DEP Legacy Well Emissions Study

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
THE GHANA POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGY Integration and Progress of Environmental Issues By Winfred Nelson NDPC November
Advertisements

Technical Requirements for Site Remediation Backbone of New Jerseys Site Remediation Program.
Volunteer Water Monitoring Support through the UWSP Center for Watershed Science and Education Nancy Turyk Citizen-Based Monitoring Conference August 2004.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AT SOLID WASTE (SW) LANDFILLS QUIZ Ruxandra Floroiu, Environmental Engineer, ECSSD WB Safeguards Workshop Chisinau, Moldova October.
Community Update on the Inglewood Oil Field Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas July 5, 2011.
Environmental Protection Commission Overview Vision: Environmental Excellence in a Changing World.
ENVIRONMENTAL UNIT IN AN ICS STRUCTURE. EU Mission Statement The Environmental Unit is established to provide technical and scientific expertise and capabilities.
All Fracked Up Kyle Hicks, Matt Gnegy, Robert Simmons and Christopher Coppock.
Water Issues Related to Marcellus Gas Drilling Activity Water Issues Related to Marcellus Gas Drilling Activity Bryan Swistock Water Resources Extension.
1 Hydraulic Fracturing Regulatory Processes in Louisiana James H. Welsh Commissioner of Conservation.
Michael A. Skiffington Program Support Manager Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy W&M ELPR Spring Symposium Williamsburg, VA – March 28,
Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy
ANRC AACD Arkansas Conservation Districts Training Program Power Point 12 Arkansas Natural Resources Commission.
Norse Energy Corp., USA  As natural gas assumes a far more important role in America’s energy mix, Norse Energy is committed to exploring, developing,
Environment Performance in the Oil & Gas E&P Industry: Assessment and Challenges Emmanuel Garland Total Exploration & Production Society of Petroleum Engineers.
E&P STORM WATER OVERVIEW Domestic Onshore Energy E&P STORM WATER OVERVIEW Domestic Onshore Energy May 10, 2005.
Chapter 25 Environmental Protection and Global Warming.
Regulatory Aspects of the Underground Hydrocarbon Storage (UHS) Program and the Role Contractors Have in This Lyons Celebration Center, Lyons, Kansas February.
Introduction to PA Act 167 Stormwater Management Planning Little Juniata River Watershed April 21, 2005.
Smart Growth Implementation Assistance State of California Fact Sheet More about Smart Growth Preliminary Project Goals.
Environmental Protection in the United States Christopher Green U.S. Embassy July 13, 2006.
OVERVIEW OF OIL & GAS EXPLORATION, DEVELOPMENT and STATE REGULATION OVERVIEW OF OIL & GAS EXPLORATION, DEVELOPMENT and STATE REGULATION February 18, 2012.
DOE ORDER ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PROGRAM WORKSHOP Natural Resource Trusteeship John J. Bascietto
Michael A. Skiffington Program Support Manager Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy Regulatory Advisory Panel Meeting #3 Abingdon, VA – July.
Probability of Detecting Atrazine and Elevated Concentrations of Nitrate in Colorado’s Ground Water USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report
Superfund Process National Priorities List (NPL) Procedures.
Reclamation of Abandoned Mine Lands: EPA Perspective.
Overview of Legal Issues in Marcellus Shale Development Penn State Ag Council Membership Meeting October 12, 2009 Agricultural Law Resource and Reference.
HAMPTON ROADS REGIONAL WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Presentation John M. Carlock, AICP Deputy Executive Director, Physical Planning Hampton Roads.
Thom KerrNovember 17, 2015 Colorado’s Continuous Adjustment to Unconventional Resource Development.
Sustain Noblesville Committee September 19, 2011 Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., DEE, QEP Commissioner, Indiana Department of Environmental Management.
Growing Smarter Pennsylvania’s Land Use Agenda. Percent of Land Developed in Pennsylvania Source: Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department.
An introduction to Private Water Systems
Dodge County Water Monitoring Update
Mission: To protect human health and safeguard the environment
Pennsylvania’s Environmental Good Samaritan Act
Proposed Plan for No Further Action
Environmental Quality Board
MONITORING Mr. Jan Prášek IPPC Agency.
by John Mitchell, Director Division of Environment
WHAT DO ALL THESE PLACES
Identification on Significant Pressures - Surface Water Bodies
Stormwater Infiltration on Contaminated Sites
State and Local Regulation in Oil & Gas
PENNSYLVANIA STORMWATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MANUAL
Climate Change & Environmental Risks Unit Research Directorate General
Florida and Reclaimed Water
Welcome.
Sacramento County Stormwater Quality Program
Classroom Catalyst.
Gas companies recently have turned their sights on the Marcellus shale, shown in grey here, a vast natural gas reserve 6,000 to 8,000 feet below the Earth’s.
Community Tools and Support for Data Driven Education
Human impact: extraction of energy resources
River Flow into Chesapeake Bay
Water Quality Rulemaking in Response to S.L
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
West Virginia University
Comprehensive Land Use Planning and Zoning
Do Now Based on your knowledge, what is the difference between a renewable and a non- renewable resource. Give an example of each. True or False. A.
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
Environmental Effects
EPA’s Current Air Toxics Activities
Cedar Ridge Estates Application for Comprehensive Permit
WHAT DO ALL THESE PLACES
Examination of the Risk of Superfund Sites In the United States
Mining and Mineral Resources
Groundwater Contamination Cases in Texas
State of the Environment reporting Agenda 5.
Sacramento County Stormwater Quality Program
Joanna Thamke Wyoming-Montana Water Science Center
Presentation transcript:

