1 / 24

Yousif Kharaka, James Thordsen, Evangelos Kakouros William Herkelrath, and Marvin Abbott *

Fate and Water Impacts of Produced Water Operations at OSPER Sites, Osage County, OK: Major (Unresolved?) Issues. Yousif Kharaka, James Thordsen, Evangelos Kakouros William Herkelrath, and Marvin Abbott * U. S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA 94025; *Oklahoma City, OK 73116.

hurdr
Download Presentation

Yousif Kharaka, James Thordsen, Evangelos Kakouros William Herkelrath, and Marvin Abbott *

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Fate and Water Impacts of Produced Water Operations at OSPER Sites, Osage County, OK: Major (Unresolved?) Issues Yousif Kharaka, James Thordsen, Evangelos Kakouros William Herkelrath, and Marvin Abbott* U. S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA 94025; *Oklahoma City, OK 73116 IPEC-13, San Antonio, TX November 17-20, 2006 Financial support from DOE-NETL Drilling support from EPA-NRMRL Osage Nation Tribal Authorities U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

  2. Multidisciplinary Investigation of Field Sites Impacted by Petroleum Production Goal: Conduct research to investigate the distribution, fate and Impactof contaminants released as a result of petroleum production. Contaminants include salts, trace metals, hydrocarbons and Naturally occurring radioactive material (NORMs). Impactscover those affecting soil, surface and ground water and the local ecosystem.

  3. Distribution of Petroleum wells in Oklahoma, Osage County, & the study Area

  4. Topics Discussed 1-  OSPER ‘A’ & ‘B’ sites, Osage County, OK. 2-  Chemical & isotopic compositions of source & ground waters at OSPER ‘A’ & ‘B’ sites. 3- Delineating the plume boundaries at OSPER ‘B’. 4- What are the major (unresolved?) issues? 5- Future plans & concluding remarks.

  5. Major (Unresolved?) Issues 1)- What are the distinguishing chemical and isotopic markers of uncontaminated local groundwater and produced water? 2)- What are the water-mineral-bacterial interactions that lead to very high sulfate (>5,000 mg/L) concentrations in contaminated groundwater? 3)- How does the brine flow through relatively thick (2-7 m) shale and siltstone beds? 4)- How much salt is removed by surface runoff and other natural processes?

  6. Sampling Trips to the Sites March 2001--- Source fluids from oil wells, GW, and Skiatook Reservoir. Surface pools at both sites. February 2002--- ~60 Geoprobe, auger and rotary wells drilled, cored, completed and sampled at and two sites. June 2002 --- Water level, conductance, and T measurements, followed by collection of ~40 water and a few oil samples. November 02 --- Drilling with geoprobe and sampling. March-April 03 ---Drilling (EPA auger) and sampling. January 2004 --- (9) deep wells (WRD air) at “A”, and sampling. May 2004 --- (4) deep (EPA auger) wells at “B”; sampling. February 2005 --- Water levels and sampling at both sites. September 2005 --- Weir discharges. March 2006 --- Weir discharges.

  7. Organics in Produced Water(mg/L)

  8. Selected Wells (a)- BA-01s (b)- BE-17 (c)- BR-01d

  9. OSPER “B” Site; Traverse A-A`

  10. OSPER “B” Site; Traverse D-D`

  11. Double-layer Clay Membrane

  12. Mineral-Water Interactions for S at OSPERs

  13. Summary and Conclusions  Significant amounts of produced water, but minor amounts of oil and organics, have and continue to be released to ground surface from the brine pits and flow towards the Skiatook Reservoir.  Three GW plumes ( up to 30,000 mg/l TDS) extend from brine pits & intersect Skiatook reservoir. High SO4 is from oxidation of pyrite.  Physico-chemical interactions of brine and clay allow brine (plume) penetration through 2-7 m shale & siltstone beds.  Remediation will not be successful without first blocking produced water releases from the brine pits and other sources.

  14. OSPERs Project Investigators • USGS-WRD • Yousif Kharaka and staff- inorganic & organic aqueous geochemistry • Bill Herkelrath and staff- hydrology and modeling • Mike Godsy (Ean Warren)- microbial ecology, microbiogeochemistry • Tom Yanosky- tree ring geochemistry • Fran Hostetler- organic geochemistry • Marvin Abbott- site manager, GPS, GIS • USGS-GD • Jim Otton- geology and project management • Bob Zielinksi- inorganic solid geochemistry, biogeochemistry • Cyndi Rice- inorganic solid geochemistry, CEC • Jim Cathcart- soil and bedrock mineralogy • Bruce Smith and others- geophysics • USGS-BRD • Bob Keeland-oak-tree ecology and tree-ring chronology • OSU • Joe Bidwell- lacustrine invertebrate ecology and toxicology • USEPA- Ada Research Lab • Don Kampbell and contractors- site characterization/reclamation, • Geoprobe support

  15. Importance of Protecting Ground Water • 50% of drinking water in USA is from GW • 95% of rural America is dependant on GW • 21% of water withdrawals in USA are GW • GW use increased from 13 x 1010 L/day in 1950 to 33 x 1010 L/day in 2000 • Once GW is contaminated, remediation is very costly or impossible

  16. Primitive model assumptions –model set up and initial conditions Uniform sandstone formation ~ 30 meters thick Sandstone hydraulic conductivity = 1 cm/day Sandstone porosity = 0.10 Recharge is steady at 1 cm/year Water table parallel to sloping ground surface at a depth of 5 meters Lateral head gradient is ~ 0.035 m/m Longitudinal dispersion = 1.0 m, lateral dispersion 10.0 cm

More Related