USGS Release: The Chemistry of Waters that Follow from Fracking: A Case Study (5/11/2015 8:49:26 AM)

USGS Release: The Chemistry of Waters that Follow from Fracking: A Case Study (5/11/2015 8:49:26 AM).

USGS Release: Historical Hydraulic Fracturing Trends and Data Unveiled in New USGS Publications (1/27/2015 12:35:41 PM)

USGS Release: Historical Hydraulic Fracturing Trends and Data Unveiled in New USGS Publications (1/27/2015 12:35:41 PM).

New Research: USGS In-Depth Study of Fracking from 1947-2010 | Marcellus Drilling News

New Research: USGS In-Depth Study of Fracking from 1947-2010 | Marcellus Drilling News.

 

link to full report inside

New Utica Assessment USGS vs Selleck maps.pdf

New Utica Assessment USGS vs Selleck maps.pdf.

Salt Production in Syracuse, New York (“The Salt City”) and the Hydrogeology of the Onondaga Creek Valley The Salt Industry, Tully Farms, N

pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2000/0139/report.pdf.

Prepared in cooperation with Onondaga Lake Cleanup Corporation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-Region 2,

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

Salt Production in Syracuse, New York (“The Salt City”)

and the Hydrogeology of the Onondaga Creek Valley

The Salt Industry, Tully Farms, N

Brine from springs in and around the southern end of Onondaga Lake, from former brine wells dug

or drilled at the lakes’ edge, and from wells that tapped halite (common salt) beds near Tully, N.Y., 15

miles south of Syracuse, were used commercially from the late 1700’s through the early 1900’s for salt

production. The rapid development of this industry in tie 18th and 19th centuries led to the nicknaming

of Syracuse as “The Salt City.”

The brine originates from halite bed

Putting Local Aquifer Protections in Place in New York

Putting Local Aquifer Protections in Place in New York.

 

 

March 16, 2013

Putting Local Aquifer Protections in Place

A USGS report released this week on the hydrogeology of the aquifer system in the Susquehanna River Valley in parts of Broome and Chenango Counties, New York highlights the role of aquifer protection in the context of gas drilling impacts. In the section, “Considerations for Aquifer Protection,” the report states:

“Aquifer protection in the study area is a topic of public concern in relation to the potential for natural gas drilling in this part of New York. Aquifer protection efforts likely will focus on currently used resources. Information provided in this report may help managers prioritize protection of largely unused aquifers whose characteristics suggest that they are capable of providing large public or commercial water supplies.” p. 17.

In the press release accompanying the report, the author of the report, USGS scientist Paul Heisig, states,”This study is intended to put basic facts into the hands of those tasked with making decisions on future groundwater use and protection. We have identified and mapped a variety of aquifer types and described their current use and their potential as groundwater sources.”

Local officials and concerned citizens in the study area now have excellent information to assist efforts to put appropriate aquifer protections in place. Because the study area is located in an area that is likely to be the target of some of the first high volume horizontal hydrofracking (HVHF) activity in New York if HVHF is allowed to go forward in the state, if local aquifer protections are sought in the area, such efforts should be initiated quickly.

The report and accompanying maps are among the most detailed and comprehensive reports and maps yet produced in the ongoing effort of USGS and the DEC to issue detailed maps of New York’s aquifers. The report fills a gap in that effort. The report maps the section of the Susquehanna River Valley shown between sections 10 and 33 on the map below of the detailed reports produced so far. Another report recently released by USGS on the Cayuta Creek and Catatonk Creek valley aquifers, fills the gap above sections 32 and 27 on the map below.

One of the most important aspects of the newly released Susquehanna River valley aquifer report is the detailed consideration given to the upland watersheds and the fractured bedrock aquifers in those watersheds. The report points out the close connections between the uplands and the valley aquifers:

“If water quality in those streams [flowing from the uplands] is compromised by activites in the upland watershed, groundwater quality in the valley may, in turn, be degraded; therefore, the maintenance of good water quality in the upland watersheds that are the source of these streams is an important aspect of protecting the Susquehanna River valley-fill aquifer system.”

