Literature DB >> 28386869

Unconventional natural gas development did not result in detectable changes in water chemistry (within the South Fork Little Red River).

Bradley J Austin1, Erin Scott2, Leslie Massey3, Michelle A Evans-White4, Sally Entrekin5, Brian E Haggard2.   

Abstract

The Fayetteville Shale within north central Arkansas is an area of extensive unconventional natural gas (UNG) production. Recently, the Scott Henderson Gulf Mountain Wildlife Management Area (GMWMA) was leased from the state of Arkansas for NG exploration, raising concerns about potential impacts on water resources. From November 2010 through November 2014, we monitored four reaches of the South Fork Little Red River (SFLRR), within the GMWMA, establishing baseline physico-chemical characteristics prior to UNG development and assessing trends in parameters during and after UNG development. Water samples were collected monthly during baseflow conditions and analyzed for conductivity, turbidity, ions, total organic carbon (TOC), and metals. All parameters were flow-adjusted and evaluated for monotonic changes over time. The concentrations of all constituents measured in the SFLRR were generally low (e.g., nitrate ranged from <0.005 to 0.268 mg/l across all sites and sample periods), suggesting the SFLRR is of high water quality. Flow-adjusted conductivity measurements and sodium concentrations increased at site 1, while magnesium decreased across all four sites, TOC decreased at sites 1 and 3, and iron decreased at site 1 over the duration of the study. With the exception of conductivity and sodium, the physico-chemical parameters either decreased or did not change over the 4-year duration, indicating that UNG activities within the GMWMA have had minimal or no detectable impact on water quality within the SFLRR. Our study provides essential baseline information that can be used to evaluate water quality within the SFLRR in the future should UNG activity within the GMWMA expand.

Entities:  

Keywords:  LOESS; Natural gas; Trend analysis; Water quality

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28386869     DOI: 10.1007/s10661-017-5904-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Monit Assess        ISSN: 0167-6369            Impact factor:   2.513


  23 in total

1.  Measurements of methane emissions at natural gas production sites in the United States.

Authors:  David T Allen; Vincent M Torres; James Thomas; David W Sullivan; Matthew Harrison; Al Hendler; Scott C Herndon; Charles E Kolb; Matthew P Fraser; A Daniel Hill; Brian K Lamb; Jennifer Miskimins; Robert F Sawyer; John H Seinfeld
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-09-16       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 2.  A review of stream nutrient criteria development in the United States.

Authors:  M A Evans-White; B E Haggard; J T Scott
Journal:  J Environ Qual       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 2.751

3.  Habitat loss and modification due to gas development in the Fayetteville shale.

Authors:  Matthew D Moran; A Brandon Cox; Rachel L Wells; Chloe C Benichou; Maureen R McClung
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2015-01-08       Impact factor: 3.266

4.  Shale gas development impacts on surface water quality in Pennsylvania.

Authors:  Sheila M Olmstead; Lucija A Muehlenbachs; Jhih-Shyang Shih; Ziyan Chu; Alan J Krupnick
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-03-11       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Gas revolution. The gas surge. Introduction.

Authors:  David Malakoff
Journal:  Science       Date:  2014-06-27       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 6.  A critical review of the risks to water resources from unconventional shale gas development and hydraulic fracturing in the United States.

Authors:  Avner Vengosh; Robert B Jackson; Nathaniel Warner; Thomas H Darrah; Andrew Kondash
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2014-03-07       Impact factor: 9.028

Review 7.  Evolving shale gas management: water resource risks, impacts, and lessons learned.

Authors:  Brian G Rahm; Susan J Riha
Journal:  Environ Sci Process Impacts       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 4.238

8.  Climate change. A bold baby step on emissions.

Authors:  Eli Kintisch
Journal:  Science       Date:  2014-06-06       Impact factor: 47.728

9.  Water pollution risk associated with natural gas extraction from the Marcellus Shale.

Authors:  Daniel J Rozell; Sheldon J Reaven
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2011-12-28       Impact factor: 4.000

10.  Temporal variation in groundwater quality in the Permian Basin of Texas, a region of increasing unconventional oil and gas development.

Authors:  Zacariah L Hildenbrand; Doug D Carlton; Brian E Fontenot; Jesse M Meik; Jayme L Walton; Jonathan B Thacker; Stephanie Korlie; C Phillip Shelor; Akinde F Kadjo; Adelaide Clark; Sascha Usenko; Jason S Hamilton; Phillip M Mach; Guido F Verbeck; Paul Hudak; Kevin A Schug
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2016-04-26       Impact factor: 7.963

View more
  1 in total

1.  Demographic characteristics of an avian predator, Louisiana Waterthrush (Parkesia motacilla), in response to its aquatic prey in a Central Appalachian USA watershed impacted by shale gas development.

Authors:  Mack W Frantz; Petra B Wood; George T Merovich
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-11-28       Impact factor: 3.240

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.