|
Supplementary material to “The Marcellus Shale: Resources and Reservations”
10 August 2010
Daniel J. Soeder, National Energy Technology Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Morgantown, West Virginia
Citation:
Soeder, D. J. (2010), The Marcellus Shale: Resources and reservations, Eos Trans. AGU, 91(32), 277–278. [Full Article (pdf)]
On July 15-16, 2010 at the invitation of the Pennsylvania Geological Survey and U.S. Geological Survey, representatives from seven federal agencies and four states met in Harrisburg, PA to discuss and define a variety of scientific and environmental issues related to Marcellus Shale gas development. Subsequent to this meeting, the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) of the U.S. Department of Energy received an offer from Range Resources, one of the largest producers of Marcellus Shale gas, to utilize one of Range’s planned well sites for an environmental research project. The idea that resulted from discussions between NETL and Range is to collect environmental baseline data for about a year from an undisturbed future drill site, and then continue data collection through the drilling and production process, and afterward for up to another year to monitor recovery, resettlement and succession.
Virtually all of the participants at the Harrisburg meeting, as well as many in industry, agree that there is a need for accurate, thorough and unbiased scientific data on the possible environmental impacts of shale gas drilling and production. In the absence of such data, environmental debates have been anecdotal, exaggerated and often shrill on both sides of the issue. Regulatory decisions have been made with little available data. NETL, Range and many others feel that it is in the best interests of industry, regulators, and concerned citizens to obtain some hard data on the environmental impacts of drilling. Such information would drive best management practices by industry, indicate the areas where regulators should focus their attention, and provide environmental and citizen watchdog groups with a list of actual rather than imagined potential problems.
NETL sent out a notice of the Range Resources opportunity to federal and state agencies, and asked for input on the type of monitoring that should be done. Given the high levels of interest in the Marcellus Shale, we received a strong response of more than 150 separate suggestions, covering everything from air and water quality to the social aspects of site development (for example, will drill pad access roads lead to greater illegal forest access on all-terrain vehicles?) Many of the suggestions were helpful, and form the basis for a set of reasonable metrics that could be used to develop indicators to assess environmental impacts.
We would be surprised to find an available site with the proper drilling schedule where it makes sense to monitor everything suggested. Once a location is identified, the monitoring program can be tailored to the site. It would be helpful to find a site in a single land-use area (i.e. forest, row crop agriculture, etc.) to minimize the variability of different land uses on the data. Several people suggested trying to locate a site in a step-out area where there will be additional pads developed, and the impact at landscape scales can be addressed.
A summary list of the monitoring suggestions follows. Many of the responders sent detailed discussions of things to monitor, which were condensed down to one line each in a spreadsheet. Any losses in translation are my fault, not theirs. If anyone wishes to receive more information, see the full list, or participate in the study, please contact the author (Daniel.Soeder@netl.doe.gov)
AIR: Methane emissions, CO2 emissions, dust and fumes, ozone monitoring
DRILLING: Impacts of noise and lights on wildlife, impacts of drilling ponds on wildlife, collect fluid and gas samples during drilling, seismic monitoring of hydrofrac, assess integrity of well and casing
ECOLOGY: Assessment of land and aquatic species assemblage, invasive species assessment, inventory of rare, threatened or endangered (RTE) species
HABITAT: Effects of cleared pad on habitat, edge effects, plant succession and resettlement of area after drilling is completed
HYDROLOGY: Establish surface water flow monitoring network, establish groundwater monitoring network, establish water quality monitoring sites, and collect samples and data.
LANDSCAPE: Monitor effects of road/pad and production development on landscape and topography
SITE CHARACTERIZATION: Assess hydrogeologic, topographic, land use, vegetation cover, etc. setting of the proposed site
SOCIAL: Assess social impacts of drilling (land use, land access, monetary value, extraction of other resources, etc.)
SOIL: Assess impacts of roads, pad, heavy machinery and drilling on soils.