DEP Legacy Well Emissions Study June 21, 2016 Citizens Advisory Council Meeting Presentation

DEP Mission “To protect Pennsylvania’s air, land and water from pollution and to provide for the health and safety of its citizens through a cleaner environment. We will work as partners with individuals, organizations, governments and businesses to prevent pollution and restore our natural resources.”

Presentation Outline Regulatory History of Well Plugging Purpose of Study Study Methods Preliminary Results

Regulatory History of Well Plugging 1859 – First well drilled, “Drake well”, Titusville, PA 1878 – Wells first required to be plugged with wood and sediment 1881 – Plugging requirements updated: Fill well with sand or rock sediment and wooden plugs above third producing sand 1921 – Plugging requirements updated Fill with sand or rock sediment and each producing strata plugged with wood plug Requires venting of wells through coal layers 1952 – API standards for cement and well plugging published 1956 – Well permitting begins; modern plugging requirements 1984 – Modern environmentally-minded plugging requirements 1989 – First well plugged in DEP plugging program The evolution of plugging standards is important to this study because historical plugging practices employed techniques and materials which would be considered inadequate today. These wells, though plugged, may still pose a threat to human health and the environment.

Regulatory History of Well Plugging

Regulatory History of Well Plugging Examples of old plug materials

Legacy Oil and Gas Wells Not shown: Tens of thousands of known wells with missing coordinates Approximately 200,000 abandoned and orphan wells not yet located

? Legacy Oil and Gas Wells Nearly 100 yrs of development prior to permitting requirements led to hundreds of thousands of un-accounted for wells. ? Pioneer Run oil field in 1859. Photo used with permission from the Pennsylvania Historical Collection and Museum Commission, Drake Well Museum Collection, Titusville, PA

Study: Purpose Inspect representative sample of abandoned, orphan, and plugged wells, and assess well integrity in order to: Provide insight into environmental hazards associated with legacy wells (greenhouse gas emissions, impacts to surface and groundwater by discharge of brine/oil/gas) Quantify agency plugging liability Inform regulatory changes Help us understand database accuracy issues

Study Methods Counties included in study: Counties with a relatively high density of wells. Selected counties which would be representative of both deep and shallow oil and gas operations.

