Who's OnlineWe have 4 guests online
|
Home Stuart's Blog Stuart's Blog Check here on occasion to see what Stuart has to say about various things; wells, ground water, the world...
|
|
Shale Gas - "Gasland" and Environmental Illiteracy |
|
|
|
|
Written by Stuart Smith
|
|
Monday, 28 June 2010 |
|
The television network HBO is airing a documentary, "Gasland" produced by Josh Fox, a filmmaker and artist, who decided to investigate shale gas drilling after being offered a lease for mineral rights on land owned by his family. This film is, to say the least, critical of the process and people involved in gas exploration and development. Now, with the devastation (probably preventable) in the Gulf of Mexico, now is not a popular time to defend hydrocarbon development, but I thought I would comment on this one (while remaining outraged at BP and its contractors) because it preys on the scientific illiteracy so prevalent among Americans. The site Energy in Depth (published by a consortium of smaller US natural gas producers) has published a critique of the Fox documentary that goes after Mr. Fox's apparently rather artistic use of facts in the movie.The blog "Flowback: Thoughts on Energy and Natural Gas" by Rita McConnell also takes on the preying on scientific illiteracy in a recent post and some before that. I don't subscribe to HBO and have not seen it myself. However, a visit to the Gasland movie website puts much doubt in my heart about the use of my time if I did watch the movie. For example, there are a lot of slogans ("exempted 2005" etc.). The explanation of "fracking" (hydrofracturing) is completely absurd. The graphic in their demonstration seems to correctly shows the placement of a casing through a drinking water aquifer (portrayed as a pool of water). The hole is drilled, completed apparently just under the aquifer. Then the frac process begins. It is depicted as creating great vertical cracks reaching the aquifer (which would be 2000-5000 ft above the production horizon), and frac solution also is released from the cemented casing. All is lost of course. The thrust of Fox's plot seems to be that during the Bush administration, rules to restrain gas development were erased, Halliburton ("hiss!") then invented some kind of nuclear hydrofracturing, and this is being applied without restraint, using hundreds of deadly chemicals that are pumped into ground water supplies. First, gas and oil drilling on land does not involve the environmental risks posed by drilling in 5000-ft-deep sea water. The most damage done by oil drilling was done in its first few decades before invention of the blowout preventer (find and view Giant for example). Much "Halliburton" technology was developed by Baroid and others before corporate acquisition by the company villified for its role in Iraq and Katrina problems. Drilling is conducted using rotating drill bits, pipes and (mostly) clay solutions with some polymers (essentially soap). Air as a circulating fluid is increasingly used (air, water, "soap"). Hydrofracturing is conducted using water, sand, and some chemicals in the 0.1-1-percent range to increase interaction with shale and to reduce surface tension between water and sand (to increase the fluid feed rate). Honestly, look at your dishwashing detergent or shampoo and conditioner for the types of chemicals used, and if you have power washed with chemicals, you have a sense of the chemical exposure risk. Some biocides are used (most typically glutaraldehyde). Glutaraldehyde poses some toxicity risk (mostly to the applicators, who should be wearing respirators and protective gear). However, biocides, acid and "soap" (polyacrylamide) are diluted at a proportion of < 1 gal per 1000 gal of water before injection. These proportions are typical of those used in potable water well cleaning. Here is a discussion of the list of chemicals compiled by the Pennsylvania DEP . Risk to the environment is mitigated by the "being injected into tight rocks 8000 ft into the earth" part, and of course, dilution and chemical breakdown in situ. Oil and gas drilling today case and cement off water supplies and other sensitive formations and are (rather) well-regulated (MMR failures in the Gulf notwithstanding). Most regulation is at the state level. Drilling on land involves drastically reduced operating risks and ability to respond to undesirable conditions (equipment failure etc) compared to the deep sea problems we are experiencing at present -- problems caused by management decisions to pinch pennies, mind you, not the technology being employed. Marcellus and other deep shale gas "plays" require hydrofracturing. Because the formations are very tight, when gas is released, a large portion of the "frac" water rebounds back up the hole with the gas. Frac return water contains fluids from the formation as well as additives. Formation fluid is high in total dissolved solids and hydrocarbons and must be controlled. This has not always been successful. The volumes can be huge. For both economic and environmental reasons, efforts are being made to recycle this water for further hydrofracturing. This effort is underway and involves