Close Menu
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    SciTechDaily
    • Biology
    • Chemistry
    • Earth
    • Health
    • Physics
    • Science
    • Space
    • Technology
    Facebook X (Twitter) Pinterest YouTube RSS
    SciTechDaily
    Home»Earth»Minimal Differences in Environmental Impact of Hydrofracking vs. Conventional Gas/Oil Drilling
    Earth

    Minimal Differences in Environmental Impact of Hydrofracking vs. Conventional Gas/Oil Drilling

    By Syracuse UniversityJuly 26, 20211 Comment5 Mins Read
    Facebook Twitter Pinterest Telegram LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Reddit
    Share
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Telegram Email Reddit
    Oil and Gas Well
    A new study led by A&S professor Tao Wen used a novel method of machine learning to explore the environmental impact of oil and gas drilling.

    A study led by EES professor Tao Wen is one of the first to use machine learning techniques to holistically assess general water quality data.

    Crude oil production and natural gas withdrawals in the United States have lessened the country’s dependence on foreign oil and provided financial relief to U.S. consumers, but have also raised longstanding concerns about environmental damage, such as groundwater contamination.

    A researcher in Syracuse University’s College of Arts and Sciences, and a team of scientists from Penn State, have developed a new machine learning technique to holistically assess water quality data in order to detect groundwater samples likely impacted by recent methane leakage during oil and gas production. Using that model, the team concluded that unconventional drilling methods like hydraulic fracturing — or hydrofracking — do not necessarily incur more environmental problems than conventional oil and gas drilling.

    US Natural Gas Producing Regions
    Shaded areas indicate some of those major regions producing natural gas in the U.S. In this study, researchers select four U.S. states to study that are located within important shale zones including the famous and prolific shale play — Marcellus. Credit: Syracuse University

    Conventional vs. Unconventional Drilling

    The two common ways to extract oil and gas in the U.S. are through conventional and unconventional methods. Conventional oil and gas are pumped from easily accessed sources using natural pressure. Conversely, unconventional oil and gas are acquired from hard-to-reach sources through a combination of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing. Hydrofracking extracts natural gas, petroleum and brine from bedrock formations by injecting a mixture of sand, chemicals and water. By drilling into the earth and directing the high-pressure mixture into rock, the gas inside releases and flows out to the head of a well.

    Tao Wen
    Professor Tao Wen contributed to a study assessing groundwater contamination caused by oil and gas production. Credit: Syracuse University

    Tao Wen, assistant professor of earth and environmental sciences (EES) at Syracuse, recently led a study comparing data from different states to see which method might result in greater contamination of groundwater. They specifically tested levels of methane, which is the primary component of natural gas.

    The team selected four U.S. states located in important shale zones to target for their study: Pennsylvania, Colorado, Texas and New York. One of those states — New York — banned the practice of hydrofracking in 2015 following a review by the NYS Department of Health which found significant uncertainties about health, including increased water and air pollution.

    Risks of Methane in Groundwater

    Wen and his colleagues compiled a large groundwater chemistry dataset from multiple sources including federal agency reports, journal articles, and oil and gas companies. The majority of tested water samples in their study were collected from domestic water wells. Although methane itself is not toxic, Wen says that methane contamination detected in shallow groundwater could be a risk to the relevant homeowner as it could be an explosion hazard, could increase the level of other toxic chemical species like manganese and arsenic, and would contribute to global warming as methane is a greenhouse gas.

    Their model used sophisticated algorithms to analyze almost all of the retained geochemistry data in order to predict if a given groundwater sample was negatively impacted by recent oil and gas drilling.

    Findings Challenge Assumptions About Fracking

    The data comparison showed that methane contamination cases in New York — a state without unconventional drilling but with a high volume of conventional drilling — were similar to that of Pennsylvania — a state with a high volume of unconventional drilling. Wen says this suggests that unconventional drilling methods like fracking do not necessarily lead to more environmental problems than conventional drilling, although this result might be alternatively explained by the different sizes of groundwater chemistry datasets compiled for these two states.

