210 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Update on onshore disposal of offshore drilling wastes
The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is developing effluent limitations guidelines to govern discharges of cuttings from wells drilled using synthetic-based muds. To support this rulemaking, Argonne National Laboratory was asked by EPA and the US Department of Energy (DOE) to collect current information about those onshore commercial disposal facilities that are permitted to receive offshore drilling wastes. Argonne contacted state officials in Louisiana, Texas, California and Alaska to obtain this information. The findings, collected during October and November 1999, are presented by state
Recommended from our members
Putting 'international' back in IPEC.
During the previous six annual sessions of the International Petroleum Environmental Conference (IPEC), little attention has been given to international issues. Although the US is clearly a leader in oil field research and regulatory development information is available on interesting projects throughout the world Many participants in IPEC have little exposure to international oil and gas environmental problems and solutions. Beginning with the 7th IPEC, a stronger effort is being made to include international issues in the confidence. This paper describes some of the author's experiences in working with international oil and gas environmental issues in North America, Latin America, Europe, and Asia. Among the topics to be discussed are the issues that developing oil and gas-producing nations face and the need for sensitivity to other nation's cultures and legal systems
Recommended from our members
Downhole oil/water separators - What's new?
The US Department of Energy's (DOE's) National Petroleum Technology Office is interested in new technologies that can bring oil to the surface at a lower cost or with less environment impact. DOE is particularly interested in technologies that can accomplish both of these goals, and downhole oil/water separators (DOWS) seem to achieve that. They have the potential to reduce operating costs while providing a greater degree of environmental protection. DOE learned of the innovative DOWS technology and funded a team from Argonne National Laboratory, CH2M Hill (a private-sector consulting firm), and the Nebraska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (a state agency) to conduct an independent evaluation of the technical feasibility, economic viability, and regulatory applicability of the DOWS technology. The results of that investigation were published in January 1999 and represent the most complete publicly available reference material on DOWs technology (the full text of the report can be downloaded from Argonne's website at www.ead.anl.gov). Other abbreviated versions of this information have been published during the past year. Last January, in the 1999 Produced Water Seminar, the author provided an overview of the DOWS technology. For the 2000 Produced Water Seminar, the author is providing updated information on DOWS and related technologies. To set the stage for the new information, the next few sections provided a review of previously reported information
Recommended from our members
Update on cavern disposal of NORM-contaminated oil field wastes.
Some types of oil and gas production and processing wastes contain naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM). If NORM is present at concentrations above regulatory levels in oil field waste, the waste requires special disposal practices. The existing disposal options for wastes containing NORM are limited and costly. Argonne National Laboratory has previously evaluated the feasibility, legality, risk and economics of disposing of nonhazardous oil field wastes, other than NORM waste, in salt caverns. Cavern disposal of nonhazardous oil field waste, other than NORM waste, is occurring at four Texas facilities, in several Canadian facilities, and reportedly in Europe. This paper evaluates the legality, technical feasibility, economics, and human health risk of disposing of NORM-contaminated oil field wastes in salt caverns as well. Cavern disposal of NORM waste is technically feasible and poses a very low human health risk. From a legal perspective, a review of federal regulations and regulations from several states indicated that there are no outright prohibitions against NORM disposal in salt caverns or other Class II wells, except for Louisiana which prohibits disposal of radioactive wastes or other radioactive materials in salt domes. Currently, however, only Texas and New Mexico are working on disposal cavern regulations, and no states have issued permits to allow cavern disposal of NORM waste. On the basis of the costs currently charged for cavern disposal of nonhazardous oil field waste (NOW), NORM waste disposal in caverns is likely to be cost competitive with existing NORM waste disposal methods when regulatory agencies approve the practice
Management of water extracted from carbon sequestration projects
Throughout the past decade, frequent discussions and debates have centered on the geological sequestration of carbon dioxide (CO{sub 2}). For sequestration to have a reasonably positive impact on atmospheric carbon levels, the anticipated volume of CO{sub 2} that would need to be injected is very large (many millions of tons per year). Many stakeholders have expressed concern about elevated formation pressure following the extended injection of CO{sub 2}. The injected CO{sub 2} plume could potentially extend for many kilometers from the injection well. If not properly managed and monitored, the increased formation pressure could stimulate new fractures or enlarge existing natural cracks or faults, so the CO{sub 2} or the brine pushed ahead of the plume could migrate vertically. One possible tool for management of formation pressure would be to extract water already residing in the formation where CO{sub 2} is being stored. The concept is that by removing water from the receiving formations (referred to as 'extracted water' to distinguish it from 'oil and gas produced water'), the pressure gradients caused by injection could be reduced, and additional pore space could be freed up to sequester CO{sub 2}. Such water extraction would occur away from the CO{sub 2} plume to avoid extracting a portion of the sequestered CO{sub 2} along with the formation water. While water extraction would not be a mandatory component of large-scale carbon storage programs, it could provide many benefits, such as reduction of pressure, increased space for CO{sub 2} storage, and potentially, 'plume steering.' Argonne National Laboratory is developing information for the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) to evaluate management of extracted water. If water is extracted from geological formations designated to receive injected CO{sub 2} for sequestration, the project operator will need to identify methods for managing very large volumes of water most of which will contain large quantities of salt and other dissolved minerals. Produced water from oil and gas production also typically contains large quantities of dissolved solids. Therefore, many of the same practices that are established and used for managing produced water also may be applicable for extracted water. This report describes the probable composition of the extracted water that is removed from the formations, options for managing the extracted water, the pros and cons of those options, and some opportunities for beneficial use of the water. Following the introductory material in Chapter 1, the report is divided into chapters covering the following topics: (Chapter 2) examines the formations that are likely candidates for CO{sub 2} sequestration and provides a general evaluation of the geochemical characteristics of the formations; (Chapter 3) makes some preliminary estimates of the volume of water that could be extracted; (Chapter 4) provides a qualitative review of many potential technologies and practices for managing extracted water and for each technology or management practice, pros and cons are provided; (Chapter 5) explores the potential costs of water management; and (Chapter 6) presents the conclusions
A Holistic Look at Minimizing Adverse Environmental Impact Under Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act
Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires that “the location, design, construction, and capacity of cooling water intake structures reflect the best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact.” As the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) develops new regulations to implement Section 316(b), much of the debate has centered on adverse impingement and entrainment impacts of cooling-water intake structures. Depending on the specific location and intake layout, once-through cooling systems withdrawing many millions of gallons of water per day can, to a varying degree, harm fish and other aquatic organisms in the water bodies from which the cooling water is withdrawn. Therefore, opponents of once-through cooling systems have encouraged the EPA to require wet or dry cooling tower systems as the best technology available (BTA), without considering site-specific conditions
Recommended from our members
USE of Mine Pool Water for Power Plant Cooling.
