Lack of snow and rain prompt Pa. officials to discuss drought potential
www.therepublic.com/view/story/33c64dbf097042838eb0ad5d3aa8f9a5/PA–Drought-Fears/
HARRISBURG, Pa. — Just after Pennsylvanians dried off from one of the wettest years on record, professional weather-watchers are becoming concerned about a potential drought in the central and eastern parts of the state.
The state’s Drought Task Force, which includes representatives of the Department of Environmental Protection, the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency, the National Weather Service and other government agencies, will meet April 25 to discuss the effects of a winter with little snowfall and a drier-than-usual spring, officials said Tuesday.
It remains to be seen whether that leads to the DEP declaring a drought watch encouraging residents in certain areas to conserve water, as Maryland officials did last week for most of the Eastern Shore.
“At this point we’re not taking any action,” said Ruth Miller of PEMA, which helped direct relief efforts during last year’s historic flooding from Hurricane Irene and Tropical Storm Lee, which killed 18 people and damaged or destroyed tens of thousands of homes and businesses.
Now, in contrast to those back-to-back disasters in August and September, the Susquehanna and Delaware rivers are flowing at record low rates for this time of year.
Susan Weaver, a DEP official who serves as the state drought coordinator, said officials assess data on precipitation, surface water, ground water and soil moisture in 90-day increments before deciding whether to issue a drought watch or a more emphatic drought warning.
“The tough part is what’s going to happen tomorrow,” Weaver said.
In August, “we issued a drought watch and I swear to God the next day it started to rain and it didn’t stop,” she said.
On Tuesday, the Susquehanna was flowing at around 14,000 cubic feet per second — less than 20 percent of its normal rate and the slowest flow since 1910, said hydrologist Charles Ross at the weather service office in State College. The average depth was barely half the normal seven feet, he said.
Still, “all it’s going to take is some average rain and we’ll probably be in pretty good shape,” Ross said.
The situation was similar on the Delaware, where the flow in Trenton, N.J., was measured at less than 4,000 cubic feet per second — the lowest for that date in the 98 years it has been measured.
“We’ve actually been setting records for a week or so,” said Clarke Rupert, spokesman for the Delaware River Basin Commission.
Susan Obleski, spokeswoman for the Susquehanna River Basin Commission, said dry conditions along streams that feed the river have led the commission to temporarily suspend permits that allow some natural gas drilling companies to use that water. So far, 14 permits held by eight companies have been suspended.
“They have multiple sources (of water), so it doesn’t mean that (a) particular company would shut down,” she said.
Penn State Master Well Owner volunteer training opportunities in 2012
Penn State Extension will be offering several training workshops for new Master Well Owner Volunteers in 2012. The six week online course will begin on February 6, 2012. Two Saturday training workshops will also be offered this spring in McKean and Butler Counties. More details on these training workshops, including a link to the online application, are provided below.
Upcoming Training Opportunities for New Master Well Owner Volunteers Pennsylvania is home to over one million private water wells and springs but it is one of the few states that do not provide statewide regulations to protect these rural drinking water supplies. In 2004, Penn State Cooperative Extension and several partner agencies created the Master Well Owner Network (MWON), a group of trained volunteers who are dedicated to promoting the proper construction, testing, and maintenance of private water wells, springs and cisterns throughout Pennsylvania. Since its inception, hundreds of MWON volunteers have been trained in 64 counties throughout Pennsylvania. These volunteers have, in turn, educated tens of thousands of private water system owners across the state.
In 2012, persons interested in becoming a trained Master Well Owner volunteer will have three opportunities.
1) Online MWON volunteer training will occur between February 6, 2012 and March 19, 2012. Volunteers in the online training receive weekly emails containing links to relevant reading in the MWON handbook (A Guide to Private Water Systems in Pennsylvania), a 45-minute video presentation for each chapter, and a short online exam. Participants in online training will largely be able to determine their own training schedule. Volunteers with questions can attend one optional live online meeting at the end of the course. Participants must score a cumulative 70% on all of the online exams to be certified as a MWON volunteer.
2) A standard, Saturday MWON volunteer training workshop will be offered in Butler County (location TBA) on March 24, 2012 from 9 AM until 3:30 PM. Participants will hear presentations from Penn State water specialists, well drillers and other experts. As with the online course, volunteers at the Saturday workshops must score at least 70% on a final exam to be certified.
3) Another standard, Saturday MWON volunteer training workshop will be offered in Smethport, PA (McKean County) on April 21, 2012 from 9 AM to 3:30 PM.
Volunteers who successfully complete any of these training courses and pass the exam(s) will receive a free copy of the 80 page publication – A Guide to Private Water Systems in Pennsylvania, a coupon good for a 10% discount on water testing through the Penn State water testing lab, and access to various MWON educational materials. In return, MWON volunteers are asked to pass along what they have learned to other private water supply owners and submit an annual report of their educational accomplishments.