    The model also detected a higher rate of methane contamination cases in Pennsylvania than in Colorado and Texas. Wen says this difference could be attributed to different practices when drillers build/drill the oil and gas wells in different states. According to previous research, most of the methane released into the environment from gas wells in the U.S. occurs because the cement that seals the well is not completed along the full lengths of the production casing. However, no data exists to conclude if drillers in those three states use different technology. Wen says this requires further study and review of the drilling data if they become available.

    According to Wen, their machine learning model proved to be effective in detecting groundwater contamination, and by applying it to other states/counties with ongoing or planned oil and gas production it will be an important resource for determining the safest methods of gas and oil drilling.

    Reference: “Detecting anomalous methane in groundwater within hydrocarbon production areas across the United States” by Tao Wen, Mengqi Liu, Josh Woda, Guanjie Zheng and Susan L. Brantley, 13 May 2021, Water Research.
    DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2021.117236

    Wen and his colleagues from Penn State, including Mengqi Liu, a graduate student from the College of Information Sciences and Technology, Josh Woda, a graduate student from Department of Geosciences, Guanjie Zheng, former Ph.D. student from the College of Information Sciences and Technology, and Susan L. Brantley, distinguished professor in the Department of Geosciences and director of Earth and Environmental Systems Institute, recently had their findings published in the journal Water Research.

    Never miss a breakthrough: Join the SciTechDaily newsletter.

    Energy Environment Fracking Machine Learning Syracuse University Water
    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Email Reddit

    Related Articles

    Fossil Fuels Replaced by Agriculture As Largest Human Source of Sulfur to the Environment

    New NASA Research Projects Probe COVID-19 Impacts on Environment, Food & Water Supply

    How Stimulus Dollars Are Spent Will Affect Emissions for Decades

    Using Machine Learning to Accurately Predict Rock Thermal Conductivity for Enhanced Oil Production

    Missing Link Identified to Determine Carbon in Deep Earth Reservoirs

    MIT Devises New Effecient Way to Remove Contaminants From Nuclear Wastewater

    California’s Switch to Solar, Wind Energy Preserves Groundwater for Drought, Agriculture

    How to Save Billions of Gallons of Water: Replace Coal With Gas or Renewables

    Surprising Secret Ingredients to Clean Up Environment: Liquid Metals

    1 Comment

    1. Shawn on July 27, 2021 11:02 am

      So they came to this conclusion on how it affects our environment by only looking at how it affects ground water??? What kind of scientific study only looks at one environmental factor to come to its conclusion? What about the effects on foliage, fauna, air contamination, etc…? Too many scientific studies these days are focused too narrowly just so they can justify their findings instead of looking at the full picture. No wonder our planet is doomed

      Reply
    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Pinterest
    • YouTube

    Don't Miss a Discovery

    Subscribe for the Latest in Science & Tech!

    Trending News

    It’s Snowing Salt. The Strange Phenomenon Happening Deep in the Dead Sea

    Stanford Scientists Successfully Reverse Autism Symptoms in Mice

    Scientists Finally Solve the Mystery of the Sun’s Fastest Particles

    Don’t Throw Away Those Cannabis Leaves – They’re Packed With Rare Compounds

    Why Cancer Spreads: Scientists Uncover a New Clue Inside the Cell’s Power Plant

    These Glow-in-the-Dark Succulents Could Replace Your Night Light

    Mezcal Worm in a Bottle Yields Surprising DNA Results

    The Math Says Life Shouldn’t Exist: New Study Challenges Origins Theories

    Follow SciTechDaily
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • YouTube
    • Pinterest
    • Newsletter
    • RSS
    SciTech News
    • Biology News
    • Chemistry News
    • Earth News
    • Health News
    • Physics News
    • Science News
    • Space News
    • Technology News
    Recent Posts
    • 50-Million-Year-Old Sea Turtle Unearthed in Syria Stuns Paleontologists
    • 41,000 Years Ago, Something Weird in Space Changed How Humans Lived on Earth
    • $1 Billion Saved Each Year? Scientists Question Adult Booster Shots
    • Insomnia Breakthrough: Cannabis Products Show Long-Term Sleep Benefits
    • New Pill Dramatically Lowers Dangerous High Blood Pressure
    Copyright © 1998 - 2025 SciTechDaily. All Rights Reserved.
    • Science News
    • About
    • Contact
    • Editorial Board
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Use

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.