a number of creative efforts. Remember - the economics drive the producers. It costs a lot to store, transport and treat water. They will achieve recycling. If you are approached about leasing land for hydrocarbon production, go into the process with open eyes. Learn the process, get to know your rights and what you can expect. Get your water supply and surface water (creeks, ponds, etc.) tested and document results. Retain rights to control fluid management on your land. If your neighbors will be leasing, test to protect yourself. Document everything. We would encourage producers to do the same. We should view large, complex hydrocarbon production activities (and similar projects such as CO2 sequestration and nuclear waste storage) critically, but objectively and based on science, not ignorance. However, Gasland (based on their web site) promises no such analysis. If we want to reduce dependency on these types of activities, let's be conserving. See also our commentary on ignorance and carbon dioxide sequestration. If we can help you with your testing, let us know, but don't expect a biased result for any agenda. |
|
Last Updated ( Friday, 16 July 2010 )
|
|
|
Ground Water Science and Social Media |
|
|
|
|
Written by Stuart Smith
|
|
Saturday, 08 May 2010 |
|
In case you have not yet run across us, Ground Water Science has a presence on both Facebook and LinkedIn social media sites. If you are on Facebook, type "Ground Water Science" ("ground water" is two words, remember) in the search box and we come up. We have some loyal fans or "likers". Feel free to join in. I post pictures, links and notices there. As a "liker" you can post photos and comments and participate in discussions. No one has felt the urge to do so yet. I also maintain a LinkedIn profile to build connections there in that more professional space. LinkedIn groups have active discussions, and I contribute at times. It can help somebody out and I learn a thing or two and discover new and interesting people with valuable skills. We at Ground Water Science like to build teams to solve problems, and among my contacts we can quickly build a team to meet your need for services. Keep that in mind. I really see no point in having a Twitter account as who cares about my random thoughts on a day to day basis? If you are on Facebook or LinkedIn, feel free to make connections, but on FB, don't bother me with "post this in your profile" or your Farmville, Mafia Wars, etc. I waste too much time there anyway, but it helps me keep up with family and old friends. Allen domesn't do any social media, in case you were looking. |
|
Last Updated ( Saturday, 08 May 2010 )
|
|
|
"Free" content on the Internet |
|
|
|
|
Written by Stuart Smith
|
|
Thursday, 18 March 2010 |
|
There have been a lot of commentaries in journalistic circles lately on the impending end of free content on the internet. If we think about it, the last decade featuring substantive content free for the taking has been an odd period. Books have been printed since the 15th Century, and they have been sold to buyers. The innovation of the public lending library, of course, provides access to content for free for a period of time. Magazines and newspapers were available by paid subscription or per copy - or you borrowed it at the library or thumbed through copies in office waiting areas. The related area of technical content (for example, scientific and engineering journals) also came by subscription. Until recently, music performance and written music content was sold: Performance as recordings (since the start of the 20th Century) and written music by the sheet or in collections. "Search" has been free via search engines such as Google, but the perform poorly when seeking specialized technical content. For that, one should turn to specialty search utilities available by subscription, just like in the old days (remember Chemical Abstracts? They still do the job). We offer some free content on this web site for your reference. We intend it to be useful. We also sell some references and our hard copy books from CRC Press. We're not heartlessly greedy - we make a living by our wits. This is also true of artists who compose and perform music and other kinds of authors. Content has value, but maybe more to the point, content providers have value. If no one can make a living providing content, who will? A valid question is "what is fair one-time use value?" If I download one article from a journal or a website, what is that worth? Maybe it is worth a lot to me if I manage to patent something! Otherwise, this is pretty much left to the provider to attach a valuation. That is as it should be. Otherwise, work an end around - befrend a librarian, for example. We would like to hear from you: What would you like from us in the form of for-pay or subscription content? With our experience, we can generate it. Is it worth something to you, and what would be valuable to you? |
|
Last Updated ( Thursday, 18 March 2010 )
|
|
|
Relocating our home office |
|
|
|
|
Written by Stuart Smith
|
|
Friday, 13 November 2009 |
|
