iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Oil, Gas Wastewater Needs Treatment, Expert Says

First Posted: 04/15/2012 12:09 pm Updated: 04/15/2012 8:26 pm

PITTSBURGH (AP) — A former top environmental official says Pennsylvania's successful efforts to keep Marcellus Shale wastewater away from drinking water supplies should be extended to all other oil and gas drillers.

"It's the same industry. It is the same contaminants. And the goal should be the same," said George Jugovic Jr., who was formerly the Department of Environmental Protection's southwest regional director. He's now president of PennFuture, an environmental group.

An AP analysis of state data found that in the second half of 2011 about 1.86 million barrels — or about 78 million gallons — of drilling wastewater from conventional oil and gas wells were still being sent to treatment plants that discharge into rivers.

The core issue is whether a problem in waterways has been solved, or if more needs to be done.

In 2010 health experts raised alarms when they found soaring levels of ultra-salty bromides in rivers and streams that are major sources of drinking water. The general view was that wastewater from Marcellus Shale gas drilling — polluted with heavy bromides from deep underground — was contributing to the problem.

High levels of bromides can contaminate drinking water with levels that exceed national safety standards and are potentially harmful. Though not considered a pollutant by themselves, the bromides combine with the chlorine used in water treatment to produce trihalomethanes, which may cause cancer if ingested over a long period of time.

Bromide levels were so high in rivers during 2010 that they caused corrosion at some plants that were using the water.

But since the spring of 2011 most Marcellus drillers have been recycling the fluids, or sending then to deep underground wells mostly in Ohio.

The gas-rich Marcellus, which lies thousands of feet underground, has attracted a gold rush of drillers who have drilled almost 5,000 new wells in the last five years. But the state also has about 70,000 older oil and gas wells, according to DEP statistics, that target different, shallower reserves.

Researchers say the bromide levels did drop last summer, but they had also expected even more of a decline after virtually all of the Marcellus Shale drillers stopped disposing wastewater into plants that discharge into rivers.

But conventional oil and gas wells weren't included in last year's recycling push — a loophole that state environmental officials downplayed at the time.

Jugovic said DEP secretary Mike Krancer should now take "the next step" and get voluntary compliance from the rest of the gas industry.

"It's hard scientifically to justify a distinction between treating conventional wastewater differently. The wastewater is being disposed in plants that are not capable of treating those contaminants," he said.

Dave Mashek, a spokesman for the Pa. Independent Oil & Gas Association, declined to comment.

Kevin Sunday, a DEP spokesman, claimed that the volume of conventional oil and gas waste is "substantially smaller" than the Marcellus amounts.

But the AP found that 78 million gallons of oil and gas wastewater were still being taken to treatment plants in the last half of 2011 — about 33 percent less than the Marcellus quantity that was raising concerns in 2010, but still a substantial amount. If that rate continues, the conventional wells will send about 150 million gallons of the wastewater to treatment plants that discharge into rivers this year.

Sunday said the agency encourages wastewater recycling, "regardless of the industry involved," and added that the conventional oil and gas drillers don't produce as much wastewater as the Marcellus drillers.

Sunday also said that the agency has created a new, revised permit to encourage recycling of waste. Ten facilities have applied for the new permit, and if all are approved, that would double the number of such facilities in the state.

David Sternberg, a spokesman for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, didn't directly answer a question about whether there was any scientific justification for treating the non-Marcellus waste differently. Sternberg said EPA, which urged Pennsylvania regulators last year to halt the dumping, is working closely with state regulators "to ensure that, where wastewater treatment facilities are accepting oil and gas wastewaters, discharges from these treatment facilities are in compliance with the Clean Water Act."

Jugovic said that some previous assumptions about the non-Marcellus waste turned out to be false. For example, there were suggestions that it generally contained much lower levels of bromides and other contaminants.

He said some of the shallow wells had very high levels of total dissolved solids and other contaminants that can be a problem for drinking water supplies.

Jugovic also said that the fact that 97 percent of Marcellus drillers appear to be complying with the wastewater restrictions raises a fairness issue. Why, he asked, should the conventional oil and gas drillers and the remaining 3 percent of drillers get a pass?

Now, researchers are waiting for expected lower river levels in the summer, to see if the bromide problem has really gone away. The higher flows in early spring dilute any contaminants and make it harder to draw conclusions about the bromides.

Also on HuffPost:

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

PITTSBURGH (AP) — A former top environmental official says Pennsylvania's successful efforts to keep Marcellus Shale wastewater away from drinking water supplies should be extended to all other oil ...
PITTSBURGH (AP) — A former top environmental official says Pennsylvania's successful efforts to keep Marcellus Shale wastewater away from drinking water supplies should be extended to all other oil ...
Filed by Joanna Zelman  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 36
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
FreewheelinFranklin
Keep on Truckin'
08:04 PM on 04/17/2012
Drilling and fracking waste water does not need to be treated. It needs to be bottled and supplied to Wall Street businesses and Congress, free of charge.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:19 PM on 04/17/2012
http://1.usa.gov/IKL69X
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:21 PM on 04/17/2012
See Bo Frack
06:02 PM on 04/17/2012
I totally agree. But a word of warning. If we elect the GOP, we won't get this sort of treatment. Instead the GOP will abolish the EPA. The oil companies will lie and cover up the environmental dangers caused by their waste water. They've done it before. They'll do it again.

