1 / 27

Comprehending Health Implications of Natural Gas Development Through Public Health Research

Comprehending Health Implications of Natural Gas Development Through Public Health Research. Roxana Witter, MD, MSPH roxana.witter@ucdenver.edu. American Public Health Association October 30, 2012. Natural Gas-Shale Gas-Unconventional Gas. 2010-2035: 29 % increase in NG production

nan
Download Presentation

Comprehending Health Implications of Natural Gas Development Through Public Health Research

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. Comprehending Health Implications of Natural Gas Development Through Public Health Research Roxana Witter, MD, MSPH roxana.witter@ucdenver.edu • American Public Health Association • October 30, 2012

  2. Natural Gas-Shale Gas-Unconventional Gas • 2010-2035: • 29 % increase in NG production • Most of the increase is in shale gas

  3. Public Health Research and Literature- In its infancy • Environment Health Perspectives News, 2011 • Review of water, air, regulatory, concerns and lack of health effects studies • Finkel, 2011 AJPH Commentary • Hydraulic Fracturing Chemicals • Known: dangerous; some unknown • Multiple pathways for exposure • Guidotti, 2011 Arch EnviroOcc Health Editorial • Scientific uncertainty • Risk- risk tradeoffs • climate change vs. local environmental degradation

  4. Policy Responses to Public Health Concerns • Colorado sketches out proposed oil, gas setback rules • September 24, 2012 • State Health department won't enforce all oil and gas well clean-air rules • October 18, 2012 • New York State Plans Health Review as It Weighs Gas Drilling • September 20, 2012

  5. Pennsylvania Marcellus Shale Bill • February 14, 2012 • Restrict drilling within 1000 ft of a public water supply • Double distance from water wells • 250 ft 500 ft • Operator’s presumptive liability for pollution and water loss • 1,000 ft 2,500 ft

  6. Hazards to Public Health • Chemical • Water • Air • Physical • Noise • Traffic • Community • Population changes • Physical changes • Psychosocial • Stress • Susceptible subpopulations • Children • Elderly • Fetus • Chronic Disease • Poor

  7. Concerns About Water • Quantity • 1-2 million gallons/drill • 2-5 million gallons/hydraulic fracture • Quality • Chemicals • Hydraulic fracturing, drilling, naturally occurring • Contamination of ground water and surface water • Disposal • Salts, metals, hydrocarbons, radioactivity (NORM) • Earthquakes

  8. Water-recent Studies and DataPennsylvaniaOsborne, 2011 PNAS, Warner, 2012 PNAS • Active gas areas • Methane concentrations in drinking water higher close to gas wells • Geochemical evidence for natural fractures between shale gas formations and shallow aquifers • Increased risk for contamination, especially for fugitive gases

  9. Water-Recent Studies and DataPavillion, Wyoming EPA http://www.epa.gov/region8/superfund/wy/pavillion/ • Chemicals found in drinking water aquifer • Consistent with NG operations • Organic and inorganic chemicals • NG activities enhanced gas migration to aquifer • Deep source of contamination (wells, fracturing) • High pH, salts, petroleum hydrocarbons (BTEX gasoline range organics, trimethylbenzenes) synthetic organic compounds (isopropanol, di&triethylene glycol) • Shallow source of contamination (pits) • Benzene, xylenes, gasoline range and diesel range organics in shallow ground water USGS repeated analysis from 2 sites: similar findings

  10. /http://fracfocus.org

  11. Colorado Oil and Gas AssociationColorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission “an industry-led voluntary Baseline Groundwater Quality Sampling Program …” “to demonstrate that drilling operations are safe and do not compromise the quality of Colorado’s important water resources.” http://cogcc.state.co.us/COGIS/EnviroSample.asp?facid=750115

  12. Water Contamination- Risk Analysis Rozell, 2012 Risk Analysis • Probability bounds analysis • Modeled 5 possible water contamination pathways • Casing failure, fracture migrations, surface contamination, transportation, disposal • Wastewater disposal poses highest risk (by several orders of magnitude)

  13. Wastewater Management • Spray on roads, lands • Evaporation pits • Discharge to dry/flowing streambeds • (Municipal wastewater treatment) • Deep injection wells (EPA regulated) Commercial treatment Reuse/recycling Wastewater • Drilling fluids • Flowback water • Produced water • Hydrocarbons, BTEX, fracturing chemicals, salts, metals, NORM, barite Daily Kos.com

  14. WastewaterContaminationBalba, 2012 Chemosphere • High levels of arsenic and selenium in Marcellus shale • High volume hydraulic fracturing could mobilized these chemicals into wastewater, posing environmental hazard. Newsworks.org