Prospective volunteers need to submit an application and be accepted into the program. Applications for the online course will only be accepted through January 31, 2012. Applications for the Saturday workshops will be accepted up to one week before the workshop. To be eligible for any MWON training, applicants must not be affiliated with any business that works directly with private water system owners such as employees of water well drilling companies, water testing laboratories or water treatment businesses.
To learn more and the Master Well Owner Network, visit
http://extension.psu.edu/water/mwon
To complete an application to participate in one of the MWON volunteer trainings listed above, visit
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/mwon_application
Note From Carbon County Groundwater Guardians – Consider coming back and helping our efforts – Looking for Volunteers Statewide.
For your information, we wanted to point out a few other resources
1. Mail Order Water Testing Kits or consider using a local water testing laboratory. The mail order testing is done by a Nationally Certified Laboratory and a portion of the proceeds that help support this organization.
2. New Education Guide for Private Well Owners in PA – What do the numbers mean and Insights into Baseline Water Testing? (Proceeds Benefit this Organization- free online read only version)
3. Our Online FREE Library of Pdf, videos, powerpoint presenations for private well owners.
4. Our New Flier
Marcellus Shale drilling may take huge chunks out of PA forests
www.bayjournal.com/article.cfm?article=4246
By Karl Blankenship
Loss could heavily impact wildlife habitat, state’s ability to meet TMDL goal
Gas drilling requires miles of roads as well as impervious surface around the well sites. All of that breaks up large tracts of forests, removing crucial bird and reptile habitats. Here, a gas company works a well site in Beech Creek Township near Bald Eagle State Park. (Credit: Dick Martin / Pennsylvania Forest Project)
During the coming two decades, Pennsylvania could lose enough forest land to build a couple of large cities. The forest won’t be lost in a single large chunk, but as thousands of small sites that are cleared to drill natural gas wells and connected with hundreds of miles of new pipelines.
While those impacts will be scattered across the landscape, their cumulative impact on forest habitats could be severe, and it could also complicate the state’s efforts to meet its nutrient and sediment reduction obligations under the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load, or pollution diet.
“It’s not so much that people know it would keep the TMDL from being met,” said Nels Johnson, director of conservation programs with The Nature Conservancy in Pennsylvania. “It’s that no one knows whether or not this really threatens the state’s efforts to meet the TMDL.”
Much of the concern about environmental impacts related to the Marcellus Shale natural gas boom has been related to the water quality impacts of hydraulic fracking, the process of injecting huge amounts of water and chemicals under high pressure deep into the ground to break apart rock and access gas.
Johnson led a team that tackled a different question – how the drilling in the Marcellus Shale formation could affect land use and, ultimately, wildlife habitats in Pennsylvania.
By using information about the depth and thickness of the Marcellus formation in different areas and a variety of other variables, they developed a model to project where the 60,000 wells expected to be drilled in the next two decades will go.
The analysis projects that about 60 percent of the wells will be drilled on forest land – the dominant land cover over much of the Marcellus Shale in the state.
A key factor that affects how much forest will be directly affected by drilling is the number of wells drilled on each drilling pad. A typical pad is about 3 acres but requires about six additional acres for roads and other related infrastructure. Right now, the average is less than two wells per pad, Johnson said, but he expects that to increase to between 4 and 10 wells per pad over time.
While scattered pads may not seem to have great impact, the analysis estimates that, across Pennsylvania, 38,000-90,000 acres of forest may ultimately be cleared for wells seeking to tap the Marcellus Shale formation, which underlies the western and northern portions of the state. Another 60,000-150,000 acres of forest could be lost for new pipelines.
“It’s a cumulative impact,” Johnson said. “Ultimately, that’s why we did this – because we wanted to have a better understanding of the cumulative impact, and how worried we should be about this.”
Pennsylvania’s large tracts of intact forests are important for an array of wildlife, from brook trout to forest interior birds. Forest birds such as the scarlet tanager, which have declined in many areas, have generally held their own in Pennsylvania’s large forests.
That could change as forests are chopped up for wells and pipelines. Many predators, from blue jays to raccoons, thrive along forest edges, from which they forage into the woods, picking off birds or the eggs of wood thrush, ovenbirds and other species that normally rely on large forests for refuge. Not only will forests be directly lost to drill pads and pipelines, but forests near those opening will be rendered uninhabitable for many species.
But the analysis also raises a concern for Chesapeake cleanup efforts. The conservancy estimates that about 46 percent of the drilling would take place within the Bay watershed. That suggests the forest loss within the watershed portion of Pennsylvania could be between 45,000-110,000 acres.
For comparison, that’s enough land to build between 1 to 2.5 District of Columbias.
Because forests absorb more nutrients and retain more sediment than other land uses, their loss could result in more of those pollutants reaching local streams.
Assuming those forests are converted to meadow, and applying loading rates derived from the Bay Program model, rough estimates suggest it could increase the amount of nitrogen runoff reaching local streams between 30,000-80,000 pounds a year; while phosphorus could increase between 15,000-40,000 pounds; and sediment could increase between 18 million to 45 million pounds. The variation depends on whether the amount of forest lost was at the low, or high end of the conservancy’s estimates.
