Germany Chancellor plans lithium deal with Serbia after Rio ruling
Olaf Scholz plans to visit Serbia this week to secure supplies of lithium that are critical for the nation’s energy transition and auto industry.
A study by the US Geological Survey (USGS) has found that hydraulic fracturing fluids leaked from a natural gas well site in 2007 caused widespread deaths of aquatic species in Kentucky’s Acorn Fork.
The joint study by the USGS and the US Fish and Wildlife Service has been analysing the spill’s effects on a small Appalachian creek. The creek is home to the federally threatened Blackside dace, a small colourful minnow.
“Our study is a precautionary tale of how entire populations could be put at risk even with small-scale fluid spills,” said USGS scientist Diana Papoulias, the study’s lead author. “This is especially the case if the species is threatened or is only found in limited areas, like the Blackside dace is in the Cumberland.”
Following the spill scientists noted “a significant die-off of aquatic life” in the area, including the minnows but also Creek chub and Green sunfish.
Sample analysis of wildlife showed gill lesions and damaged spleens and livers. The lesions, the panel notes, are indications of exposure to acidic water and toxic concentrations of heavy metals.
One ecologist who participated in the study called the fish deaths “a canary in a coal mine.”
“These species use the same water as we do, so it is just as important to keep our waters clean for people and for wildlife,” he said in a statement on Wednesday.
11 Comments
renevers
What proof is there , that this was “fracking” ? If there is fracking in the neighbourhood and there are some dead fish , that still means nothing. Only scientific investigation can find an answer. Fracking leaks are very rare. Natural water emission leaks on the contrary, are very COMMON. They made the minerals in hydrothermal mineralisation in the past (Isn’t this a mining internet site?) . Dead fish can be caused by : hot water, lack of oxygen, bacteria or virus, poisons in the water like pesticides, algae, NATURAL arsenic, sulfur and lead, all natural causes. Further : fracking fluid is not that poisonous.. It is mostly water , salt, plasticizer, sand ,natural thickner, some diesel.. Return water is treated or reused.
The anti fracking lobby is mastering the rumour tactics, for its blackmail scheme’s.
Blackmail in concertiation, is a nice job nowadays. One can even end up, like a well payed politician, well paid “advisor” or newspaper writer.
Guest
Wow! All this article does is tells you about the study. I am sure those
interested can find and read the actual study. Fracking water not that
poisonous???? Yikes! Are you a shtick for the oil and gas industry or
what? Anything and everything that endangers aquifers is by default BAD. With a such a nonchalant attitude towards oil and gas industry policy, you should consider a career in the EPA, which IS bought and paid for. The oil and gas industry propaganda machine has NO equal. Oh sure they have the means to control any and all spills, OH except when the actually have one. You probably believe the Gulf is as pristine as it was before man showed up. Please.
Chris Armstrong
Where is the multi-million dollar FINE for this typical environmental desecration by Big Oil: I guess their payoffs paid off ! Big Oil’s track record clearly demonstrates that they care squat about the environment and future generations! “Lip service” is cheap. Gee, I guess the dead fish and contamination is just a strange coincidence: just like gas coming out of taps, shallow wells contaminated, deep wells contaminated, etc., etc. Fracking is another environmental disaster for which Big Oil should pay BIG TIME !
renevers
This is part of the ” scientific work” the biologists wrote. Be aware of the part ” it is not known “. That indicates “Just guessing the importance if a incident” . It looks like a classic industrial incident: overflowing of a stock an just spilling above ground and inadequate return water storage capacity. Not the fracking process itself could has been at fault. That would have been the rupture of a pressure pipe or a geologic type leak, from water that comes up, from beneath along a geological fault from 2 km down.
There is no indication of the contamination source magnitude. Just the registration of acidity in the water , low Ph and conductivity, for some time. have
“It is not known how many dace were killed during the 2007 event because two
wells had already been “fracked”, and peak mortality was likely missed before re-
searchers arrived to document the incident. However, one dead, one moribund, and
several living but distressed Blackside Dace, along with three distressed Semotilus
atromaculatus (Mitchill) (Creek Chub) were observed”
That is a lot of USGS biologist work, for so few dead fish!
Here the article:
http://www.cerc.usgs.gov/Assets/UploadedFiles/ExternalDocs/91955%20Papoulias%20and%20Velasco%20(2013)%20Fish%20from%20Acorn%20Fork%20Creek%20exposed%20to%20hydraulic%20fracturing%20realease.pdfhave
Jim
I’m confused here. Was this a surface spill, or did the release originate at the fracking depth? The author of this article has some homework to do.
renevers
Look at this:
“Abstract – Fracking fluids were released into Acorn Fork, KY, a designated Outstanding State Resource Water,”
This is what the biologist had to prove.. There is no link made with a real existing release. You would expect a proof that actual return water and its COMPOSITION would have entered the stream. And it would have needed a magnitude for the AMOUNT of spillage. There is no link made between the natural mineral content of the stream and the constituents, of the fracking effluents that supposedly were spilled. The biologist supposed that the acidity of fracking water is to blame. But that would have needed more water analysis. It is HCl in the effluent that is to blame like this.