Since 1997, we have maintained two offices, first in Ada and Bluffton, Ohio, and then in Bluffton and Upper Sandusky, Ohio, with Ada and Upper Sandusky, respectively (my offices) serving as our main physical address. Because we are a small practice with limited empire structure, these offices are on the partners' properties. For family reasons, we Smiths are relocating from Upper Sandusky (my wife's career tends to result in a relocation about every 10-15 years). Fortunately for us, we quickly sold our property, but this move required first a temporary, then a permanent move. Allen is not going anywhere and it seemed best to focus our center in Bluffton (Blanchard River watershed). Our accounts payable and receivable address will remain the same (Upper Sandusky post office box). Also, look for a new main telephone number. This HQ transfer was essentially completed by 22 November. We enjoyed our time in Upper Sandusky (Sandusky River watershed), wish the community well, and plan to be frequent visitors (family and friends, including our accountant, are in the area). Stuart will be working most of the time at his Poland, Ohio, office (Mahoning River watershed). Thank you for your patience during this transition. |
|
Last Updated ( Thursday, 18 March 2010 )
|
|
|
Carbon sequestration and geologic illiteracy |
|
|
|
|
Written by Stuart Smith
|
|
Monday, 14 September 2009 |
|
Late this summer, when visiting my wife's mother outside of Greenville, Ohio, I noticed the "No CO2 Waste in Darke" signs along the road and was naturally intrigued. I had not been following the geologic carbon dioxide sequestration scene very closely. When I looked into it, I found that the Midwest Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership had been working with The Andersons to develop a geologic sequestration test site, utilizing waste carbon dioxide from their ethanol plant near Greenville, Ohio. The project was being managed by my old (way back) employer, Battelle Memorial Institute, which has some expertise in geologic waste sequestration. The idea was to pump CO2 into the Mt. Simon formation, an "aquifer" deep below, and generally isolated from, fresh water aquifers. The Mt. Simon already receives industrial wastes, injected under the supervision of EPA Underground Injection Control. Speaking as a geologic scientist, such a test would be intriguing. |
|
Last Updated ( Wednesday, 30 September 2009 )
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Written by Stuart Smith
|
|
Tuesday, 30 June 2009 |
|
It is with great sadness that we report the death of George Alford of Daytona Beach, FL (Obituary). George was an original and creative contributor to the art and science of diagnosing biofouling, cleaning it up, especially under difficult situations, and promoting maintenance to prevent or mitigate recurrence. George was one of the original people in the field, and a genuine self-taught expert. In the late 1970s, he set out to learn all he could about this "iron bacteria" problem. He first contacted me in 1981, as I recall it, when I was on the staff of the National Water Well Association (now NGWA), after I wrote a couple of articles in the Water Well Journal as a newly minted staff expert on what we now call well biofouling. We have compared notes, collaborated, taught some courses, and generally stayed in touch about important stuff ever since. I thought he might beat this challenge too, but it was not to be. George was in on numerous inventions and contributions to the practice, including better mixtures for biofouling removal, perfecting the equipment to apply heated solutions in wells, and helping to promote maintenance as a practice to prevent out-of-control well clogging (still a new idea to many people). We are diminished by his passing. We thank his bride and family for sharing him with us. We also just now belatedly learned of the November 2008 death of Dr. Otto Helweg (obituary), a major contributor to the science and engineering of well hydraulics, as well as being a great Christian humanitarian and academician. He was 72. I only physically met him once and found him to be warm, gracious, and professional. Again, we are saddened and diminished here on this side by his passing. |
|
Last Updated ( Friday, 03 July 2009 )
|
|
|
"Free" water contact hour training in Ohio |
|
|
|
|
Written by Stuart Smith
|
|
Thursday, 04 June 2009 |
|
Here in Ohio (like other jurisdictions I suppose) we have state requirements for training contact hours. While I was prepping for a seminar last year, I received an email happily announcing free 6-hr contact hour days and it struck a nerve. They are repeating the offer in 2010. Yeah! Even more "free" training... So the process of devaluing training goes in this state. The default contact hour value goes to junk bond status. If the objective is accumulating 12 or so contact hours, why pay for it if you can string together a few booth talk trips here, an ORWA course there? ORWA - the same people bring you free hydrogeology performed by circuit riders. And they want us to pay big bucks for a booth at their show... |
|
Last Updated ( Thursday, 18 March 2010 )
|
|
Read more...
|
|
| | << Start < Prev 1 2 Next > End >>
| | Results 1 - 17 of 21 |
|