Right now, the land use changes are not included in the state’s watershed implementation plan, which shows how it plans to meet nutrient and sediment limits set in the TMDL.
Kevin Sunday, a spokesman for the state Department of Environmental Protection, said sediment and erosion control guidelines would require best management practices to control runoff and well sites would need to be re-vegetated.
Johnson said that, as a practical matter, it is difficult to reforest areas disturbed for drilling as companies need to maintain access to wells and pipelines. Further, a recent study showed that reforestation generally wasn’t taking place at drilling sites, he said.
Katherine Antos, water quality team leader with the EPA’s Bay Program Office in Annapolis, said state pollution limits set in the TMDL were based on land uses in place in 2010. “If there are any changes to that, any increased loads or new sources, states have to be able to offset those increases,” she said.
Antos said the EPA is currently reviewing offset programs for all states in the watershed.
Harry Campbell, a scientist with the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, said concerns about the impacts related to drilling activities on the Bay TMDL were among the reasons that it and several other organizations petitioned the federal government last year seeking the development of an Environmental Impact Statement to examine the full range of Marcellus drilling impacts in the state.
“We just don’t know enough about all this to get a handle on what the potential impacts are,” he said. “If we don’t have that, then we are flying blind.”
That petition is still pending.
Meanwhile, Johnson said the conservancy has been using its analyses to work with drilling companies to encourage drilling more wells at existing pads to reduce forest loss. It’s also integrating more habitat data into its model to help steer drilling away from sensitive areas. Companies have been “pretty interested,” he said. “We’re pretty confident it is going to help, but we know it is not going to eliminate impacts.”
Clearfield County well to hold fracking wastewater
www.centredaily.com/2011/12/11/3016382/clearfield-county-well-to-hold.html
By Cliff White cwhite@centredaily.com
Posted: Dec 11, 2011
A Pennsylvania tractor-trailer unloads fracking wastewater at the Devco 1 injection well near Cambridge, Ohio, in July. (COLUMBUS DISPATCH PHOTO/KYLE ROBERTSON)
It’s an old story by now in Pennsylvania: local residents upset about a Marcellus Shale-related well proposed in their back yard.
But there’s a difference in the well planned for Brady Township, Clearfield County. Instead of taking gas out of the ground, the well is intended to store fracking wastewater deep in the folds of the earth. Neighbors are up in arms, but the debate marks a new step in the evolution of the Marcellus Shale play.
“Injection of flowback fluids or fluids from the production process has been a common procedure for a long, long time, but it’s still relatively rare in Pennsylvania,” said Tom Murphy, co-director of the Penn State Marcellus Center for Outreach and Research. < http://marcellus.psu.edu/ >
Flowback water is a briny, silty and potentially toxic cocktail created as a byproduct of the hydraulic fracturing process, when millions of gallons of water are pumped at high pressure into a gas well to create fractures in rock formations, thereby releasing trapped gas. Environmental regulations require drillers to capture and dispose of wastewater that commonly flows back out of the gas well when it is fracked.
Read more
Free Pre-Drilling Private Drinking Water Testing Offered
paenvironmentdaily.blogspot.com/2011/11/free-pre-drilling-private-drinking.html
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Free Pre-Drilling Private Drinking Water Testing Offered In 8 Northcentral Counties
The Headwaters Quality Drinking Water Project of the Headwaters Resource Conservation & Development Council is now providing low income families in Jefferson, Elk, Potter, Cameron, Clearfield, Clinton, Centre and McKean Counties with secure chain of custody water sample analyses of their private water supplies prior to Marcellus Shale Gas Well Drilling activities.
A $150,000 grant from the Colcom Foundation’s Marcellus Environmental Fund supports this project.
The Headwaters Project is also providing mandatory educational workshops and material explaining how to interpret the water quality results, when do things become toxic, and what the homeowner should do in case something does happen to their water supply.
RC&D will partner with various organizations and agencies including the Department of Environmental Protection, Penn State Extension and the local school districts and conservation districts.
Jefferson & Clearfield Counties
The first set of water samplings will take place in Jefferson and Clearfield Counties. Testing will be conducted from October 24 through December 2 with a mandatory educational workshop following.
For folks living in Jefferson County, the workshop will be held on December 15 from 5-7 p.m., location to be determined. For Clearfield County, the workshop will be held on December 14 from 5-7 p.m., location to be determined.
Elk & Centre Counties
The second set of water samplings will take place in Elk and Centre Counties. Testing will be conducted January 9 through February 17 with a mandatory educational workshop following.
For folks living in Elk County, the workshop will be held on March 8 from 5-7 p.m., location to be determined. For Centre County, the workshop will be held on March 7 from 5-7 p.m., location to be determined.
Cameron & Clinton Counties
The third set of water samplings will take place in Cameron and Clinton Counties. Testing will be conducted March 12 through April 20 with a mandatory educational workshop following.
