Feds warn residents near Wyoming gas drilling sites not to drink their water

By Abrahm Lustgarten, ProPublica

Natural gas production in Wyoming was called into question by residents concerned that it was contaminating their drinking water.

The federal government is warning residents in a small Wyoming town with extensive natural gas development not to drink their water, and to use fans and ventilation when showering or washing clothes in order to avoid the risk of an explosion.

The announcement accompanied results from a second round of testing and analysis in the town of Pavillion by Superfund investigators for the Environmental Protection Agency. Researchers found benzene, metals, naphthalene, phenols and methane in wells and in groundwater. They also confirmed the presence of other compounds that they had tentatively identified last summer and that may be linked to drilling activities.

“Last week it became clear to us that the information that we had gathered” “was going to potentially result in a hazard — result in a recommendation to some of you that you not continue to drink your water,” Martin Hestmark, deputy assistant regional administrator for ecosystems protection and remediation with the EPA in Denver, told a crowd of about 100 gathered at a community center in Pavillion Tuesday night. “We understand the gravity of that.”

Representatives of the EPA and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, which made the health recommendation, said they had not determined the cause of the contamination and said it was too early to tell whether gas drilling was to blame. In addition to contaminants related to oil and gas, the agency detected pesticides in some wells, and significant levels of nitrates in one sample — signs that agricultural pollution could be partly to blame. The EPA’s final report on Pavillion’s water is expected early next year.

ProPublica first drew attention to Pavillion’s water [1] in late 2008, and reported extensively [2] on the EPA’s ongoing investigation there last August.

EnCana, the oil and gas company that owns most of the wells near Pavillion, has agreed to contribute to the cost of supplying residents with drinking water, even though the company has not accepted responsibility for the contamination.

EnCana spokesman Doug Hock told ProPublica in an e-mail that the petroleum hydrocarbon compounds the EPA found “covers an extremely wide spectrum of chemicals, many of which aren’t associated with oil and gas.”

“ATSDR’s suggestion to landowners was based upon high levels of inorganics — sodium and sulfate that are naturally occurring in the area,” he said.

EPA scientists began investigating Pavillion’s water in 2008 after residents complained about foul smells, illness and discolored water, and after state agencies declined to investigate. Last August the EPA found contaminants in a quarter of samples taken during the first stage of its investigation, and the agency announced it would continue with another round of samples — the set being disclosed now.

In the meeting Tuesday, the agency shared results from tests of 23 wells, 19 of which supply drinking water to residents. It found low levels of hydrocarbon compounds — various substances that make up oil — in 89 percent of the drinking water wells it tested. Methane gas was detected in seven of the wells and was determined to have come from the gas reservoir being tapped for energy. Eleven of the wells contained low levels of the compound 2-butoxyethanol phosphate — a compound associated with drilling processes but that is also used as a fire retardant and a plasticizer.

The scientists also found extremely high levels of benzene, a carcinogen, and other compounds in groundwater samples taken near old drilling disposal pits. Some of the samples were taken less than 200 yards from drinking water sources and scientists expressed concerns that the contaminated water was connected to drinking water wells by an underground aquifer.

“The groundwater associated with some inactive oil and gas production pits” “is in fact highly contaminated,” Ayn Schmit, a scientist with the EPA’s ecosystems protection program, told residents. But she also cautioned that the EPA has not determined the cause of the contamination and is continuing its investigation.

Related:

The price of gas: A Need to Know investigation

 
SUGGESTED STORIES
  • Differing views on fracking's impact
    Studies conducted on the counties above the Marcellus and Barnett Shale for example — where extensive drilling has already taken place — present mixed economic results.
  • thumb
    Too much solar energy?
    The proliferation of privately owned solar has large power companies in Germany worried.
  • thumb
    Nominee has industry ties
    Energy secretary nominee had deep connections to industry, including as a paid adviser to BP until 2011.

Comments

  • jan

    Use fans or ventilation while showering or washing clothes to avoid the risk of an explosion? That is truly frightening.

  • Jeanne

    What are we going to do when the cost of water is $5 a gallon?! We will be importing our water while the industry exports our natural gas.

  • Anne

    How could NBC news have a feature this past week about “fracking” in Pennsylvania and allow a company rep say there was no evidence of this operating system having a negative impact on ground water?

  • Mariajosekeough

    American dream is death, big companies and corporations now own the land of the free. There it is no more freedom in your country. You are going to be thirsty, hungry and slaved. How are you going to let this happen without a fight. I guess with all the drugs on your children, they are going to be militarized and hypnotized that they should die for the country, when there it is no excuse to die for an slaved country no more. You are not free anymore you are owned by a corrupted country, and to think that it all happened to third world countries before. Corruption is your enemy, the Elite are the enemy. Don’t let your flag of freedom die in vain. You all had a wonderful country.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_BPUFZKJTBFQHYFOLUDBXGEZKPE KJR

    “ATSDR’s suggestion to landowners was based upon high levels of inorganics — sodium and sulfate that are naturally occurring in the area,” he said.
    That’s a bit disingenious of him to claim.