  15. Air Quality • On site • Silica, Diesel exhaust, BTEX, PM, glutaraldehyde • Near pad • Diesel exhaust, BTEX, PM (PAH, SO4) • Regional • Ozone • Global • Methane BOLD= Preliminary data of levels

  16. SilicaNIOSH & OSHA • OSHA-NIOSH HAZARD ALERT • 11 sites in AR, CO, ND, PA, TX • 116 Personal breathing zone, full shift samples • Exceeded OSHA PEL, NIOSH REL, ACGIH TLV • 31% w/ levels above what respirator could handle Centers for Disease Control http://www.osha.gov/dts/hazardalerts/hydraulic_frac_hazard_alert.html

  17. Local Air Quality(near pad) Mckenzie, 2012 Sci Total Environ Health Risk Assessment • EPA screening assumptions • 24 samples from near well pad • 163 samples from ambient air in NG area • Risk of sub-chronic and chronic non- cancer health effects elevated • Excess cancer risk slightly higher National Geographic • Contributing Chemicals • Aliphatic hydrocarbons • Trimethylbenzenes • Benzene • Xylene • 1,3 Butadiene • Ethylbenzene

  18. Suspected Effects on Pets, Livestock, Humans Bamberger, 2012 New Solutions • Case series (24) • Animal owners in six states (CO, LA, NY, OH, PA, TX) • Water exposures • Well casing failures, blowouts, wastewater dumping and leakage, fracturing/drilling chemical spills • Air exposures • Flares, compressor station • Animal health effects • Reproduction, milk production, poor condition (skin, GI, urological, respiratory, neurological), death • Human (owner) effects • Respiratory, neurological, skin, GI Frank Finan

  19. Regional Wintertime Ozone Wyoming, Utah Schnell, 2009 Nature Geoscience NOx from combustion VOCfrom wells, tanks, compressors Sunlight Snow reflection Ozone 100-125 ppb NAAQS 75 ppb JENNIFER FRAZIER http://deq.state.wy.us/aqd/Ozone%20Main.asp http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_20042330

  20. Predicted Regional Ozone Impacts in TX and LA Kembal-Cook, 2010 EnviroSci Technology • Ozone Impacts of Natural Gas Development in the Haynesville Shale • Increases of 5 ppb from increased precursors 2 to NG FIGURE 4. Twelve km grid ozone modeling results: a) Episode average difference in daily maximum 8-h ozone (ppb): Haynesville Low Secenario-2012 Baseline and b) Episode average difference in daily maximum 8-h ozone (ppb): Haynesville High Scenario-2012 Baseline and c) Episode maximum difference in daily maximum 8-h ozone (ppb): Haynesville Low Scenario-2012 Baseline and d) Episode maximum difference in daily maximum 8-h ozone (ppb): Haynesville High Scenario-2012 Baseline.

  21. Global Climate Change & NG Lifecycle Topic of much debate and uncertainty NG Combustion • Less CO2 emissions than coal • Also less mercury into the atmosphere NG Whole lifecycle • Methane 20x stronger GHG • Methane leakage • Extraction • Processing • Distribution • Inefficient engines

  22. Lifecycle GHG EmissionsBased on emission estimates • Howarth, 2011 Climatic Change • Shale gas > conventional gas> coal • Weber, 2012 Environ SciTechnol • Shale gas = conventional gas < coal • Burnham 2012 Environ. SciTechnol • Shale gas = conventional gas < coal • Alvarez, 2012 PNAS • NG < coal (electricity generation); • NG > gasoline, diesel (transportation) • Due to inefficient engines and leaky distribution system

  23. CO2 emissions from power plants decreased in 2009 relative to 2008, due to cheaper NG Lu, 2012 Environ. Sci. Technol.

  24. Methane Leaks http://www.picarro.com/about_picarro/ Nathan Phillips, Picarro

  25. Measurements of GHG in Atmosphere Greater than Estimates • Katzenstein, et al 2003 • Methane and other hydrocarbon emissions from oil and gas fields underestimated • Petron, 2012 J Geophysical Atmospheres • Methane from Natural Gas activities in Colorado likely underestimated by a factor of 2

  26. Planned Research • University of Colorado • Air and water quality, social science, human health, information technology, outreach and education • Colorado State University • Assess air emissions and dispersion of drilling, hydraulic fracturing, flowback in Garfield County, CO • Data released in 2015 • Geisinger Health System • Pennsylvania integrated health care delivery system • Longitudinal dataset of health outcomes for researchers to determine NG related health outcomes • Health, environmental, community, occupational data

  27. Thank You!

More Related