For folks living in Cameron County, the workshop will be held on May 10 from 5-7 p.m., location to be determined. For Clinton County, the workshop will be held on May 9 from 5-7 p.m., location to be determined.
McKean & Potter Counties
The fourth set of water samplings will take place in McKean and Potter Counties. Testing will be conducted May 14 through June 22 with a mandatory educational workshop following.
For folks living in McKean County, the workshop will be held on July 11 from 5-7 p.m., location to be determined. For Potter County, the workshop will be held on July 12 from 5-7 p.m., location to be determined.
Applications can be obtained at the Clearfield County Conservation District located at 511 Spruce Street Suite 6, Clearfield, PA 16830 and are available online.
For more information, contact Kelly Williams, Clearfield County Conservation District’s Watershed Conservationist at 814-765-2629 or send email to: kwilliamsccd@atlanticbbn.net.
The Headwaters Resource Conservation & Development Council is tasked with providing local leadership to improve the economic, environmental, and social well-being of the people of Cameron, Centre, Clearfield, Clinton, Elk, Jefferson, McKean, and Potter counties in northcentral Pennsylvania.
Posted by David E. Hess at 11:37 AM
Coal ash taints groundwater
http://www.tennessean.com/article/20110725/NEWS11/307250034/Coal-ash-taints-groundwater-at-TVA-sites-report-finds
Inspector General report finds nine of TVA’s plant sites have contamination
A new report says groundwater contamination from coal ash has been found at Gallatin and eight of the nine other Tennessee Valley Authority fossil power plant sites where testing is being done.
Levels of toxic substances found at the Gallatin plant site in Sumner County and at the Cumberland site, 50 miles northwest of Nashville, are high enough that they could create a health hazard, the report says. Beryllium, cadmium and nickel levels are above drinking water standards at Gallatin, as are arsenic, selenium and vanadium at Cumberland.
One major surprise also showed up in the review by TVA’s Office of Inspector General: For more than a decade, the TVA had been finding substances in groundwater at its Allen coal-fired plant in Memphis that indicated toxic metals could be leaking from a coal ash pond there.
Arsenic above today’s allowable levels was found repeatedly in a monitoring well on the site, which is in a sensitive location. The plant and its ash ponds lie above a deep, high-quality aquifer that supplies drinking water to Memphis and nearby areas.
“I was not aware of this until today,” Chuck Head, Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation’s senior director for land programs, said Friday after The Tennessean provided a copy of the TVA document.
“We would obviously have liked them to report it to us when they found the arsenic. But now that we have the information, we are going to work with them to try to resolve the problem.”
TVA declined requests for interviews on the topic, but spokeswoman Barbara Martocci sent an email, saying the legal limits for contaminants at Allen were met at the time of the testing.
“Even though some parameters were measured at levels higher than background, there were no exceedances of EPA municipal drinking water limits,” she wrote.
That was the case, up to a point.
TVA quit testing when the EPA tightened its standard — what’s called the Maximum Contaminant Level, the report said. Samples taken before then had showed arsenic levels above the new, higher standard.
“Testing has not been performed since the Maximum Contaminant Level was lowered,” the report said.
The toxic substances typically are found in small amounts — parts per billion. At the Gallatin site, they are likely moving down to and being diluted in the Cumberland River, Head said.
Similarly, at Allen in Memphis, the most likely result is discharge of the groundwater directly into the nearby Mississippi River and a lake there, he said. The threat to the Memphis aquifer is minimal.
Head said the state is set to talk Tuesday to TVA as they work toward a solution.
He said more monitoring wells will likely be needed to determine how large the contaminated plume is underground at the Gallatin plant.
’08 spill was catalyst
The OIG investigation of groundwater contamination at TVA coal ash sites, released June 21, began as a result of questions raised during congressional testimony following the December 2008 ash spill in East Tennessee.
A mountain of damp ash had buckled at TVA’s Kingston plant and 5.4 million cubic yards of the waste, which contains mercury, cadmium, lead, selenium, arsenic and other potentially toxic substances, cascaded into yards, fields and the Emory River.
The event brought national attention to the lack of regulation of coal ash and helped spark proposed rules last year from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that are being argued over today.
The OIG report is considered important on several counts by the Environmental Integrity Project that has been gathering data on coal ash sites.
“The list of plants where monitoring is taking place at TVA is notable for what is missing,” said Russell Boulding, a hydro-geologist and soil scientist working with the environmental advocacy group.
That includes the absence of testing at the ash impoundment at TVA’s closed Watts Bar Plant coal-fired plant, 60 miles southwest of Knoxville. No monitoring is done around Watts Bar, where an old, unlined ash pond is located.
Spokeswoman Martocci said it’s not required.
“It is not an active plant, and there were no solid waste permits (or other regulations) that required groundwater monitoring for the site,” she wrote.
The legacy ash pond there is under study for permanent closure, which, when officially closed, could require monitoring by the state.
Coal ash, once viewed as harmless, contains a variety of heavy metals in low concentrations. Without proper protection, they can leach into groundwater and move to drinking water sources, such as well water, posing “significant public health concerns,” according to an EPA report.