Anyway these kind of streams repopulate with fish withing months after accidents like this. Fish will avoid the water and will escape up stream in pools and wait there until the water is .
Is this accident realy worse than accidently entering “farmers ammonia” in a stream, or insecticides, washing powder, cement construction powder, H2S, sulfur, gearbox oil, iron oxide , zinc oxide? That is every day contamination nobody cares about. A nearby stream is called “Stinking Creek”.. That implies that that stream or geologic region has some particular water content, even before there was “fracking” going on in the neighbourhood. Low flowrate in the streams for temporally lack of rain and some natural mineral water from natural wells containing natural minerals and Ph increasing natural chemicals, could cause these incidents as well. The biologist had to prove this case to be a “non natural event”. The report makes no mention of that methodology. That needs more water samples and another type of investigation, than the biologists team did. But that needs water experts and criminal investigation teams. Where they invoked? The biologist did what they learnt for: “histological analysis” . You have a hammer and are looking for nails.
Fracking effluents shouldn’t go into any natural water stream..But they normally don’t . They are by standard, collected ,treated and recycled. But the biologist report did not go into details about how the effluents entered the stream. How many kilo of acid went into the stream, if any? 10kg 100 kg 1000 kg? .. Nobody knows. But a small stream with 10 kg acid , which is a very small amount can be influenced by it, for a couple of weeks. So this little report looks like ,trying to taint a new , supposedly “dangerous” industry.
ObiWanWotan
Go read a book called Trouting On The Brule. Written by a Chicago Lawyer in 1865, about his summer vacation that took him thru the wilds of Upper Michigan to the Brule River, boarder water between WI and MI. The waters of the Brule were perfectly clear, and the bottom of the river was a perfect, pristine gravel bed for trout spawning and the aquatic species they thrive on to live in. There was 3 lawyers and they estmate they caught over 5,000 trout in 3 days. Go there today and you would be lucky to catch 10 fish per day per person, and more like 3-4, if that. What happened? Upstream, underground iron ore mining in the western Menominee Range, see Iron County, MI. No other industry, virtually no agriculture. The damage is not always instantaneous, it can develop over decades. Note however that the mining ended over 40 yrs ago now, a new waste water treatment plant was built about 30 yrs ago, yet, the trout have not repopulated, and biologists will tell you that their food source doesn’t really exist anymore. Why? The river bottom is covered in a thin sludge/slime, and those low-food-chain species cannot live there in large numbers anymore, even after 40 yrs. Just saying.
Robin
Your point on ‘farmer’s ammonia’ is very important and missed, intentionally by the Green Movement, as they realize they will loose support if they attack the largest polluters in the world.
I observed this over 25 years in the lowlands of Scotland, where 7 year rotation and the use of ‘cow-muck’ spread over small, hedge row surrounded fields as fertilizer and 2-3 years of allowing grass to grow changed to intensive barley and other grain farming.
To increase production trees and hedgerows were cut down to make larger fields, drain pipes were laid into the fields, a red mercury compound/powder was added to the grain to prevent fungus, and artificial fertilizers were intensively used.
As no root systems from grass, hedgerows and trees and added drains, water flow was accelerated into the rivers and the result was the average river water level went down, sudden floods increased, and water weeds increased, from phosphates. Birds decreased.
The result on the fish population, due to lower flows/levels (less oxygen), the Teviot/Tweed Rivers went from hosting mostly Trout, Grayling, Salmon and eels to significantly less of the first three and arrival of Roach, Perch etc (which can live in less oxygenated waters) which I had never seen before and bank to bank river weed
I am seeing this all over the world from Asia, Americas to Africa by asking locals how farming has changed over the last 30 -40 years, then asking how the rivers have changed. Most have never linked the two events over that time span. But it is the same story, increased industrial farming or increased flocks/herds (overgrazing), and deforestation (with no reforesting taking place in most countries) resulting in less root systems to retain water in soil and thus lower river levels/increased flash flooding, polluted rivers and significant effect on the natural fauna and flora over huge areas.
That is what should be getting the headlines!!! That is what is affecting the environment worldwide
Matt
My question is more fundamental. Why is the United States Geologic Survey (USGS) conducting investigation into biological incidences, that is the job and professional duty of the Environmental Protection Agency. This is a waste of our tax payers dollars and duplication of duties of governmental agencies. So now we not only have red tape and harassment from the EPA and US Fish and Wildlife Service but the USGS as well?
nobody24
Fear mongering… “leaked”. Churnalism at it’s literary finest!
JH
it really takes some effort to track down the original report, but the key thing it was 2007, the spill was from a retention dam. It could just have easily been the site construction poo pit, or the oil capture pit over flowing, a fuel tanker roll over, or a farmer losing drums of material during a flood…stuff happens ..nothing what so ever to do with under ground fracing. Just the frac fluid stored in a bund on the surface. The fact they knew the pH, when it happens tells you there is no big secret or devious activity or anything related to what is happening several kilometers underground.
Just the usual ignorant media reporting.
Ana Komnenic should be ashamed at not telling the balanced story, rather than really sloppy plagiarism.