Conventional Fossil Fuel Extraction, Associated Biogeochemical Processes, and Topography Influence Methane Groundwater Concentrations in Appalachia.

The production of fossil fuels, including oil, gas, and coal, retains a dominant share in US energy production and serves as a major anthropogenic source of methane, a greenhouse gas with a high warming potential. In addition to directly emitting methane into the air, fossil fuel production can release methane into groundwater, and that methane may eventually reach the atmosphere. In this study, we collected 311 water samples from an unconventional oil and gas (UOG) production region in Pennsylvania and an oil and gas (O&G) and coal production region across Ohio and West Virginia. Methane concentration was negatively correlated to distance to the nearest O&G well in the second region, but such a correlation was shown to be driven by topography as a confounding variable. Furthermore, sulfate concentration was negatively correlated with methane concentration and with distance to coal mining in the second region, and these correlations were robust even when considering topography. We hypothesized that coal mining enriched sulfate in groundwater, which in turn inhibited methanogenesis and enhanced microbial methane oxidation. Thus, this study highlights the complex interplay of multiple factors in shaping groundwater methane concentrations, including biogeochemical conversion, topography, and conventional fossil extraction.

Groundwater Methane in Northeastern Pennsylvania Attributable to Thermogenic Sources and Hydrogeomorphologic Migration Pathways.

Conflicting evidence exists as to whether or not unconventional oil and gas (UOG) development has enhanced methane transport into groundwater aquifers over the past 15 years. In this study, recent groundwater samples were collected from 90 domestic wells and 4 springs in Northeastern Pennsylvania located above the Marcellus Shale after more than a decade of UOG development. No statistically significant correlations were observed between the groundwater methane level and various UOG geospatial metrics, including proximity to UOG wells and well violations, as well as the number of UOG wells and violations within particular radii. The δ13C and methane-to-higher chain hydrocarbon signatures suggested that the elevated methane levels were not attributable to UOG development nor could they be explained by using simple biogenic-thermogenic end-member mixing models. Instead, groundwater methane levels were significantly correlated with geochemical water type and topographical location. Comparing a subset of contemporary methane measurements to their co-located pre-drilling records (n = 64 at 49 distinct locations) did not indicate systematic increases in methane concentration but did reveal several cases of elevated concentration (n = 12) across a spectrum of topographies. Multiple lines of evidence suggested that the high-concentration groundwater methane could have originated from shallow thermogenic methane that migrated upward into groundwater aquifers with Appalachian Basin brine.

Implications of Social Distancing Policies on Drinking Water Infrastructure: An Overview of the Challenges to and Responses of U.S. Utilities during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Social distancing policies (SDPs) implemented throughout the United States in response to COVID-19 have led to spatial and temporal shifts in drinking water demand and, for water utilities, created sociotechnical challenges. During this unique period, many water utilities have been forced to operate outside of design conditions with reduced workforce and financial capacities. Few studies have examined how water utilities respond to a pandemic; such methods are even absent from many emergency response plans. Here, we documented how utilities have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted a qualitative analysis of 30 interviews with 53 practitioners spanning 28 U.S. water utilities. Our aim was to, first, understand the challenges experienced by utilities and changes to operations (e.g., demand and deficit accounts) and, second, to document utilities' responses. Results showed that to maintain service continuity and implement SDPs, utilities had to overcome various challenges. These include supply chain issues, spatiotemporal changes in demand, and financial losses, and these challenges were largely dependent on the type of customers served (e.g., commercial or residential). Examples of utilities' responses include proactively ordering extra supplies and postponing capital projects. Although utilities' adaptations ensured the immediate provision of water services, their responses might have negative repercussions in the future (e.g., delayed projects contributing to aging infrastructure).