Some of the substances can also move up the food chain.
Martocci said TVA’s coal ash sites pose no threat.
“The small amount of heavy metals or other potential contaminants identified in groundwater at the fossil sites are confined to the TVA reservation and do not impact off-site drinking water sources,” Martocci wrote. “Moreover, there are no potable water supplies down-gradient from these sites.”
Data gap frustrating
The Environmental Integrity Project is among groups that have been advocating for the EPA to regulate coal ash, but a lack of monitoring nationally in the past means little data is available.
“This has been a big source of frustration for those of us who are looking at the impacts of disposal practices,” Boulding said.
At least in Tennessee there is some information, he said. Data, including this new report, is growing in the wake of the Kingston spill, and more is forthcoming. TVA voluntarily put in 29 groundwater monitoring wells last year at its power plant coal ash sites. Results from samples are expected this year.
In Colorado and some other states, the group can find virtually no data despite a large number of coal-fired plants pumping out coal ash, Boulding said.
Still, the EPA has found about 70 cases where coal ash has caused fish kills, sullied wells and tainted land in a 2007 report. The EIP, Earthjustice and the Sierra Club have put out reports on scores of other cases.
Time of reckoning
Coal, which has long provided cheap electricity nationwide, has also generated vast quantities of ash in Tennessee and around the country. After burning, the leftover chunks and flakes have generally been flooded with water for sluicing to ponds where the ash settles out. The water is then pumped into a river or lake. Coal ash has been left in the ponds, mounded beside rivers, placed in old coal mines and loaded into gravel pits.
Some has been spread on roadways or used to make walking paths. And some has been recycled in asphalt or other products .
Since at least the 1980s, with growing coal ash wastes and disasters environmentalists have been pressing for regulation.
Coal industry representatives have said federal regulation would be cumbersome and costly and want to leave it to states.
TVA officials have said they’re getting ahead of the curve. They announced plans earlier to convert to more costly but preferred dry ash disposal, which experts say makes ash easier to manage and less likely to contaminate groundwater. It also leaves materials available for recycling.
Though monitoring hasn’t been required, TVA carried out voluntary testing at the Allen plant ash ponds in Memphis from 1988-2008, according to the OIG report.
Elevated levels of boron and sulfate — which indicate ash releases from the impoundments there — and also arsenic “have been historically higher than the background data,” the report said.
“According to TVA personnel, these levels have not been reported to (the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation) because the testing was not required,” it said.
The report gave specific data for a few plant sites, but not for Allen. It did say that arsenic levels measured in the past were above today’s current safe limit.
Mapping of underground water pools
http://citizensvoice.com/news/mapping-of-underground-water-pools-1.1164422#axzz1Pup6R8MH
Published: June 21, 2011
Fears that the development of the Marcellus Shale natural gas reserves might lead to anthracite mining era-style environmental degradation are well founded. This is especially true as it relates to protecting the sources of the water that we need to survive.
It is ironic, then, to learn that the natural gas and coal industries, both intent on extracting resources from underground, are linked today. The linkage is in the vast water pools in former mine workings, water that can be tapped for fracking. That is the process whereby water is injected under high pressure into the shale deposits that hold the natural gas, breaking up the shale to allow the gas to escape and be captured.
There are billions of gallons of water in the anthracite coal fields. The total could be more than one trillion gallons, according to Bob Hughes of the Eastern Pennsylvania Coalition for Mine Reclamation. His agency and the Susquehanna River Basin Commission are engaged in a high-tech mapping of underground water pools in the anthracite fields.
The mapping also reveals existing coal deposits. There are billions of tons of coal underground. Yes, billions of tons, and that coal, the billions of gallons of water and even the 65 or so mine fires burning in Pennsylvania all mean that bountiful resources exist that could create, build and sustain economic models that could inure to the benefit of all Pennsylvanians.
The key is developing each resource so that it can turn a profit for whatever entity does the developing, whether it is a private company or a government entity.
The spark that led this column to talk to Bob Hughes was a letter to the editor from Jude O’Donnell of Harveys Lake. He wondered if the tremendous energy being generated by the Laurel Run mine fire might be harnessed. The fire has been burning underground on the mountain east of Wilkes-Barre since 1915. In the 1950s, all homes in the mine fire area were taken by the federal government and the fire was sealed with a clay barrier.
Hughes said O’Donnell’s idea has merit. A plant could be built outside the fire zone and the heat could be piped to the plant and converted by one of several processes into energy. That energy could heat homes or businesses, or sold, perhaps by a local government or consortium of local governments working together. Can you say “regional cooperation?”
The same could be done at other mine fires in the state, including Centralia, the famous fire that led to abandonment of a community in southern Columbia County.
The energy from mine fires likely will last for generations, Hughes said, just as the billions of gallons of underground water will be there for centuries. The mapping partners are looking at historical data on water levels, recorded at boreholes all over the anthracite fields, and safe withdrawal levels can be established. This would preclude mine subsidence threats.
