generated huge production - and spills scale with huge production - and brine spills are recalcitrant as all get out. The newspaper article is guilty of slanting the study IMO.

- - - Updated - - -

and like all good researchers - they conclude they should get funded - to study it more :D

I've done that maybe 100 times in my R&D career - hee hee hee
If that's what the deal was they would have explained it that way. And they wouldn't have used "fracing" in the title. This is nothing more than an attempt to rile people up and secure massive funding on the back of the fear of "fracing". Liberal jackasses.
 


SDMF

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Posts
10,942
Likes
663
Points
448
Concrete conclusions and attainable end-points have become the antithesis of "research". The only acceptable answer that withstands peer-review is, "Results indicate that the overlying issue warrants additional research." In the common tongue that's pronounced, " gimme more fuggin' money".
 

guywhofishes

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Posts
28,714
Likes
4,107
Points
958
Location
Faaargo, ND
Concrete conclusions and attainable end-points have become the antithesis of "research". The only acceptable answer that withstands peer-review is, "Results indicate that the overlying issue warrants additional research." In the common tongue that's pronounced, " gimme more fuggin' money".

there's a reason it's called re-search
 

SDMF

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Posts
10,942
Likes
663
Points
448
Seems much more innocuous that folks who went to school for 8-12yrs, have worked for 20, and still consider it "practice". (Grin).
 

gst

Banned
Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Posts
7,654
Likes
122
Points
308
I see that other citation went sailing over your head. Maybe read it more carefully. (wink wink)

Here's the journal article citation regarding the original post. http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acs.est.5b06349 As usual I don't think newspaper article did a decent job of framing the study's findings.

This graphic from the article is shocking - as produced oil sky rocketed the spills of saltwater skyrocketed. :cool:

es-2015-06349f_0006.gif

and

- - - Updated - - -

there's a reason it's called re-search

So can I get paid to do that kind of "research? Or do you need to be "trained" to figure that out?

- - - Updated - - -

Apparentlly we are now "researching" common sense.
 


eyexer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Posts
13,730
Likes
708
Points
438
Location
williston
and

- - - Updated - - -



So can I get paid to do that kind of "research? Or do you need to be "trained" to figure that out?

- - - Updated - - -

Apparentlly we are now "researching" common sense.
they go pretty much hand in hand. we also had brine spills long before we ever fraced a well in ND.
 

espringers

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 18, 2015
Posts
8,189
Likes
895
Points
428
Location
Devils Lake
Didn't they use the F-word cause it's the source or reason all the brine exists in the first place? Not necessarily because the F-word causes brine spills? I also didn't bother reading the whole thing. So, that's just an assumption
 

eyexer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Posts
13,730
Likes
708
Points
438
Location
williston
Didn't they use the F-word cause it's the source or reason all the brine exists in the first place? Not necessarily because the F-word causes brine spills? I also didn't bother reading the whole thing. So, that's just an assumption
brine would exist whether these wells were fraced or not. It's simply a product of oil production in this area. And most areas actually.
 

gst

Banned
Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Posts
7,654
Likes
122
Points
308
Ha, protest "fracking" in merry old England and get a facce full of bullshit to go along side the crumpet your baking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHXWfkdp65o

- - - Updated - - -

http://www.ijreview.com/2016/04/593722-holy-crap-farmer-gets-revenge-on-oscar-winning-actress-for-fracking-protest-on-his-land/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=owned&utm_campaign=ods&utm_term=ijamerica&utm_content=culture

- - - Updated - - -

"While Thompson voiced her opposition to potential fracking at the site, the farmer drove his manure spreader in circles around the film crew, splattering protesters and crew with a liquid manure sludge."
 


Recent Posts

Friends of NDA

Top Posters of the Month

  • This month: 190
  • This month: 153
  • This month: 142
  • This month: 137
  • This month: 113
  • This month: 93
  • This month: 93
  • This month: 88
  • This month: 84
  • This month: 78
Top Bottom