Lessons Learned from Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) Systems in the United States

Abstract

This paper is the result of a survey and analyses of available data from 204 Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) sites in the United States. This ASR site survey included all active and inactive sites and collected both operational and construction details. The inactive sites are of particular interest here because these are the projects from which valuable lessons can often be learned. The intent of this paper is to examine the reasons for those projects that are terminated. Statistical analyses indicated that there were factors associated with terminated ASR projects: general geographic location (e.g., region), operational issue, storage cycle, casing material, and injection formation. The injection formation involves local geology and aquifer characteristics (i.e., whether the aquifer is leaky and/or unconfined, and if water can be displaced to surface water bodies or adjacent aquifers). Operational problems associated with inactive projects include well clogging, metals mobilization, a low percentage of recovery for injected water, and disinfection byproducts in the recovered water.

Mapped Fractures and Sinkholes in the Coastal Plain of Florida and Georgia to Infer Environmental Impacts from Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) and Supply Wells in the Regional Karst Floridan Aquifer System

“…The consulting firm CH2M Hill was involved in the construction, operation, or testing associated with the ASR cycle-test data for the Boynton Beach, Broward County, City of Delray, Lake Okeechobee, Marathon, Miami-Dade W Well Field, San Carlos Estates, and West Palm Beach ASR wells. Ironically, all but one of those ASR sites, including the West Palm Beach ASR sites, was reported as abandoned by Bloetscher et al (2014). The West Palm Beach, Florida ASR well was described as the largest capacity ASR well in the world (Pyne, 2004).…”

“…The names of those 14 ASR sites are shown in bold in Table 1 ( Bacchus et al, 2015b). Examples of other abandoned ASR sites in Collier, Lee, Miami-Dade, and Okeechobee Counties are shown in Table 1 of Bloetscher et al (2014).…”

“…8, No. 2;2016 Although our study did not attempt to determine if additional ASR wells in Florida had been abandoned after the 2013 data-collection date used for Bloetscher et al (2014), Bacchus et al (2015b) identified another ASR site evaluated in Florida by Reese (2002, San Carlos) that was listed by FDEP as inactive, but not identified as an abandoned or inactive ASR well by Bloetscher et al (2014). It is unclear how many of those 33 ASR well sites in Florida were abandoned or were inactive because of preferential flow through fractures or other karst conduits of the aquifer injections and withdrawals associated with those ASR wells.…”

“…Neither study evaluated the hydrological influence that fractures might have on the long-term operation of ASR wells in Florida and other areas with karst aquifer systems, such as the proximity of ASR wells to fractures. Bacchus et al (2015b) described the 13 ASR well sites in Florida that were evaluated by Reese (2002), and later identified by Bloetscher et al (2014) as abandoned. Some of those 13 abandoned ASR well sites had multiple ASR wells (Bacchus et al, 2015b).…”

“…After the evaluation of 18 ASR sites by Reese (2002, Table 5), in the USGS review of Florida's ASR wells, 13 of those sites were reported as abandoned by Bloetscher, Sham, Danko III, and Ratick (2014). That suggests percent "recovery" was misrepresented because water continued to be withdrawn after the chloride content of the withdrawn water was considerably greater than the chloride content of the water injected into ASR wells, making claims of the volume and duration of injected water "stored" questionable.…”