Once again, if we want to save this country for our children, we must re-elect President Obama and fire the GOP. The consequences for the next generation are really too terrifying to contemplate.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Andrew Harvey
Don't F with the Jesus
05:43 AM on 04/17/2012
Hard to imagine that the oil rush in PA is going to destroy the environment.

The last oil rush in PA didn't destroy anything. Why is this one any different?
06:05 PM on 04/17/2012
When did the last oil rush in Pennsylvania occur? I'd suggest that you check out any turn-f-the cemetery in the areas around PA's last oil boom. Count the number of childrens' graves. Perhaps that might give you an answer.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Andrew Harvey
Don't F with the Jesus
08:58 PM on 04/22/2012
That's because they were sending down to work in the coal mines. PA has not been poisoned by oil, despite spilling truckloads of it during the oil rush in the 1870's to 1900.
06:35 PM on 04/16/2012
Honest free market economics requires that these companies pay all costs necessary to prevent their operations from polluting the environment -- a commons space. Failure to do so is socializing their costs onto everyone else, which is not free market economics. By requiring the companies to incur all these costs themselves, it results in an honest cost to produce their product which is absolutely necessary to adhere to free market principles. Failure to do so gives the polluting companies a dishonest and unfair production cost advantage over those companies that do not pollute the commons.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
l monroe
I question authority.
05:57 AM on 04/16/2012
The question is do we have anything in microbial form that eats bromides in our sewer water? The answer is yes. However are they Cyanide aluminum or iron based? I know that sounds crazy but it really does depend. It can pick up many different heavy metals so which group is it? Educate me if I am wrong. Best wishes.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Roosevelt Democrat
10:25 AM on 04/16/2012
It's just my opinion but I would assume the bromides would kill the microbes like chlorine. Being an element I can't think of ways other than reverse osmosis, ultra filtration, or possibly activated charcoal to remove it.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:58 PM on 04/15/2012
"A former top environmental official says Pennsylvania's successful efforts to keep Marcellus Shale wastewater away from drinking water supplies should be extended to all other oil and gas drillers."

Ahh, so the environmental officials are saying the drinking water isn't being polluted.

Quick we need Josh Fox to weigh in! This "expert" doesn't know what he's taking about! (Hahaha)

Frack baby frack
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
l monroe
I question authority.
05:58 AM on 04/16/2012
I got an idea let him drink it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Roosevelt Democrat
10:14 AM on 04/16/2012
I'm sure he does.

http://www.pennfuture.org/aboutus_s_detail.aspx?StaffID=49

Have you ever noticed, Anti-Frackers only believe science that agrees with their politics?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:56 PM on 04/16/2012
Another "expert" I see...

If you're looking for some found water to drink from a private well, fracking isn't required. I can find you some nasty water 100s of miles from the nearest frack job. I can also find you some sweet water with a fracked well 100 feet away.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ghelm92160
09:29 PM on 04/15/2012
Another expert! I'm sure you can find another expert who would disagree just like in a court of law when both sides intoduce their experts and they are 180 degrees apart!
08:54 PM on 04/15/2012
But will treatment designed fo human sewage be adequate for the deep bromide laced products of fracking ? If we dont have good data drilling should halt until these are available and reproduced.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
richardwb
Left Coast Calipha Ornia
11:09 PM on 04/15/2012
Vile moneygrubbers are poisoning our environment, while we sit idly by and watch the ruin of our grandchildren's world.
The time for complacency is long passed.
We must get active!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cempiremtn
09:45 AM on 04/16/2012
If you REALLY worry about your grandchildren's future, you need to vote Obama out in 2012. The debt he is amassing is going to destroy this country, just like it is doing to Europe.
Without the Oil industry and yes, Fracking Companies, the prices for EVERYTHING you buy would skyrocket, is that what you really want?
12:13 AM on 04/17/2012
The frackers are active. Why are you still sitting idly by and talking about needing to get active? The majority of frackers are already doing their part to make their processes as environmentally sound as possible. It is in their best interest to do so if not for their own survivability
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chipher
03:21 AM on 04/16/2012
You're missing the point. The technology already exists to treat fracking water prior to disposal. It's the Republican's wild west yahoo mentality that prevents the 'level playing field' they always talk about, by letting the cheaters get off without paying for treatment, like letting you flush your sewage right out into the street, because not to do so would 'present a hardship and kill jobs.' Big Lie Politics.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Roosevelt Democrat
04:19 PM on 04/16/2012
Didn't he say 97% have already made the change. Most likely the holdup for the other 3% is permit changes.

You can't change how you do a process without first getting the paperwork approved.