Impact of Shale Gas Development on Water Resources: A Case Study in Northern Poland

Abstract

Shale gas is currently being explored in Europe as an alternative energy source to conventional oil and gas. There is, however, increasing concern about the potential environmental impacts of shale gas extraction by hydraulic fracturing (fracking). In this study, we focussed on the potential impacts on regional water resources within the Baltic Basin in Poland, both in terms of quantity and quality. The future development of the shale play was modeled for the time period 2015–2030 using the LUISA modeling framework. We formulated two scenarios which took into account the large range in technology and resource requirements, as well as two additional scenarios based on the current legislation and the potential restrictions which could be put in place. According to these scenarios, between 0.03 and 0.86 % of the total water withdrawals for all sectors could be attributed to shale gas exploitation within the study area. A screening-level assessment of the potential impact of the chemicals commonly used in fracking was carried out and showed that due to their wide range of physicochemical properties, these chemicals may pose additional pressure on freshwater ecosystems. The legislation put in place also influenced the resulting environmental impacts of shale gas extraction. Especially important are the protection of vulnerable ground and surface water resources and the promotion of more water-efficient technologies.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00267-015-0454-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A critical review of water uptake by shales

“…Sometimes, after fracturing operation the well is shut-in without a brief flow back period. On average, only 6-10% of the injected water is recovered in the US across all shale plays (Vandecasteele et al 2015;Mantell 2013), whereas the unrecovered part of the injected fluid is believed to be imbibed by surrounding shale matrix, microfractures and other fracture network through various mechanisms. The recovered amount of water tends to be two times more in the case of liquid shale plays (Bakken, Eagle Ford, Mississippi Lime) compared to the recovered amount in the case of dry gas shale plays…”

We Are Best Friends: Animals in Society

“…This is not surprising, as these articles cite many of the "Animal-Focused Articles" listed above as supporting evidence. For instance, studies show that chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing pose a risk to ecosystems (Entrekin et al 2018;He et al 2017;Loh and Loh 2016;Vandecasteele et al 2015;Yao et al 2015). Specifically, Kassotis et al (2016b) find that injection well disposal sites reveal elevated levels of toxins that could disrupt reproduction and development in aquatic animals (see, e.g., Elliott et al 2017).…”

Is There Scientific Evidence to Support the Selection of Hydraulic Fracturing Rules?

“…In the process of developing new basins, the long term optimal water demand for hydraulic fracturing is only understood after the appropriate methodology applicable to the particular unconventional resource has been proven, hence, the concept of analogue formations must be treated cautiously. In a review (Vandecasteele et al 2015) of potential water demand for hydraulic fracturing in the development of the Baltic Basin in northern Poland a reserved approach identifies the likely range of 8,000 to 19,000 m 3 water per well, however, quoted supporting data indicates a possible range 5,000 to 50,000 m 3 water per well, only time will tell. Other than for coal bed methane development, ongoing return of water (produced water) is minimal after the initial relaxation (flowback) of the reservoir.…”