Characterizing Toxicity and Risks of Hydraulic Fracturing Fluid Additives Andrew Pawlisz, DABT ERT(UK) - Senior Toxicologist/Risk Assessor Image placeholder.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Federal and Regional Efforts Related to Marcellus Shale Exploration and Production David P. Russ,
Advertisements

Possible Effects of Hydraulic Fracturing and Shale Gas Development in Durham County Zheng Lu.
Robert Fisher, PG April 16, Discussion Topics Unconventional Gas Barnett Shale/Economics Example Plays How Fracking Works Production of Natural.
Zacariah L. Hildenbrand, Ph.D. Inform Environmental, LLC, Dallas, TX The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX Characterize groundwater.
Environmental Regulation and Hydraulic Fracturing in California
Water Management and Treatment Hurdles Kelvin B. Gregory, PhD On the banks of the Youghigheny River, Versailles, PA, Photo Courtesy McKeesport Historical.
TRP Chapter Chapter 2.3 Environmental impacts and health risks.
CHESTER, PENNSYLVANIA RISK STUDY Reginald Harris, Senior Toxicologist/Regional Environmental Justice Coordinator EPA Region III.
Oil and Gas Drilling and Production Chemicals, Waste and Environmental Impacts June 23, 2009 Wilma Subra Subra Company Earthworks Board Member.
Fracking 101. What is fracking? This is short for “hydrofracturing.” This is an old technique for increasing oil production from worked-out oil wells,
Hydraulic Fracturing Best Management Practices Environmentally Friendly Drilling Program John Michael Fernandez Matthew Gunter.
GOVERNOR’S SMALL BUSINESS FORUM APACHE CORP. JUNE 4, 2014.
Hydraulic Fracturing and Groundwater Quality Keith B. Hall Louisiana State University Law School Baton Rouge, Louisiana United States +1 (225)
Hydraulic Fracturing in the Marcellus Shale Formation Why regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act is needed.
RISK ANALYSIS,EVALUATION AND CHARACTERIZATION OF THE DIXIE OIL PROCESSORS INC., FRIENDSWOOD,TEXAS CVEN 610/PHEO 650 APRIL 22,2004 BY OKE NWANESHIUDU ABHIRAM.
Unconventional Gas: Shale Gas Shale Gas  Unconventional gas (hydrocarbons) found in subsurface shale formations  Replacement to coal, oil, and natural.
Nonrenewable Energy Oil & Petroleum. Nonrenewable vs. Renewable? nonrenewablerenewableWhat is the difference between nonrenewable and renewable? net energyWhat.
1 Risk Assessment Develop Objectives And Goals Develop and Screen Cleanup Alternatives Select Final Cleanup Alternative Communicate Decisions to the Public.
Human Health Effects of Hydraulic Fracturing Fluid BTEX Components in Drinking Water Ashley Andersen, Nicole Fenton, Alex Friedman, Kevin Jackson, Alec.
1. © 2013 Petroch Services Pty Ltd BP Version J11002– Occupational Hygiene in the Oil & Gas Industry Occupational Hygiene in the Oil & Gas Industry Day.
H. Hydraulic Fracturing Debunking the Myths Why We Have an Exciting Energy Future Why You Should Care Greg Kozera- Learned Leadership.
Fracking COLE HESS CBE 555 PROFESSOR: THATCHER ROOT 1.
Is Natural Gas the Answer for Electricity Generation? Issues and Considerations October 14, 2011 Bruce Baizel Staff Attorney Earthworks Durango, Colorado.
Impact Assessment of Natural Gas Production in the NYC Water Supply Watershed NYWEA Watershed Science and Technical Conference September 15, 2009 ▪ West.
Against Fracking in Monterey County HCOM 266 Presented by: Ashley Stout Duce Bell Kerry Kelvas Sophie Snow.
Preliminary Assessment of the Microbiology of Marcellus Shale Fracture and Flowback Waters Website: Customer Service:
(IAQ). What is Risk Assessment? Risk assessment: provides information on the health risk Characterizes the potential adverse health effects of human exposures.
Fracking 101. Fracking is a debated environmental and political issue. Industry’s insist it is a safe and economical source of clean energy; critics,
Fossil Fuels Chapter 11. Energy Consumption Per capita energy consumption.
Environmental Issues Associated with Oil and Natural Gas Extraction, Transport and Processing in the Marcellus and Utica Shale Region of Ohio Joe Bonnell,