Water and energy production issues intersect in numerous ways. Water is produced along with oil and gas, water runs off of or accumulates in coal mines, and water is needed to operate steam electric power plants and hydropower generating facilities. However, water and energy are often not in the proper balance. For example, even if water is available in sufficient quantities, it may not have the physical and chemical characteristics suitable for energy or other uses. This report provides preliminary information about an opportunity to reuse an overabundant water source--ground water accumulated in underground coal mines--for cooling and process water in electric generating facilities. The report was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), which has implemented a water/energy research program (Feeley and Ramezan 2003). Among the topics studied under that program is the availability and use of ''non-traditional sources'' of water for use at power plants. This report supports NETL's water/energy research program
Recommended from our members
Impact of drought on U.S. steam electric power plant cooling water intakes and related water resource management issues.
This report was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) Existing Plants Research Program, which has an energy-water research effort that focuses on water use at power plants. This study complements their overall research effort by evaluating water availability at power plants under drought conditions. While there are a number of competing demands on water uses, particularly during drought conditions, this report focuses solely on impacts to the U.S. steam electric power plant fleet. Included are both fossil-fuel and nuclear power plants. One plant examined also uses biomass as a fuel. The purpose of this project is to estimate the impact on generation capacity of a drop in water level at U.S. steam electric power plants due to climatic or other conditions. While, as indicated above, the temperature of the water can impact decisions to halt or curtail power plant operations, this report specifically examines impacts as a result of a drop in water levels below power plant submerged cooling water intakes. Impacts due to the combined effects of excessive temperatures of the returned cooling water and elevated temperatures of receiving waters (due to high ambient temperatures associated with drought) may be examined in a subsequent study. For this study, the sources of cooling water used by the U.S. steam electric power plant fleet were examined. This effort entailed development of a database of power plants and cooling water intake locations and depths for those plants that use surface water as a source of cooling water. Development of the database and its general characteristics are described in Chapter 2 of this report. Examination of the database gives an indication of how low water levels can drop before cooling water intakes cease to function. Water level drops are evaluated against a number of different power plant characteristics, such as the nature of the water source (river vs. lake or reservoir) and type of plant (nuclear vs. fossil fuel). This is accomplished in Chapter 3. In Chapter 4, the nature of any compacts or agreements that give priority to users (i.e., which users must stop withdrawing water first) is examined. This is examined on a regional or watershed basis, specifically for western water rights, and also as a function of federal and state water management programs. Chapter 5 presents the findings and conclusions of this study. In addition to the above, a related intent of this study is to conduct preliminary modeling of how lowered surface water levels could affect generating capacity and other factors at different regional power plants. If utility managers are forced to take some units out of service or reduce plant outputs, the fuel mix at the remaining plants and the resulting carbon dioxide emissions may change. Electricity costs and other factors may also be impacted. Argonne has conducted some modeling based on the information presented in the database described in Chapter 2 of this report. A separate report of the modeling effort has been prepared (Poch et al. 2009). In addition to the U.S. steam electric power plant fleet, this modeling also includes an evaluation of power production of hydroelectric facilities. The focus of this modeling is on those power plants located in the western United States
Recommended from our members
Information on commercial disposal facilities that may have received offshore drilling wastes.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is developing regulations that would establish requirements for discharging synthetic-based drill cuttings from offshore wells into the ocean. Justification for allowing discharges of these cuttings is that the environmental impacts from discharging drilling wastes into the ocean may be less harmful than the impacts from hauling them to shore for disposal. In the past, some onshore commercial facilities that disposed of these cuttings were improperly managed and operated and left behind environmental problems. This report provides background information on commercial waste disposal facilities in Texas, Louisiana, California, and Alaska that received or may have received offshore drilling wastes in the past and are now undergoing cleanup
- …