While a number of communities in New York have put aquifer protection strategies in place, many more communities are becoming aware of the need to do so and are looking at protection options. I spoke about watershed protection options recently at a program in Elmira on Feb. 22, 2013, and am scheduled to speak again on the topic at a program in Candor on March 27, 2013. Some of the options I discussed were zoning to create aquifer protection districts, establishing critical environmental areas under the State Environmental Quality Review Act regulations, obtaining sole source aquifer status from the federal EPA, establishing municipal compacts and setting up watershed protection associations. Slides and notes from my presentation in Elmira are posted on my law office website.

Posted by Rachel Treichler at 03/16/13 12:30 PM

Copyright 2013, Rachel Treichler

USGS WaterNow: On-demand current-conditions for water data directly to your mobile phone or email

USGS WaterNow: On-demand current-conditions for water data directly to your mobile phone or email.

USGS Scientific Investigations Report 2012-5282: Hydrogeology of the Susquehanna River Valley-Fill Aquifer System and Adjacent Areas in Eastern Broome and Southeastern Chenango Counties, New York

USGS Scientific Investigations Report 2012-5282: Hydrogeology of the Susquehanna River Valley-Fill Aquifer System and Adjacent Areas in Eastern Broome and Southeastern Chenango Counties, New York.

Prepared in cooperation with New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

Hydrogeology of the Susquehanna River Valley-Fill Aquifer System and Adjacent Areas in Eastern Broome and Southeastern Chenango Counties, New York

By Paul M. Heisig

Thumbnail of and link to report PDF (3.56 MB)Abstract

The hydrogeology of the valley-fill aquifer system along a 32-mile reach of the Susquehanna River valley and adjacent areas was evaluated in eastern Broome and southeastern Chenango Counties, New York. The surficial geology, inferred ice-marginal positions, and distribution of stratified-drift aquifers were mapped from existing data. Ice-marginal positions, which represent pauses in the retreat of glacial ice from the region, favored the accumulation of coarse-grained deposits whereas more steady or rapid ice retreat between these positions favored deposition of fine-grained lacustrine deposits with limited coarse-grained deposits at depth. Unconfined aquifers with thick saturated coarse-grained deposits are the most favorable settings for water-resource development, and three several-mile-long sections of valley were identified (mostly in Broome County) as potentially favorable: (1) the southernmost valley section, which extends from the New York–Pennsylvania border to about 1 mile north of South Windsor, (2) the valley section that rounds the west side of the umlaufberg (an isolated bedrock hill within a valley) north of Windsor, and (3) the east–west valley section at the Broome County–Chenango County border from Nineveh to East of Bettsburg (including the lower reach of the Cornell Brook valley). Fine-grained lacustrine deposits form extensive confining units between the unconfined areas, and the water-resource potential of confined aquifers is largely untested.

Recharge, or replenishment, of these aquifers is dependent not only on infiltration of precipitation directly on unconfined aquifers, but perhaps more so from precipitation that falls in adjacent upland areas. Surface runoff and shallow groundwater from the valley walls flow downslope and recharge valley aquifers. Tributary streams that drain upland areas lose flow as they enter main valleys on permeable alluvial fans. This infiltrating water also recharges valley aquifers.

Current (2012) use of water resources in the area is primarily through domestic wells, most of which are completed in fractured bedrock in upland areas. A few villages in the Susquehanna River valley have supply wells that draw water from beneath alluvial fans and near the Susquehanna River, which is a large potential source of water from induced infiltration.