Environmental monitoring of shale gas operations in the UK Simon Talbot - Managing Director GGS.
Impact of Hydraulic Fracturing on Ohio’s Infrastructure Impact of Hydraulic Fracturing on Ohio’s Infrastructure David Nash
Hydraulic Fracturing or “Fracking”. Natural Gas: Clean Energy? Natural gas power plants produce: half as much CO 2 (greenhouse gas) less than a third.
Global Energy Security Forum Miami, Florida March 26, 2013 Mark K. Boling President HYDRAULIC FRACTURING OPERATIONS: SEPARATING FACT FROM FICTION.
Production of Nitric Acid Environmental Impact Assessment Erik TolonenNick Poulin Environmental Engineering Environmental Planning and Decision Making.
April 12, 2012 Shale Gas Extraction.
Hydraulic Shale Fracturing Kyle Koliba Robert Stroud
MARCELLUS SHALE Natural Gas in Pennyslvania. Where is Marcellus Shale in PA?  Marcellus Shale  The contour lines tell thickness of the shale. Pink =
To Frack or not to Frack, That is the Question Fred Aminzadeh Executive Director, USC Induced Seismicity Consortium (ISC) Science Matters California Science.
AIM: What is fracking? Why is fracking such a controversial topic? DN: What do you know about fracking?
Hydraulic Fracturing or ‘Fracking’. Background The purpose of fracking is to increase the amount of mineral that can be mined from an ore body. The ‘frack’
RISK ASSESSMENT. Major Issues to be considered in designing the Study 1.- Emission Inventory What is the relative significance of the various sources.
Hydraulic Fracturing or Fracking. Process -Drill horizontal line -Charges detonate blasting small holes in the shale -Pressurized fluids are pumped into.
NORA Oil and Gas Sector Council, Fatality Trends and Database, NIOSH Oil and Gas Field Research, US/EU Joint Conference on OSH, 2015 The findings and conclusions.
12/14/06 Characterizing Chemicals in Commerce ConferenceProcess Profiles1 Toxicity Data and Pollution Prevention Kirsten Rosselot, PE.
Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, is an innovative and cost-saving process for drilling oil and gas from rock formations far underground, and is a booming.
 Introduction… ◦ Former Director of Western Colorado Congress ◦ Graduate of University of Colorado Law School ◦ Attorney specializing in representation.
Hydraulic Fracturing Tom Carr, Lauren Dynes, and Pete Strader.
Petroleum compounds Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) Natural gas constituents Methane Sulfur compounds (H 2 S,
Non-Renewable Energy Oil, Gas, and Coal
Green Technology for Biological Control of Marcellus Shale Hyrofracture Waters Shale Gas Innovation Contest Ben Franklin Technology Partners May 7, 2013.
Water Quality Rulemaking in Response to S.L
What is Fracking? Fracking is the process of drilling down into the earth before a high- pressure water mixture is directed at the rock to release the.
Hydraulic Fracturing (Fracking)
Managing environmental risks from shale gas exploration – the UK’s experience so far Dr Tony Grayling Head of Climate Change and Communities Environment.
Hydraulic Fracturing By: Anthony, Chris, James, and Jamie.
Myth or Fact The real “FRACKING” story. Myth or Fact?  Oil and natural gas reside in huge underground pools and lakes.  Myth  Oil and natural gas are.
Risk CHARACTERIZATION
Hydraulic Fracturing: FRACKING. Steps: The well is drilled deep below the aquifer to the shale, then drilling continues horizontally Charges are set.
A systems level perspective on Marcellus wastewater management in Pennsylvania LESLIE ABRAHAMS Engineering and Public Policy Civil and Environmental Engineering.
What the Frack Is Going On?
Sustainability in Marcellus Shale Development
Hydraulic Fracturing in Virginia
Class: Energy and the Environment Professor: Dr. Kazi Javed
Hazardous Wastes and Oil & Gas Operations (cont’d)
Water Quality Rulemaking in Response to S.L
Hydraulic Fracturing in the Barnett Shale
Groundwater Pollution
Zacariah L. Hildenbrand, Ph.D.
Presentation transcript:

Characterizing Toxicity and Risks of Hydraulic Fracturing Fluid Additives Andrew Pawlisz, DABT ERT(UK) - Senior Toxicologist/Risk Assessor Image placeholder December 2015 Dallas, TX

Outline 1.Introduction 2.Risk messaging to public in media 3.Risk assessment process 4.Reported events 5.Hypothetical drill rig worker risk assessment 6.Conclusions

Shale Gas & Oil Exploration Increased application of hydraulic fracturing worldwide First experiment in 1947 Over 40 North American shale plays Over 1 million operations completed in US Expansion projected despite the 2015 drop Lifting oil export ban?

Surface Spills Process Sensitive Receptor

Over 30,000 drilled wells in contiguous counties

Relatively clean alternate fossil energy source More energy per CO 2 than coal Reduction in reliance on imports Reduction in carbon emissions due to switching from coal Concerns with environmental impacts, groundwater, flowback/produced water, and air quality Regulatory, public, and political pressures Attribution challenge: conventional vs. unconventional Vidic (2013) Regulatory and Public Issues

Public Interest in Fracking Fxstreet (2015) Google Keyword Counts for “fracking” Production Drop

Risk Information: Media 2013

Risk Information: Media 2015

Risk Assessment Process Hazard Identification Toxicity Evaluation Exposure Assessment Risk Characterization Risk Management

Conceptual Exposure Model

Reported Events King (2011)

Reported Events Surface Water: - Illegal dumping (Hunt 2013) - Pennsylvania and North Dakota (Kusnetz 2012) - Blacklick Creek, PA - Stevens Creek, PA (PR 2013) - Monongahela River, PA - Mahoning River, OH - Brush Run, PA - Ten Mile Creek, PA

Reported Events Frac Fluid (on-Site): - Accidental releases (Wiseman 2013) - Alleged exposure of worker/nurse in Durango, CO (Tsou 2012) - Blow-outs (TCCG 2011) - BMPs and controls designed to prevent exposure (Nygaard 2013) Frac Fluid (off-Site): - Releases to pastures in PA (PP 2010) and LA (PP 2009) - Treatment system residual emissions in PA (Olmstead 2012) - Spills (Bamberger 2012&2015) - Transportation accidents (King 2012) - Blow-outs - Endocrine disruptor activity (Kassotis 2015)

Exposure Potential: Worker

Chemical Identity Inbound Media: −Typically a fresh water solution fortified with chemicals and propping media to aid in fracking −1:10,000 to 1:100,000 dilutions of chemicals (Gordalla 2013) Outbound Media: −E.g., NaCl, hydrocarbons (e.g., benzene), elements (e.g., As, Ba, Sr, Ra, Rn, U, Th, Fe, K) −Formation-specific −Not unique to fracking except for media additives −Proposed as more problematic (Gordalla 2013)

Chemical Identity USEPA identified 1,000 chemicals (USEPA 2012) 347 unique CAS entries Trade secret constituents generally exempt from public disclosure Frac fluid composition (Fontaine 2008): - Water (99%) - Proppants (1.9%) - Friction reducers (0.025%) - Disinfectants (0.05%) - Surfactants (0.002%) - Thickeners (not common) - Scale inhibitors - Corrosion inhibitors (0.5%) - Acids

Analytical Methods Proposed Analytical Methods (USEPA 2012): Alcohols: SW-846 Methods 5030 and 8260C Aldehydes: SW-846 Method 8315 Alkylphenols: No standard method Alkylphenol ethoxylates: No standard method Amides: SW-846 Methods 8032A and 8316 Amines (alcohols): No standard method Hydrocarbons: SW- 846 Methods 5030 and 8260C Carbohydrates: No standard method Ethoxylated alcohols: ASTM D Glycols: Region 3 Draft SOP Halogens: SW-846 Method 9056A Inorganics: SW-846 Methods 3015A and 6020A Radionuclides: SW-846 Method 9310

Biocidal Agents: Uses Chemical NameUsesFreq. Tetrahydro-3,5-dimethyl-2H-1,3,5-thiadiazine-2-thioneBiocide19 Alkyl dimethyl benzyl ammonium chlorideDisinfectant15 Phosphonium, tetrakis(hydroxymethly)-sulfateBiocide11 2,2-Dibromo-3-nitrilopropionamideBiocide8 Dipropylene glycol monomethyl etherBiocide7 5-Chloro-2-methyl-4-isothiazolin-3-oneBiocide4 Methylene bis(thiocyanate)Biocide3 Magnesium chlorideBiocide3 Ethoxylated nonylphenol Disinfectant, surfactant, corrosion inhibitor, antiemulsant 3 2-(2-Methoxyethoxy)ethanolBiocide3 Oxydiethylene bis(alkyl dimethyl ammonium chloride)Bactericide3 Polyethylene glycolBiocide3 Diatomaceous earth, calcinedBiocide2 Ammonium lauryl sulfateBiocide2 Ethanol Biocide, disinfectant, corrosion inhibitor, foaming agent, surfactant 2 2-Bromo-3-nitrilopropionamideBiocide2 Didecyl dimethyl ammonium chlorideBiocide2 2-(Thiocyanomethylthio)benzothiazoleBiocide2 1,2-Bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diolBiocide2 Dialkyl dimethyl ammonium chlorideDisinfectant2 Heavy aromatic petroleum naphtha Biocide, antiemulsant, acid inhibitor, corrosion inhibitor, proppant, surfactant 1 GlutaraldehydeBiocide, corrosion inhibitor1

