Arlington’s drinking water has changed since this Tomorrow Fund was born. The timing suspiciously correlates to when we started urban drilling.
Sorry to burst your feel good video balloon guys/gals, but this is blood money from urban drilling near our schools, churches, businesses and our homes. We need to save that cash to fund citizen medical treatments like bladder cancer….why?
Back on the City of Arlington’s 2001 Drinking Water Report
we only reported one detectable radioactive effluent called Beta/Photon Emitters. But in 2004
, we added Gross Alpha Particles AND Radium 228. Maybe we have Ft Worth to blame for disturbing all that NORM being brought up from the bowels of the earth with all that salty/brine waste water?
At least Arlington did NOT make this 2004 TeXas towns list of those that exceeded the Radium 226 illegal limit…
However Radium is in general a problem in Texas….
“A new report from the nonprofit Environmental Working Group finds more than 170 million people are exposed to the carcinogen
In 2011, Rowan et al. showed that high salinity mobilizes radionuclides, increasing exposure to radioactive waste. Their abstract study reads…”A positive correlation between the logs of TDS and radium activity can be demonstrated for the entire dataset, and controlling for this TDS dependence, Marcellus shale produced water samples contain statistically more radium than non-Marcellus samples. The radium isotopic ratio, Ra-228/Ra-226, in samples from the Marcellus Shale is generally less than 0.3, distinctly lower than the median values from other reservoirs. This ratio may serve as an indicator of the provenance or reservoir source of radium in samples of uncertain origin”.
Radium Content of Oil-and Gas-Field Produced Waters in the Northern Appalachian Basin (USA): Summary and Discussion of Data (PDF Download Available)
. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263658210_Radium_Content_of_Oil-and_Gas-Field_Produced_Waters_in_the_Northern_Appalachian_Basin_USA_Summary_and_Discussion_of_Data
[accessed May 3, 2017].
Ft Worth official, Fullenwider, reported back in 2010 http://bit.ly/2pC5aVh
…” Ten years ago (2000) there were no gas wells in town, Fullenwider said, but now there are 1,675 shale-gas wells within the city limits and over 100 brine disposal wells in the area.”
She went on to say…”Then, in 2004, there was a sharp increase in the number of wells drilled, and drilling operations began moving into more populated areas”
From 2003-2006, Arlington’a TTHM’s had a range of 4.4 – 5.8 ppb and averaged only 5 ppb in PRE-drilling.
But now compare that to our POST-drilling average TTHM’s…..
2007= 8.1 ppb,
2009=14.7 ppb max 26 ppb (spill?),
The change was an increase in TTHM’s by a factor 2.6 or 160% increase in Arlington’s drinking water.
Our TTHMs have almost tripled since 2007
when this Tomorrow Fund was born.
Ft Worth’s TTHM’s have been chronically high* and have finally started dropping after 2012 which I believe correlates to the BUST timing of the reduced drilling in the Barnett Shale.
While both cities are still under the TTHM 80 ppb MCL (maximum contaminant level), to also see that Arlington’s TTHM’s started going UP correlating with the BOOM in drilling after 2007 helps make my case for how the blood money of urban drilling may be affecting our drinking water and our HEALTH.
But I don’t expect to see low TTHMS back to the 5 ppb for Arlington now that we have established production sites and keep in mind that Ft Worth has so many injection wells nearby in unincorporated areas. ALSO it won’t be long before Arlington gets an injection well right near the shores of our drinking water source at Lake Arlington! (update council rejected bid for injection well thank God!)
If NORM, TTHMs, & Bromate don’t impress you, then look at your water reports and see the one distinct constituent that is always a hair away from being illegal….it is our secondary disinfectant, Chloramine. FYI ozonation is our first line of disinfectant treatment.
But we NEED disinfectants!!! Yes but why so much? These microbes/bacteria are building up a resistance! Nature is so smart to defend itself.
……..end 2018 update…………..
Below is Ft Worth’s 2015 raw water report, some of which Arlington sources from too. Note that some tests are only done four times a year….
Why oh why won’t those microbes die?
An official from the Trinity River Authority commented of microbe testing….
“The testing methods that determine species and viability are very complicated and expensive so most entities choose to go with the common enumeration method. That being said, it is important to test for these indicator organisms at the untreated/raw water intake point because they are resistant to the typical chemical disinfection processes that use chlorine and the number of ingested viable cysts required for infection is pretty low“.
And it is not just the TRA admitting to chlorine resistant bacteria…….