First posted February 20, 2013

  • Appendix 1 XLS (864 kB)
    Well data for Susquehanna River valley and adjacent uplands, eastern Broome and southeastern Chenango Counties, New York.
  • Plate 1 html
    Hydrogeology of the Susquehanna valley-fill aquifer system and adjacent areas in eastern Broome and southeastern Chenango Counties, New York

For additional information contact:
Director
U.S. Geological Survey
New York Water Science Center
425 Jordan Road
Troy, NY 12180
(518) 285-5600
http://ny.water.usgs.gov

COMMENTS
What the USGS are saying is that these three regions/locations are prime for “developers” (AKA drillers) to sink MAJOR water wells to supply frack operations. This paper relates to what I heard a Senior SRBS scientist present last year, that SRBC was quite concerned that as gas drilling moved North from PA it would be getting to the “headwaters regions (low water volume) of the Susq and other rivers and thus they anticipated more emphasis by the drillers to use groundwater for their fracking uses.
This directly goes to the issue of impacts on water quantity of residential and public water wells; that is what will a big mother of a “comercial” well by a driller do to the QUANTITY of water available from your private well.  In other words, will your water well dry up?
This is an issue that is NOT adressed at all in NYS draft regs OR the rdSGEIS – only pre-drill baseline testing of wells near(1000ft) a proposed well pad need be tested by the driller for QUALITY.
The potential impact on private property values is clear; mitigation by drilling a private well deeper would probably work, although I dont know enoug hydrology to float a boat, so to speak.
————————————
“Unconfined aquifers with thick saturated coarse-grained deposits are the most favorable settings for water-resource development, and three several-mile-long sections of valley were identified (mostly in Broome County) as potentially favorable: (1) the southernmost valley section, which extends from the New York–Pennsylvania border to about 1 mile north of South Windsor, (2) the valley section that rounds the west side of the umlaufberg (an isolated bedrock hill within a valley) north of Windsor, and (3) the east–west valley section at the Broome County–Chenango County border from Nineveh to East of Bettsburg (including the lower reach of the Cornell Brook valley).”
————————————
Finally, this water source/quantity issue will apply equally to regions further north of the NY/PA border, and one hope USGS is studying such; remember, drilling a bit north likely wont be marcellus but rather the deeper Utica Shale.
S
Stan Scobie, Binghamton, NY, 607-669-4683

Putting Local Aquifer Protections in Place in New York. Rachel Treichler

Fracking Has the USGS Been Co-opted?

RWMA Newsletter – Fracking Special Edition 2012.

Fracking

Has the USGS Been Co-opted?

Landscape Consequences of Natural Gas Extraction in Bradford and Washington Counties, Pennsylvania,

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2012/1154/of2012-1154.pdf

Landscape Consequences of Natural Gas Extraction in Bradford and Washington Counties, Pennsylvania, 2004–2010

E.T. Slonecker, L.E. Milheim, C.M. Roig-Silva, A.R. Malizia, D.A. Marr, and G.B. Fisher

Thumbnail of and link to report PDF (3.21 MB)Abstract

Increased demands for cleaner burning energy, coupled with the relatively recent technological advances in accessing unconventional hydrocarbon-rich geologic formations, led to an intense effort to find and extract natural gas from various underground sources around the country. One of these sources, the Marcellus Shale, located in the Allegheny Plateau, is undergoing extensive drilling and production. The technology used to extract gas in the Marcellus Shale is known as hydraulic fracturing and has garnered much attention because of its use of large amounts of fresh water, its use of proprietary fluids for the hydraulic-fracturing process, its potential to release contaminants into the environment, and its potential effect on water resources. Nonetheless, development of natural gas extraction wells in the Marcellus Shale is only part of the overall natural gas story in the area of Pennsylvania. Coalbed methane, which is sometimes extracted using the same technique, is often located in the same general area as the Marcellus Shale and is frequently developed in clusters across the landscape. The combined effects of these two natural gas extraction methods create potentially serious patterns of disturbance on the landscape. This document quantifies the landscape changes and consequences of natural gas extraction for Bradford County and Washington County, Pennsylvania, between 2004 and 2010. Patterns of landscape disturbance related to natural gas extraction activities were collected and digitized using National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) imagery for 2004, 2005/2006, 2008, and 2010. The disturbance patterns were then used to measure changes in land cover and land use using the National Land Cover Database (NLCD) of 2001. A series of landscape metrics is used to quantify these changes and are included in this publication.