Colorado Fracking Study Blames Faulty Wells for Water Contamination
Faulty construction, rather than the fracking process, is found to have caused the methane leaks in one Colorado area.
Methane
contamination of Colorado water wells from nearby fossil fuel
development is likely due to faulty oil and gas well construction rather
than hydraulic fracturing, according to a new study of aquifer
contamination in the state.
The study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
on Monday, is the latest to pinpoint the sources and pathways of
methane reported in residential drinking water near drilling sites, a
concern to many communities as the fracking boom has spread across the
country.
Environmental
activists have asserted that fracking opens fissures underground along
which methane, the main ingredient in natural gas, migrates from fossil
fuel reservoirs into aquifers. Industry has maintained that residents'
water already contained methane before oil and gas activity began.
The
Colorado study builds on several others published in the last few
years, examining water from Texas to Pennsylvania. They all indicate
methane can bleed from oil and gas wells if the metal casings inside the
wellbore are not cemented completely or sealed deep enough underground.
"The
bottom line here is that industry has denied any stray gas
contamination: that whenever we have methane in a well, it always
preexisting," said Avner Vengosh, professor of earth and ocean sciences
at Duke University, who read the paper but was not involved in the
study. "The merit of this is that it's a different oil and gas basin, a
different approach, and it's saying that stray gas could happen."
The
study's authors examined data collected by state regulators from
Colorado's Denver-Julesberg Basin from 1988 to 2014. The area has been
home to oil and gas development for decades, but horizontal drilling and
high-volume fracking began in 2010.
The
authors found methane in the water of 593 wells sampled in the area.
Analysis of the chemical composition of the methane showed that 42 wells
contained gas that was the same as that being produced in the area.
Of the wells, 11 had documentation from state authorities analyzing the cause of the contamination
as "barrier failures." The other cases are still under investigation.
The barriers are steel casings inside an oil or gas well that are
cemented in place to prevent hydrocarbons from seeping into the
surrounding earth.
All
11 wells with barrier failure were drilled before 1993 and did not
undergo high-volume fracking and horizontal drilling. Further, they were
not subject to new regulations adopted by Colorado in 1993 that set
more stringent standards for cement casings inside new oil and gas
wells.
Colorado's
adoption of tougher well-construction standards does not reflect
national practices, however. Because Congress banned national regulation
of fracking under the 2005 Energy Policy Act, standards for water and
air protection around oil and gas sites vary by state.
There
are also no laws governing the kind of cement that should be used. The
cement used to hold the casings in place has to be "competent," said
Dominic DiGiulio, a visiting scholar at Stanford University and retired
scientist from the Environmental Protection Agency. Petroleum engineers
who work for the drilling company test the cement in a well and
determine whether the seal is durable. But not every well is tested.
Industry
has resisted efforts to standardize testing of the cement bond in
fracked wells. The Bureau of Land Management's draft fracking rules,
recently struck down by a federal appeals court,
call for testing the cement in fracked wells. The oil and gas industry
has argued that it would be prohibitively expensive, estimating that
would cost 20 times greater than the federal government has estimated.
Ensuring
the integrity of the wellbore casing and cement job "isn't a technical
issue but a financial issue," DiGiulio said. "The petroleum industry
knows this technology but it's not done on every single well, and that
gets down to cost."
No comments:
Post a Comment