ABSTRACT
Determining whether changes in groundwater methane concentration are naturally occurring or related to oil and gas operations can be complicated by numerous sources of variability. This study of 10 residential water supply wells in Northeastern Pennsylvania evaluates how i) sampling from different points within the water well system, ii) purging different water volumes prior to sampling, and ii) natural variation over time, affects concentrations of naturally occurring dissolved methane and other water quality parameters. Among the population of wells, all had dissolved methane concentrations >1mg/L. Regardless of the volume of water purged or the timing between events, the maximum change in methane concentration (ratio of maximum to minimum concentration) among samples from a single well was 3.2, with eight out of ten wells exhibiting a maximum change less than a factor of two (i.e., <±100%). Among water wells where methane concentration changed by ±50% or more, there was a strong correlation with changes in the concentrations of sodium, chloride, and other salinity indicators such as specific conductivity and TDS. This suggests that significant variability in methane concentration is predominantly related to changes in the relative volumes of sodium-rich fluids feeding the wellbore at any given time. Among study well locations with bladder and diaphragm pressure tanks, there was no significant difference in dissolved methane concentrations between samples collected either upstream or downstream of a pressure tank. There appears to be little benefit to purging multiple casing volumes of water from a well prior to sampling because such volumes tend to be much larger than those representative of normal residential use. We recommend purging a volume sufficient to remove standing water in the pressure tank and lines above the pump intake. This article culminates with additional recommendations for improving sample collection methods and interpreting sampling data.
ABSTRACT
Analysis of dissolved light hydrocarbon gas concentrations (primarily methane and ethane) in water supply wells is commonly used to establish conditions before and after drilling in areas of shale gas and oil extraction. Several methods are currently used to collect samples for dissolved gas analysis from water supply wells; however, the reliability of results obtained from these methods has not been quantified. This study compares dissolved methane and ethane concentrations measured in groundwater samples collected using three sampling methods employed in pre- and post-drill sampling programs in the Appalachian Basin. These include an open-system collection method where 40 mL volatile organic analysis (VOA) vials are filled directly while in contact with the atmosphere (Direct-Fill VOA) and two alternative methods: (1) a semi-closed system method whereby 40 mL VOA vials are filled while inverted under a head of water (Inverted VOA) and (2) a relatively new (2013) closed system method in which the sample is collected without direct contact with purge water or the atmosphere (IsoFlask® ). This study reveals that, in the absence of effervescence, the difference in methane concentrations between the three sampling methods was relatively small. However, when methane concentrations equaled or exceeded 20 mg/L (the approximate concentration at which effervescence occurs in the study area), IsoFlask® (closed system) samples yielded significantly higher methane concentrations than Direct-Fill VOA (open system) samples, and Inverted VOA (semi-closed system) samples yielded lower concentrations. These results suggest that open and semi-closed system sample collection methods are adequate for non-effervescing samples. However, the use of a closed system collection method provides the most accurate means for the measurement of dissolved hydrocarbon gases under all conditions.