Mine water is undrinkable and unusable, except for industrial uses such as fracking, because of its iron content. However, wastewater from fracking then becomes dangerous if it enters aquifers, reservoirs, streams and rivers used as drinking water sources. This is the key issue on which critics of natural gas development are focused, with good reason.
Then there is the coal. Strip mining continues, especially in the Southern Anthracite Field, but few deep mines exist. The last to operate in Wyoming Valley was the Glen-Nan mine in Newport Township, the closing of which I covered in 1974. It will take technological breakthroughs and an industry commitment to environmental protection before anyone can get excited again about tapping the massive coal reserves.
The mapping project will be invaluable to those watchdog groups and citizens in general worried about the commonwealth’s water resources. In addition to the use of aquifers, lakes and streams by gas companies, we must add mine water pools which should not be discounted, regardless of acidity, as a major part of overall Pennsylvania water resources.
Paul Golias, retired managing editor of The Citizens’ Voice, writes a weekly column on regional issues. He can be contacted at pgolias@ptd.net.
Local drilling opponent not surprised by findings
http://citizensvoice.com/news/local-drilling-opponent-not-surprised-by-findings-1.1144256#axzz1LwpBiOFT
Elizabeth Skrapits
Published: May 10, 2011
Dr. Thomas Jiunta said Monday the Duke University study shows drilling 'is a pathway' for methane to get into drinking water.
Results of a study by scientists at Duke University showing a link between natural gas drilling and water well contamination come as no surprise to a local drilling opponent.
Dr. Thomas Jiunta, a co-founder of the Gas Drilling Awareness Coalition, said the study proves what environmentalists have been saying all along: that there’s “definitely a chance and a likelihood” for gas to migrate along the pathways between drilling sites and drinking water sources.
“The thing that I think is important is that shows it’s a pathway,” he said. “The methane itself isn’t necessarily dangerous to drink, but it’s explosive, obviously, as it builds up.”
If methane can travel through the pathways, other chemicals, heavy metals and the water used in hydraulic fracturing could also migrate through them, Jiunta said. Pressure in the natural gas wells could increase that migration, he said.
“That just blows my mind that they’re still allowing this (gas drilling), after what we know. It’s just one thing after another,” Jiunta said.
Scientific Study Links Flammable Drinking Water to Fracking
http://www.propublica.org/article/scientific-study-links-flammable-drinking-water-to-fracking
by Abrahm Lustgarten
ProPublica, May 9, 2011
For the first time, a scientific study has linked natural gas drilling and hydraulic fracturing with a pattern of drinking water contamination so severe that some faucets can be lit on fire.
The peer-reviewed study, published today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, stands to shape the contentious debate over whether drilling is safe and begins to fill an information gap that has made it difficult for lawmakers and the public to understand the risks.
The research was conducted by four scientists at Duke University. They found that levels of flammable methane gas in drinking water wells increased to dangerous levels when those water supplies were close to natural gas wells. They also found that the type of gas detected at high levels in the water was the same type of gas that energy companies were extracting from thousands of feet underground, strongly implying that the gas may be seeping underground through natural or manmade faults and fractures, or coming from cracks in the well structure itself.
“Our results show evidence for methane contamination of shallow drinking water systems in at least three areas of the region and suggest important environmental risks accompanying shale gas exploration worldwide,” the article states.
The group tested 68 drinking water wells in the Marcellus and Utica shale drilling areas in northeastern Pennsylvania and southern New York State. Sixty of those wells were tested for dissolved gas. While most of the wells had some methane, the water samples taken closest to the gas wells had on average 17 times the levels detected in wells further from active drilling. The group defined an active drilling area as within one kilometer, or about six tenths of a mile, from a gas well.
The average concentration of the methane detected in the water wells near drilling sites fell squarely within a range that the U.S Department of Interior says is dangerous and requires urgent “hazard mitigation” action, according to the study.
The researchers did not find evidence that the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing had contaminated any of the wells they tested, allaying for the time being some of the greatest fears among environmentalists and drilling opponents.
But they were alarmed by what they described as a clear correlation between drilling activity and the seepage of gas contaminants underground, a danger in itself and evidence that pathways do exist for contaminants to migrate deep within the earth.
“We certainly didn’t expect to see such a strong relationship between the concentration of methane in water and the nearest gas wells. That was a real surprise,” said Robert Jackson, a biology professor at Duke and one of the report’s authors.
Methane contamination of drinking water wells has been a common complaint among people living in gas drilling areas across the country. A 2009 investigation by ProPublica revealed that methane contamination from drilling was widespread, including in Colorado, Ohio and Pennsylvania. In several cases, homes blew up after gas seeped into their basements or water supplies. In Pennsylvania a 2004 accident killed three people, including a baby.
In Dimock, Pa., where part of the Duke study was performed, some residents’ water wells exploded or their water could be lit on fire. In at least a dozen cases in Colorado, ProPublica’s investigation found, methane had infiltrated drinking water supplies that residents said were clean until hydraulic fracturing was performed nearby.
