Literature DB >> 23798404

Increased stray gas abundance in a subset of drinking water wells near Marcellus shale gas extraction.

Robert B Jackson1, Avner Vengosh, Thomas H Darrah, Nathaniel R Warner, Adrian Down, Robert J Poreda, Stephen G Osborn, Kaiguang Zhao, Jonathan D Karr.   

Abstract

Horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing are transforming energy production, but their potential environmental effects remain controversial. We analyzed 141 drinking water wells across the Appalachian Plateaus physiographic province of northeastern Pennsylvania, examining natural gas concentrations and isotopic signatures with proximity to shale gas wells. Methane was detected in 82% of drinking water samples, with average concentrations six times higher for homes <1 km from natural gas wells (P = 0.0006). Ethane was 23 times higher in homes <1 km from gas wells (P = 0.0013); propane was detected in 10 water wells, all within approximately 1 km distance (P = 0.01). Of three factors previously proposed to influence gas concentrations in shallow groundwater (distances to gas wells, valley bottoms, and the Appalachian Structural Front, a proxy for tectonic deformation), distance to gas wells was highly significant for methane concentrations (P = 0.007; multiple regression), whereas distances to valley bottoms and the Appalachian Structural Front were not significant (P = 0.27 and P = 0.11, respectively). Distance to gas wells was also the most significant factor for Pearson and Spearman correlation analyses (P < 0.01). For ethane concentrations, distance to gas wells was the only statistically significant factor (P < 0.005). Isotopic signatures (δ(13)C-CH4, δ(13)C-C2H6, and δ(2)H-CH4), hydrocarbon ratios (methane to ethane and propane), and the ratio of the noble gas (4)He to CH4 in groundwater were characteristic of a thermally postmature Marcellus-like source in some cases. Overall, our data suggest that some homeowners living <1 km from gas wells have drinking water contaminated with stray gases.

Entities:  

Keywords:  carbon, hydrogen, and helium isotopes; fracking; geochemical fingerprinting; groundwater contamination; hydrology and ecology

Year:  2013        PMID: 23798404      PMCID: PMC3710833          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1221635110

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  11 in total

1.  Geochemical and strontium isotope characterization of produced waters from Marcellus Shale natural gas extraction.

Authors:  Elizabeth C Chapman; Rosemary C Capo; Brian W Stewart; Carl S Kirby; Richard W Hammack; Karl T Schroeder; Harry M Edenborn
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2012-03-08       Impact factor: 9.028

2.  Methane contamination of drinking water caused by hydraulic fracturing remains unproven.

Authors:  Richard J Davies
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-10-14       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Geochemical evidence for possible natural migration of Marcellus Formation brine to shallow aquifers in Pennsylvania.

Authors:  Nathaniel R Warner; Robert B Jackson; Thomas H Darrah; Stephen G Osborn; Adrian Down; Kaiguang Zhao; Alissa White; Avner Vengosh
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-07-09       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Natural gas plays in the Marcellus Shale: challenges and potential opportunities.

Authors:  David M Kargbo; Ron G Wilhelm; David J Campbell
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2010-08-01       Impact factor: 9.028

5.  Energy. Natural gas from shale bursts onto the scene.

Authors:  Richard A Kerr
Journal:  Science       Date:  2010-06-25       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  Natural gas: Should fracking stop?

Authors:  Robert W Howarth; Anthony Ingraffea; Terry Engelder
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2011-09-14       Impact factor: 49.962

7.  Analysis of dissolved methane, ethane, and ethylene in ground water by a standard gas chromatographic technique.

Authors:  D H Kampbell; S A Vandegrift
Journal:  J Chromatogr Sci       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 1.618

8.  Potential contaminant pathways from hydraulically fractured shale to aquifers.

Authors:  Tom Myers
Journal:  Ground Water       Date:  2012-04-17       Impact factor: 2.671

9.  Methane contamination of drinking water accompanying gas-well drilling and hydraulic fracturing.

Authors:  Stephen G Osborn; Avner Vengosh; Nathaniel R Warner; Robert B Jackson
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-05-09       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  Evaluation of methane sources in groundwater in northeastern Pennsylvania.

Authors:  Lisa J Molofsky; John A Connor; Albert S Wylie; Tom Wagner; Shahla K Farhat
Journal:  Ground Water       Date:  2013-04-05       Impact factor: 2.671

View more
  61 in total

1.  Unconventional Natural Gas Development and Birth Outcomes in Pennsylvania, USA.

Authors:  Joan A Casey; David A Savitz; Sara G Rasmussen; Elizabeth L Ogburn; Jonathan Pollak; Dione G Mercer; Brian S Schwartz
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 4.822

2.  Elevated levels of diesel range organic compounds in groundwater near Marcellus gas operations are derived from surface activities.

Authors:  Brian D Drollette; Kathrin Hoelzer; Nathaniel R Warner; Thomas H Darrah; Osman Karatum; Megan P O'Connor; Robert K Nelson; Loretta A Fernandez; Christopher M Reddy; Avner Vengosh; Robert B Jackson; Martin Elsner; Desiree L Plata
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-10-12       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Salinity of deep groundwater in California: Water quantity, quality, and protection.

Authors:  Mary Kang; Robert B Jackson
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-06-27       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Quasi-Two-Dimensional Phase Transition of Methane Adsorbed in Cylindrical Silica Mesopores.

Authors:  Daniel W Siderius; William P Krekelberg; Wei-Shan Chiang; Vincent K Shen; Yun Liu
Journal:  Langmuir       Date:  2017-12-11       Impact factor: 3.882

5.  Estimating the Creation and Removal Date of Fracking Ponds Using Trend Analysis of Landsat Imagery.

Authors:  Rutherford V Platt; David Manthos; John Amos
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2018-01-05       Impact factor: 3.266

6.  Hydraulic fracturing near domestic groundwater wells.

Authors:  Scott Jasechko; Debra Perrone
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-11-27       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Direct measurements of methane emissions from abandoned oil and gas wells in Pennsylvania.

Authors:  Mary Kang; Cynthia M Kanno; Matthew C Reid; Xin Zhang; Denise L Mauzerall; Michael A Celia; Yuheng Chen; Tullis C Onstott
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-12-08       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 8.  Extensive review of shale gas environmental impacts from scientific literature (2010-2015).

Authors:  Daniele Costa; João Jesus; David Branco; Anthony Danko; António Fiúza
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2017-04-28       Impact factor: 4.223

Review 9.  A review of the public health impacts of unconventional natural gas development.

Authors:  P J Saunders; D McCoy; R Goldstein; A T Saunders; A Munroe
Journal:  Environ Geochem Health       Date:  2016-12-05       Impact factor: 4.609

10.  Monitoring concentration and isotopic composition of methane in groundwater in the Utica Shale hydraulic fracturing region of Ohio.

Authors:  E Claire Botner; Amy Townsend-Small; David B Nash; Xiaomei Xu; Arndt Schimmelmann; Joshua H Miller
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2018-05-03       Impact factor: 2.513

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.