Advertisement

If you have an ACS member number, please enter it here so we can link this account to your membership. (optional)

ACS values your privacy. By submitting your information, you are gaining access to C&EN and subscribing to our weekly newsletter. We use the information you provide to make your reading experience better, and we will never sell your data to third party members.

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCES TO C&EN

Environment

Struggles With Fracking Wastewater

Water used in natural gas production still contains high levels of fracking contaminants even after passing through treatment facilities

by Journal News and Community
March 25, 2013 | A version of this story appeared in Volume 91, Issue 12

[+]Enlarge
Credit: Kyle Ferrar
Wastewater leaves a treatment plant in Pennsylvania that has processed water used in natural gas production.
This photo shows treated wastewater flowing out of a sewage plant in Pennsylvania.
Credit: Kyle Ferrar
Wastewater leaves a treatment plant in Pennsylvania that has processed water used in natural gas production.

Energy companies that use hydraulic fracturing to extract natural gas use a lot of process water. They’re left with recovered water containing high levels of pollutants, including benzene, bromide, and the heavy metals barium and strontium. The firms can reuse the water, but in some cases they inject it into deep storage wells or send it to local treatment plants. A study has found that water flowing out of treatment facilities still has elevated levels of fracking pollutants (Environ. Sci. Technol., DOI: 10.1021/es301411q). Kyle J. Ferrar and his colleagues at the University of Pittsburgh analyzed water leaving three treatment plants in Pennsylvania before and after the facilities complied with a state request to stop processing fracking wastewater. The team found that levels of contaminants dropped significantly after the plants stopped taking the water. But when the plants still handled it, concentrations of several of the chemicals exceeded EPA drinking water standards. For example, at one facility, strontium levels were on average 48.3 mg/L, which exceeds the 4 mg/L standard. Ferrar says there is no immediate public health concern over the pollutant concentrations, but he thinks the elevated levels could affect aquatic ecosystems downstream of the treatment facilities.

Article:

This article has been sent to the following recipient:

0 /1 FREE ARTICLES LEFT THIS MONTH Remaining
Chemistry matters. Join us to get the news you need.