The drilling industry and some state regulators described some of these cases as “anecdotal” and said they were either unconnected to drilling activity or were an isolated problem. But the consistency of the Duke findings raises questions about how unusual and widespread such cases of methane contamination may be.
“It suggests that at least in the region we looked, this is a more general problem than people expected,” Jackson told ProPublica.
For those who live in the midst of this problem, the report serves as long-awaited vindication. “We weren’t just blowing smoke. What we were talking about was the truth,” said Ron Carter, a Dimock resident whose water went bad when drilling began there in 2008 and was later tested as part of the study. “Now I’m happy that at least something helps prove out our theory.”
Methane is not regulated in drinking water, and while research is limited, it is not currently believed to be harmful to drink. But the methane is dangerous because as it collects in enclosed spaces it can asphyxiate people nearby, or lead to an explosion.
To determine where the methane in the wells they tested came from, the researchers ran it through a molecular fingerprinting process called an isotopic analysis. Water samples furthest from gas drilling showed traces of biogenic methane—a type of methane that can naturally appear in water from biological decay. But samples taken closer to drilling had high concentrations of thermogenic methane, which comes from the same hydrocarbon layers where gas drilling is targeted. That—plus the proximity to the gas wells—told the researchers that the contamination was linked to the drilling processes.
In addition to the methane, other types of gases were also detected, providing further evidence that the gas originated with the hydrocarbon deposits miles beneath the earth and that it was unique to the active gas drilling areas. Ethane, another component of natural gas, and other hydrocarbons were detected in 81 percent of water wells near active gas drilling, but in only 9 percent of water wells further away. Propane and butane were also detected in some drilling area wells.
The report noted that as much as a mile of rock separated the bottom of the shallow drinking water wells from the deep zones fractured for gas, and identified several ways in which fluids or the gas contaminants could move underground: The substances could be displaced by the pressures underground; could travel through new fractures or connections to faults created by the hydraulic fracturing process; or could leak from the well casing itself somewhere closer to the surface.
The geology in Pennsylvania and New York, they said, is tectonically active with faults and other pathways through the rock. They noted that leaky well casings were the most likely cause of the contamination, but couldn’t rule out long-range underground migration, which they said “might be possible due to both the extensive fracture systems reported for these formations and the many older, uncased wells drilled and abandoned.”
The water was also analyzed for signs that dangerous fluids from inside the gas wells might have escaped into water supplies. The group tested for salts, radium and other chemicals that, if detected, would have signaled that the produced water or natural fluids in the well’s target zone were making it to the aquifers. But those types of fluids were not found. The group did not test for fracking chemicals or hydrocarbons like benzene, relying instead on the saline or radioactive compounds like radium as indicators.
In an interview, Jackson said that gas was more likely to migrate underground than liquid chemicals. Based on his findings, he doesn’t believe the toxic chemicals pumped into the ground during fracturing are likely to end up in water supplies the same way the methane did. “I’m not ready to use the word impossible,” he said, “but unlikely.”
In a white paper the group issued along with the journal article, Jackson and the others acknowledged the uncertainty and called for more research. “Contamination is often stated to be impossible due to the distance between the well and the drinking water,” they wrote. “Although this seems reasonable in most (and possibly all) cases, field and modeling studies should be undertaken to confirm this assumption… Understanding any cases where this assumption is incorrect will be important—when, where, and why they occur—to limit problems with hydraulic fracturing operations.”
A hydrogeologist closely affiliated with the drilling industry raised questions about the study. “It’s possible, assuming their measurements are accurate, that all they have done is document the natural conditions of the aquifer,” said John Conrad, president of Conrad Geosciences in Poughkeepsie, N.Y. Conrad spoke with ProPublica at the suggestion of Energy In Depth, a drilling industry advocacy group, but said that he did not work for EID.
He said that the thermogenic methane — which many scientists say comes from the same deep gas layers where drilling occurs — could be naturally occurring. He also said the researchers didn’t test enough wells to support their conclusions, though he could not say how many wells would have been appropriate.
Conrad said the most likely cause for the contamination identified by the Duke researchers — that the gas was leaking out of faulty well casings — seemed implausible.
“For their assumptions to hold up there would have to be more than just the occasional bad cement job,” he said. “They are implying that where you see hydraulic fracturing you should expect to see elevated methane. We are aware of faulty cement jobs. But we don’t believe that it is common and we certainly don’t believe that it is universal.”
The Duke study precedes a national study by the Environmental Protection Agency into the dangers of hydraulic fracturing that is expected to be finished sometime next year. Last year the EPA found that some chemicals known to be used in fracturing were among the contaminants detected in 11 residential drinking water wells in Pavillion, Wy.—where more than 200 natural gas wells have been drilled in recent years—but that investigation is continuing and the scientists haven’t concluded that the contamination is linked with drilling or hydraulic fracturing.
