Cargando…

Comparison of chemical-use between hydraulic fracturing, acidizing, and routine oil and gas development

The potential hazards and risks associated with well-stimulation in unconventional oil and gas development (hydraulic fracturing, acid fracturing, and matrix acidizing) have been investigated and evaluated and federal and state regulations requiring chemical disclosure for well-stimulation have been...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stringfellow, William T., Camarillo, Mary Kay, Domen, Jeremy K., Shonkoff, Seth B. C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5396893/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28422971
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175344
_version_ 1783230162438979584
author Stringfellow, William T.
Camarillo, Mary Kay
Domen, Jeremy K.
Shonkoff, Seth B. C.
author_facet Stringfellow, William T.
Camarillo, Mary Kay
Domen, Jeremy K.
Shonkoff, Seth B. C.
author_sort Stringfellow, William T.
collection PubMed
description The potential hazards and risks associated with well-stimulation in unconventional oil and gas development (hydraulic fracturing, acid fracturing, and matrix acidizing) have been investigated and evaluated and federal and state regulations requiring chemical disclosure for well-stimulation have been implemented as part of an overall risk management strategy for unconventional oil and gas development. Similar evaluations for chemicals used in other routine oil and gas development activities, such as maintenance acidizing, gravel packing, and well drilling, have not been previously conducted, in part due to a lack of reliable information concerning on-field chemical-use. In this study, we compare chemical-use between routine activities and the more closely regulated well-stimulation activities using data collected by the South Coast Air Quality Monitoring District (SCAQMD), which mandates the reporting of both unconventional and routine on-field chemical-use for parts of Southern California. Analysis of this data shows that there is significant overlap in chemical-use between so-called unconventional activities and routine activities conducted for well maintenance, well-completion, or rework. A comparison within the SCAQMD shows a significant overlap between both types and amounts of chemicals used for well-stimulation treatments included under State mandatory-disclosure regulations and routine treatments that are not included under State regulations. A comparison between SCAQMD chemical-use for routine treatments and state-wide chemical-use for hydraulic fracturing also showed close similarity in chemical-use between activities covered under chemical disclosure requirements (e.g. hydraulic fracturing) and many other oil and gas field activities. The results of this study indicate regulations and risk assessments focused exclusively on chemicals used in well-stimulation activities may underestimate potential hazard or risk from overall oil field chemical-use.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5396893
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53968932017-05-04 Comparison of chemical-use between hydraulic fracturing, acidizing, and routine oil and gas development Stringfellow, William T. Camarillo, Mary Kay Domen, Jeremy K. Shonkoff, Seth B. C. PLoS One Research Article The potential hazards and risks associated with well-stimulation in unconventional oil and gas development (hydraulic fracturing, acid fracturing, and matrix acidizing) have been investigated and evaluated and federal and state regulations requiring chemical disclosure for well-stimulation have been implemented as part of an overall risk management strategy for unconventional oil and gas development. Similar evaluations for chemicals used in other routine oil and gas development activities, such as maintenance acidizing, gravel packing, and well drilling, have not been previously conducted, in part due to a lack of reliable information concerning on-field chemical-use. In this study, we compare chemical-use between routine activities and the more closely regulated well-stimulation activities using data collected by the South Coast Air Quality Monitoring District (SCAQMD), which mandates the reporting of both unconventional and routine on-field chemical-use for parts of Southern California. Analysis of this data shows that there is significant overlap in chemical-use between so-called unconventional activities and routine activities conducted for well maintenance, well-completion, or rework. A comparison within the SCAQMD shows a significant overlap between both types and amounts of chemicals used for well-stimulation treatments included under State mandatory-disclosure regulations and routine treatments that are not included under State regulations. A comparison between SCAQMD chemical-use for routine treatments and state-wide chemical-use for hydraulic fracturing also showed close similarity in chemical-use between activities covered under chemical disclosure requirements (e.g. hydraulic fracturing) and many other oil and gas field activities. The results of this study indicate regulations and risk assessments focused exclusively on chemicals used in well-stimulation activities may underestimate potential hazard or risk from overall oil field chemical-use. Public Library of Science 2017-04-19 /pmc/articles/PMC5396893/ /pubmed/28422971 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175344 Text en © 2017 Stringfellow et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Stringfellow, William T.
Camarillo, Mary Kay
Domen, Jeremy K.
Shonkoff, Seth B. C.
Comparison of chemical-use between hydraulic fracturing, acidizing, and routine oil and gas development
title Comparison of chemical-use between hydraulic fracturing, acidizing, and routine oil and gas development
title_full Comparison of chemical-use between hydraulic fracturing, acidizing, and routine oil and gas development
title_fullStr Comparison of chemical-use between hydraulic fracturing, acidizing, and routine oil and gas development
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of chemical-use between hydraulic fracturing, acidizing, and routine oil and gas development
title_short Comparison of chemical-use between hydraulic fracturing, acidizing, and routine oil and gas development
title_sort comparison of chemical-use between hydraulic fracturing, acidizing, and routine oil and gas development
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5396893/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28422971
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175344
work_keys_str_mv AT stringfellowwilliamt comparisonofchemicalusebetweenhydraulicfracturingacidizingandroutineoilandgasdevelopment
AT camarillomarykay comparisonofchemicalusebetweenhydraulicfracturingacidizingandroutineoilandgasdevelopment
AT domenjeremyk comparisonofchemicalusebetweenhydraulicfracturingacidizingandroutineoilandgasdevelopment
AT shonkoffsethbc comparisonofchemicalusebetweenhydraulicfracturingacidizingandroutineoilandgasdevelopment