New Study Predicts Frack Fluids Can Migrate to Aquifers Within Years
Major news outlets such as Bloomberg News, Business Week and Propublica are reporting on a game-changing peer reviewed study commissioned by Catskill Mountainkeeper that predicts frack fluids can migrate into aquifers, directly contradicting the claims by the gas industry that these toxic chemicals will stay underground forever.
The new peer-reviewed study by hydrogeologist and researcher Tom Myers, “Potential Contaminant Pathways from Hydraulically Fractured Shale to Aquifers,” published in the current issue of Ground Water, demonstrates that fluids from highly-pressurized gas drilling activities can migrate from deep subsurface layers of shale to shallow aquifers and surface waters, bringing along polluting gases, chemicals and radioactivity. The study, based on computer modeling of pressure waves, rock characteristics and fluid mobilization in natural and induced fissures, offers an explanatory mechanism for previous reports of contamination of wells by deep shale methane in multiple areas around Pennsylvania.
The study accords with detailed fracture maps produced by structural geologist Robert Jacobi, showing extensive fracturing of deep bedrock, including shale layers in the Catskills and across New York State. Hydrofracking and other high-pressurized drilling activities seek to exploit natural and induced fractures in order to release methane gas, but migration of contaminated gas and fluids through rock fissures cannot be managed or controlled, making slow contamination of aquifers and water resources—over time frames as short as one year—extremely likely in areas of intensive drilling activity. This threat from deep level contamination therefore points to risks inherent in high pressure drilling activities above and beyond the already existing threats to human and animal health posed by poorly drilled wells and dissolving cement sheaths and casings, which are already well-accepted as mechanisms by which drilling activities can ruin water sources.
- Read the report abstract here.
- Read the Probublica story here.
- Read the Bloomberg/Business Week story here.
For more information, click here.
By Robin Scher
Beyond the questions surrounding the availability, effectiveness and safety of a vaccine, the COVID-19 pandemic has led us to question where our food is coming from and whether we will have enough.
- Can Urban Farms Prevent Hunger in 54 Million People in the U.S. ... ›
- New Report Finds Malnutrition World's Top Killer Amid Pandemic ... ›
- Oxfam Warns 12,000 Could Die Per Day From Hunger Due to ... ›
- Three Ways to Support a Healthy Food System During the COVID ... ›
- Trump USDA Resumes Effort to Cut Food Stamp Benefits - EcoWatch ›
- Pandemic Threatens Food Security for Many College Students ... ›
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
Tearing through the crowded streets of Philadelphia, an electric car and a gas-powered car sought to win a heated race. One that mimicked how cars are actually used. The cars had to stop at stoplights, wait for pedestrians to cross the street, and swerve in and out of the hundreds of horse-drawn buggies. That's right, horse-drawn buggies. Because this race took place in 1908. It wanted to settle once and for all which car was the superior urban vehicle. Although the gas-powered car was more powerful, the electric car was more versatile. As the cars passed over the finish line, the defeat was stunning. The 1908 Studebaker electric car won by 10 minutes. If in 1908, the electric car was clearly the better form of transportation, why don't we drive them now? Today, I'm going to answer that question by diving into the history of electric cars and what I discovered may surprise you.
As bitcoin's fortunes and prominence rise, so do concerns about its environmental impact.
- 15 Top Conservation Issues of 2021 Include Big Threats, Potential ... ›
- How Blockchain Could Boost Clean Energy - EcoWatch ›
By David Drake and Jeffrey York
The Research Brief is a short take about interesting academic work.
The Big Idea
People often point to plunging natural gas prices as the reason U.S. coal-fired power plants have been shutting down at a faster pace in recent years. However, new research shows two other forces had a much larger effect: federal regulation and a well-funded activist campaign that launched in 2011 with the goal of ending coal power.
- Major Milestone: More than 100,000 MW Worth of Coal-Fired Power ... ›
- Coal Will Not Bring Appalachia Back to Life, But Tech and ... ›
- Renewables Beat Coal in the U.S. for the First Time This April ... ›