Biocidal Agents: Toxicity Chemical Name Reference Dose (mg/kg BW-day) Reference Concentration (mg/m 3 ) Acrolein5.00E E-05 Naphthalene2.00E E-03 2-(Thiocyanomethylthio)benzothiazole3.00E E-01 Glutaraldehyde5.00E E-05 Methyl-4-isothiazolin5.30E-02Not Available Methylene bis(thiocyanate)5.50E-02Not Available Didecyl dimethyl ammonium chloride8.40E-02NA 2,2-Dibromo-3-nitrilopropionamide1.18E E-02 Tetrahydro-3,5-dimethyl-2H-1,3,5-thiadiazine-2-thione1.20E E+00 2-Bromo-3-nitrilopropionamide1.78E E+01 1,2-Bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol1.80E E+00 5-Chloro-2-methyl-4-isothiazolin-3-one2.10E-01Not Available Dibromoacetonitrile2.45E-01Not Available Phosphonium, tetrakis(hydroxymethly)-sulfate2.48E E-01 Trichloroisocyanuric acid, dry4.06E E+01 Alkyl dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride4.26E-01Not Available Magnesium nitrate5.00E-01Not Available Tetrasodium ethylenediaminetetraacetate6.30E-01Not Available N, N'-Methylene bis(5-methyl oxazolidine)9.00E E-01 Ethoxylated nonylphenol1.31E E-01 Sodium dichloro-s-triazinetrione1.42E+00Not Available

Worker Exposure Model Incidental Oral Ingestion Incidental Skin Contact Total Exposure = + Exposure Assumptions: - Each shift of 8 hrs - Oral ingestion of 16 mL fracking fluid per shift - 14% transdermal influx via exposed hands and arms days per year - Occupational exposure of 10 years

Biocidal Agents: Exposure Ranking Chemical Name Fracturing Fluid Concentration (mg/L) Incidental Consumption Exposure (mg/kg-day) Incidental Contact Exposure (mg/kg BW-day) Total Exposure Polyethylene glycol4.20E E E E-01 Diatomaceous earth, calcined3.28E E E E-02 Ethanol1.88E E E E-02 Glutaraldehyde1.29E E E E-02 2,2-Dibromo-3-nitrilopropionamide6.85E E E E-02 Alkyl dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride2.54E E E E-03 5-Chloro-2-methyl-4-isothiazolin-3-one1.91E E E E-03 Magnesium nitrate1.91E E E E-03 Tetrahydro-3,5-dimethyl-2H-1,3,5-thiadiazine-2-thione1.90E E E E-03 Dibromoacetonitrile1.09E E E E-03 Didecyl dimethyl ammonium chloride9.80E E E E-03 Phosphonium, tetrakis(hydroxymethly)-sulfate9.10E E E E-03 Magnesium chloride3.90E E E E-03 1,2-Bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol3.80E E E E-03 Methyl-4-isothiazolin1.30E E E E-04 2-Bromo-3-nitrilopropionamide3.00E E E E-05

Worker Risk Model Reference Dose Total Exposure Hazard Quotient = Risk Decision Process: - HQ ≤ acceptable exposure - HQ > estimated exposure may be associated with elevated risks

Biocidal Agents: Risk Ranking Chemical Name Total Exposure (mg/kg-day) RfD (mg/kg-day) HQ Glutaraldehyde3.74E E ,2-Dibromo-3-nitrilopropionamide1.98E E Tetrahydro-3,5-dimethyl-2H-1,3,5-thiadiazine-2-thione5.50E E Didecyl dimethyl ammonium chloride2.84E E Polyethylene glycol1.22E E Chloro-2-methyl-4-isothiazolin-3-one5.53E E Ethanol5.43E E Alkyl dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride7.35E E Dibromoacetonitrile3.15E E Magnesium nitrate5.53E E Phosphonium, tetrakis(hydroxymethly)-sulfate2.63E E Methyl-4-isothiazolin3.76E E ,2-Bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol1.10E E Bromo-3-nitrilopropionamide8.68E E Magnesium chloride1.13E E Tetrasodium ethylenediaminetetraacetate5.79E E

Summary Studies are generating data to support additional risk assessments No widespread impacts on groundwater (except surface spills, non- spec operations, and accidents) Air exposures findings variable (except silica dust exposure) Highest hypothetical worker exposures are to polyethylene glycol, diatomaceous earth, ethanol, glutaraldehyde, and brominated nitrilopropionamide Highest hypothetical relative risks are to glutaraldehyde, brominated nitrilopropionamide, methylated thiodiazine, methylated ammonium chloride, and polyethylene glycol

Thank You