The CLEAR team finds pathogenic bacteria in highly chlorinated water from a public water supply well. These startling findings and more to be published in one of our next scientific manuscripts.
So as a concerned Arlington citizen do I
blame the animal/human poopers for the
detects of microorganisms in the Ft Worth
raw water report? Not so fast!
Earlier UTA CLEAR also had a white paper published and highlighted areas included:
- “Geospatial modeling correlated groundwater chemicals to Barnett fractured wells,
- Increased Beryllium strongly associated with hydraulically fractured gas well
- Indirect evidence of pollutant migration via microannular fissures in well casings
On UTA CLEAR”S publications page they wrote…..
Characterizing Microbial Contamination of Groundwater
“CLEAR takes a comprehensive view of water quality analysis. Recently, new tests have shown that populations of bacteria can be altered in conjunction with chemical contamination of water supplies. This is a very new development in an understudied area of research. Our working hypothesis is that the presence of chemical constituents can upset the natural balance of microbial communities, enabling the grow of bacteria, which in some cases, could be more deleterious than the chemicals themselves with respect to human exposure. We are currently drafting our first manuscript on this topic for peer review. Featured will be our use of both mass spectrometric and biochemical methods for characterizing bacterial populations in a variety of groundwater samples”.
The frackers like to frack with surface water and per and industry source…..
“Surface water, almost without exception, contains large populations of microorganisms, such as sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRBs) and acid-producing bacteria (APBs). So when a production company hires a service company to hydraulically frac a well, it is setting into motion a process that potentially holds both risk and reward. Hydraulic fracturing can open new parts of the reservoir for production; but it simultaneously injects microbes into fractured zones that can become established and cause serious problems, including formation damage, biogenic hydrogen sulfide (H2S), microbiologically influenced corrosion (MIC), and low-quality flowback water. Chemical companies exist to nullify these situations.”
“Bacteria are the arch-nemeses of hydraulically fractured wells, because water is the main ingredient in the fluids injected into oil and gas reservoirs during frac treatments.”
“…leading oilfield chemists have learned through exhaustive research and countless field applications over many decades: how virulent a bacterium can be if it finds a nutrient-rich environment and is left to reproduce unchecked. The implications of this latter point are significant, especially for companies using hydraulic fracturing technology in combination with advanced horizontal drilling…”
“A liquid scale inhibitor is introduced at surface into the acid for a frac procedure;
the corrosion inhibitor is introduced into the linear gel flush solution to be injected following the acid stage;
and a registered biocide is introduced in the fresh water prior to the gel chemicals being added.”
“…Once introduced into the reservoir, extremely small amounts of inhibitor and biocide are produced back to the surface throughout the flowback period, until the well is placed on production.”
“After the fracing process is complete, highly-trained field technicians must monitor biocide levels in flowback fluids, gather and culture bacteria for enumeration studies, and adjust future treatment parameters based on empirical indicators. Close monitoring optimizes the effectiveness of biocide treatments, which helps sustain production by reducing safety and environmental risks, chemical consumption and operating costs.”
This is more than you wanted to know I’m sure.
So what did you just read about these biocides?…The point is the biocides attempting to control these #frackONcrack microbes are being injected in these disposal wells! You know these disposal wells have no bottom right? In our area they are injected into the old salty ocean called the Ellenberger.
We hope they stay down there.
We hope the casings hold.
We hope there are no spills along the way.
We hope the truck manifests ACCOUNT for all fluids that are evacuated daily from each storage tank that are driven to these injection wells.
Consider IF the proposed injection well near Lake Arlington ends up receiving PIPED IN toxic waste waters from nearby padsites, we hope the pipes forever hold all that corrosive brine materials.
We hope the plastic piping doesn’t leach the Houdini of hydrocarbons, Benzene, into nearby soil/water sources into nearby soil/water sources. Former Senator Wendy Davis once spoke at an Energy hearing in Ft Worth (that I was selected to speak at too) and was concerned that these plastic pipes carrying produced water
*Ft Worths TTHMs averaged 45 ppb from 2003-2012. The downward trend starting in 2013 could be related to the decrease in drilling the Barnett Shale…..
2003 39 ppb
2004 37 ppb
2005 48 ppb
2006 38 ppb
2007 51 ppb
2008 52 ppb
2009 45 ppb
2010 49 ppb
2011 50 ppb
2012 38 ppb
2013 22 ppb
2014 26 ppb
2015 28 ppb
2016 (report not out yet)