Study Methods Wells located on public lands are proposed in Northwest District for ease of access DEP plugged wells located on both public and private lands are proposed in the Southwest District to increase population size Well types considered in study: Oil, gas, combination, undetermined Oil, gas, and combination wells will be considered for this study in both regions. DEP-plugged wells of undetermined type will also be considered in the Southwest region to increase the sampled population size.

Study Methods Data cleanup: 2 databases compared for spatial discrepancies WIS (DCNR) and eFACTS (DEP) Locational discrepancies > 50 ft. removed from study Wells located on public lands identified Study areas restricted to public lands in NW for ease of access. Expanded to private lands in SW to increase sample size Oil, gas, combination, undetermined well types considered

Study Methods Well site accessibility: Included only wells located within ¼ mile of roads, and generally on a grade of less than 10% Oil, gas, and combination wells will be considered for this study in both regions. DEP-plugged wells of undetermined type will also be considered in the Southwest region to increase the sampled population size.

Study Methods Region Sample Size Sample size was selected to balance statistical significance with available resources. Region Sample Size Northwest 114 Southwest 94 Note: Data cleanup involved removing records without location data, no location discrepancies between databases. 95% +/- 15% confident that the mean of the sample size is statistically the same as the mean of the population (sample is representative of total population)

Plugging/AO Study Methods

Plugging/AO Study Methods Field Observations: Methane concentrations Flow rate Oil, brine discharges Verify coordinates

Study Methods

Preliminary Findings – Armstrong Co. Total wells selected: 13 9 A/O 4 Plugged Total wells inspected: 3, indicated as abandoned/orphan in eFACTS, 1 was found to be plugged upon inspection Total wells positively identified: 3 2 wells were not located 8 wells have not been visited as of 6/15/2016 No discharges of gas, oil, brine detected

Preliminary Findings – Greene Co. Total wells selected: 14 5 A/O 9 Plugged Total wells inspected: 6 plugged Total wells positively identified: 6 8 wells have not been visited as of 6/15/2016 No discharges of gas, oil, brine detected

Preliminary Findings – Indiana Co. Total wells selected: 14 6 A/O 7 Plugged 1 status changed to Active, 063-26473, removed from study Total wells inspected: 11 Total wells not located: 2 plugged

Preliminary Findings – Indiana Co., cont. 4 wells had measureable concentrations of gas ranging from 43% LEL to 100 % gas 1 Plugged 3 Abandoned 2 of those wells had measureable flow ranging from 1.8 cfd to 1456 cfd 1 Abandoned 1 orphan well was discharging water to a wetland at approximately 4 gpm, no apparent impact to vegetation Be ready to explain difference between LEL and % gas (100% LEL for methane = 5% methane by volume)

Preliminary Findings – Venango Co. Total wells selected: 26 26 A/O Total wells inspected: 13 Total wells positively identified: 10 9 wells have not been visited as of 6/1/2016 3 well locations had no casing, just hole in the ground 4 wells were not located No discharges of gas, oil, brine detected

Conclusion Hundreds of thousands of legacy wells are potential sources of environmental impacts (methane emissions, oil/brine/gas to surface and groundwater) Legacy Well Emissions Study Aims to: Provide insight into methane emissions from plugged/abandoned and orphan wells Assist in identifying any needed changes in regulations Quantify agency plugging liability Equipment investment needs

Conclusion Preliminary Results: Contrast between wells in SW and NW SW: Greater density of legacy gas wells. Wells located and identified with relative ease. Gas emissions and water discharges already noted. NW: Greater density of legacy oil wells. Wells difficult to locate, missing casings. No discharges noted as of yet. 41 wells down, 167 to go!

Information Specialist Bureau of Oil & Gas Planning & Program Mgmt Thank You! Questions? Lindsay A. Byron Geologic Specialist lbyron@pa.gov Stewart Beattie Information Specialist stebeattie@pa.gov Bureau of Oil & Gas Planning & Program Mgmt 717.772.0219