The release of the Duke research could immediately shape the increasingly intense public debate over drilling and hydraulic fracturing, especially in some of the areas where the research was conducted. Pennsylvania, which holds drilling companies liable for drinking water contamination within 1000 feet of a gas well, might consider the fact that the Duke researchers found the contamination extended to about 3,000 feet, Jackson said. New York State has a moratorium in place for hydraulic fracturing of horizontally-drilled wells—which cover more area and require more chemicals—through the end of June to allow for more consideration of the risks. “I would extend that at least temporarily,” Jackson said.
Congress, too, is taking note.
“This study provides eye-opening scientific evidence about methane contamination and the risks that irresponsible natural gas drilling poses for drinking water supplies,” said Congressman Maurice Hinchey, D-NY. “It provides yet another reason why more study of the environmental and health risks associated with hydraulic fracturing is needed.”
Hinchey is one of several Democratic members of Congress who recently re-introduced the FRAC Act, which calls for public disclosure of the chemicals used underground. The bill, which is currently languishing in the House, would remove an exemption in federal law that prohibits the EPA from regulating hydraulic fracturing.
2 Pa. water companies to test supplies over drilling
Two large Pennsylvania water providers said Wednesday they planned to immediately test public water supplies in response to outcry over a news report that radioactive gas-drilling wastewater may have been discharged into the state’s streams.
The Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority and Pennsylvania American Water Co. said they hoped the tests in the next few weeks would address fears that public drinking water is imperiled by Marcellus Shale gas drilling.
“We want to know if there is a problem here,” said Stanley States, director of water quality and production for the Pittsburgh authority, which plans to take monthly radiological samples at its two treatment plants for the next year. “We need data.”
Pennsylvania American, which has five treatment plants in and around Pittsburgh that are near gas-drilling operations, will conduct “a battery of radiological tests during the next few weeks,” said Terry M. Maenza, a spokesman for the company headquartered in Hershey.
“We expect there will be no cause for concern,” he said.
Public officials, environmental advocates, and industry representatives have called on regulators to require more frequent testing of Pennsylvania water supplies after the New York Times reported Sunday that some radioactive wastewater is sent to sewage plants not designed to treat it and then discharged into rivers that supply drinking water.
The report focused on discharges in Western and north-central Pennsylvania, where drillers are active. No producing wells are active in the Delaware River basin, which provides the Philadelphia region with drinking water.
The Times reported that some wastewater from Marcellus Shale gas-drilling contained radioactivity at levels higher than previously known. Radioactive materials such as uranium and radium occur naturally in deep rock formations and are brought to the surface in wastewater associated with hydraulic fracturing, the controversial technique that drillers use to release natural gas locked up in the mile-deep formation.
Though the Times reported that some wastewater at well sites contained elevated radioactivity, the potential health effects are unclear because little testing has been conducted since the shale boom took off three years ago.
Prolonged ingestion of the low-level radioactive material is believed to increase the risk of developing certain types of cancer. Brief skin contact with the wastewater is not considered dangerous.
“Drinking water with elevated levels of radium and uranium – which are found in virtually all rock, soil, and water – may cause cancer after several years,” the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says on its website.
Elevated radiation levels can be reduced with treatment, according to some environmental agencies that tell homeowners with private wells that standard water softeners can reduce radium and that more expensive reverse-osmosis systems can remove uranium and radium.
The EPA and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection require radiological testing infrequently in areas with no history of radioactive contamination. The Pittsburgh system last tested its water for radioactivity in 2005, States said.
“If we find something elevated, we’ll certainly bring it to the regulators’ attention right away,” he said.
The cost of the tests is not a factor. States said an Indiana laboratory would charge about $150 for each test.
U.S. Sen. Robert P. Casey Jr. (D., Pa.) was among the officials who this week called on regulators to require more frequent testing.
But regulators have stopped short of ordering more tests.
Richard Yost, an EPA spokesman, said Monday the agency was examining radioactivity as part of a two-year national study of hydraulic fracturing.
“While we conduct this study, we will not hesitate to take any steps under the law to protect Americans whose health may be at risk,” he said in an e-mail.
Katherine Gresh, a Pennsylvania DEP spokeswoman, said the agency was awaiting results of radium tests on water samples collected in November and December from seven rivers: the Monongahela at Charleroi; the Tioga; the West Branch of the Susquehanna; the Conemaugh; the Allegheny; the Beaver; and the South Fork of Ten Mile Creek. “Requiring more frequent testing is definitely under consideration,” she said.
Wastewater has become a huge challenge for the Marcellus industry, which recycles about 70 percent of its wastewater.
The Susquehanna River Basin Commission has conducted some tests of radioactivity in Marcellus streams, said Andy Gavin, manager of restoration and protection. The tests indicated no contamination.
But commission officials caution that the samples were drawn from smaller tributaries upstream from sewage-treatment plants, so they would not detect radiation from wastewater legally disposed of at the plants, but only contamination from spills or illegal dumping.
“We’re still collecting baseline information,” Gavin said.
By Andrew Maykuth
Inquirer Staff Writer
Mar. 3, 2011
http://www.philly.com/philly/business/117300118.html