[HN Gopher] Oil-and-gas wells produce radioactive waste
___________________________________________________________________
Oil-and-gas wells produce radioactive waste
Author : elijahwheelock
Score : 164 points
Date : 2020-01-24 12:59 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.rollingstone.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.rollingstone.com)
| shiftpgdn wrote:
| For what it's worth this brine is potentially a monster source of
| lithium.
| capableweb wrote:
| How is that relevant to the story about workers being exposed
| to brine, not being told it's radioactive and everyone is
| acting casually around waste management around brine?
| asguy wrote:
| I found it interesting. Maybe there's an avenue to better
| remediation via using the waste as feeder to another chemical
| process, which ends in more value?
| capableweb wrote:
| Me too, but it's hardy relevant to the subject of the
| article, which is about contamination and people being
| affected by it, and the industry not taking the necessary
| precautions when dealing with waste.
| catalogia wrote:
| With all that lithium, at least the workers won't be
| depressed about getting irradiated.
| htk wrote:
| Many interesting discussions here touch on tangential
| subjects. I for one found the information relevant.
| acidburnNSA wrote:
| Technically speaking they released concentrated naturally-
| occurring radioactive materials (NORMs). I only emphasize this
| because most people don't know how much radioactive stuff is
| natural.
|
| Doesn't mean it's not a hazard in concentration, of course.
| ComputerGuru wrote:
| We literally mine Uranium. How can people not realize this
| stuff can be found naturally on Earth?
| reaperducer wrote:
| _We literally mine Uranium. How can people not realize this
| stuff can be found naturally on Earth?_
|
| The same way 30% of British children think that cheese is a
| plant, that fish sticks come from pigs, and 10% think
| potatoes grow on trees.
|
| https://www.bbc.com/news/education-22730613
|
| Of course, with almond "milk" and soy "turkey" these days, I
| guess it's normal for them to be confused.
| nradov wrote:
| Some British people believed that spaghetti grows on trees.
|
| http://hoaxes.org/archive/permalink/the_swiss_spaghetti_har
| v...
| catalogia wrote:
| Most of this is probably just kids taking the piss with
| adults who ask them dumb questions.
|
| > _" Where do fish sticks come from? Do they think I'm
| retarded just because I'm five? Fuck it, I'll tell them it
| comes from pigs, I wonder if they'll be stupid enough to
| think I'm not fucking with them."_
| lostlogin wrote:
| Or even better, the natural fission reactor found in Gabon. h
| ttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_nuclear_fission_reac..
| .
| acidburnNSA wrote:
| I'll raise you the hypothesized (and today largely doubted)
| terracentric georeactor published in PNAS:
|
| Deep-Earth reactor: Nuclear fission, helium, and the
| geomagnetic field, https://www.pnas.org/content/98/20/11085
|
| And don't forget the "Moon may have formed in a nuclear
| explosion" theory (uranium enrichment back then was well
| above 20%!):
| https://www.technologyreview.com/s/417259/moon-may-have-
| form...
| Merrill wrote:
| >What's Lurking in Your Countertop?
|
| >But with increasing regularity in recent months, the
| Environmental Protection Agency has been receiving calls from
| radon inspectors as well as from concerned homeowners about
| granite countertops with radiation measurements several times
| above background levels. "We've been hearing from people all
| over the country concerned about high readings," said Lou Witt,
| a program analyst with the agency's Indoor Environments
| Division.
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/24/garden/24granite.html
| capableweb wrote:
| Sounds like you're trying to correct something that is already
| correct in the article, as soon as in paragraph 4.
|
| > The Earth's crust is in fact peppered with radioactive
| elements that concentrate deep underground in oil-and-gas-
| bearing layers. This radioactivity is often pulled to the
| surface when oil and gas is extracted -- carried largely in the
| brine.
| acidburnNSA wrote:
| The article does a good job. I'm referring to the headline.
| For example, nuclear reactors _produce_ radioactive material
| by fissioning barely-radioactive uranium into highly-
| radioactive fission products but take great care to not
| _release_ it. Fracking _releases_ naturally-occurring
| radioactive materials.
|
| Also: "is peppered with" does not imply naturally-occurring.
| Someone biased to think all radiation is man-made could
| easily assume it's from us dumping waste.
| jschwartzi wrote:
| If we're using solutions full of this stuff as deicing
| brine, that's definitionally dumping waste.
| [deleted]
| redprince wrote:
| The article actually picks up on that but the other way around:
|
| "There is a perception that because the radioactivity is
| naturally occurring it's less harmful (the industry and
| regulators almost exclusively call oil-and-gas waste NORM --
| naturally occurring radioactive material, or TENORM for the
| "technologically enhanced" concentrations of radioactivity that
| accumulate in equipment like pipes and trucks)."
| keeganjw wrote:
| We're drowning in headlines these days that I feel like this
| story really fell through the cracks. People who live near
| fracking really need to know this.
| lostlogin wrote:
| It's not just those near it - places between the well and the
| dump site, near the rivers by the dump, near the truck stops,
| eating the crops the brine has contaminated, using the recycled
| pipes, washing workers clothes, living in the worker's houses.
| If you were designing a dispersal system, you'd be hard placed
| to make a better one short of perhaps aerial spraying.
| dylan604 wrote:
| It's amazing what that monthly check can make people look over
| when the wells are placed on private property.
| JohnJamesRambo wrote:
| I used to do the soil lab testing for a guy that dealt with this
| waste in my state. They did permitting and paid farmers to be
| able to spread it on their fields and tell them it is good for
| them and will make the soil more fertile. It can be either the
| salt brine or the more hydrocarbon based stuff that was basically
| like tar being spread on the farmer's pasture. He himself wrote
| the laws that the state government just rubber-stamped. I felt
| like I was working for evil, polluting my own state, and quit as
| soon as I could. Some real Grapes of Wrath type stuff. The old
| farmers don't have any money, so the money the oil company will
| pay to spread that garbage on their land seems like a good deal
| to them and they weren't informed about the real dangers of what
| was being spread.
|
| Side note, the owner of that company was a very rich man and also
| one of the unhappiest people I've ever met in my life. It was a
| good lesson to learn at my young age then.
| LeifCarrotson wrote:
| What did the tests say was in it? What didn't you test for
| (like radioactivity) that you felt bad about?
| clumsysmurf wrote:
| > they weren't informed about the real dangers of what was
| being spread.
|
| I wonder how many of them would even care. This week the EPA
| dismantled the Clean Water Rule.
|
| The primary backers for this were farmers and developers.
| gvjddbnvdrbv wrote:
| I guess they would care if their land becomes worthless as a
| result.
| behringer wrote:
| They didn't care about selling their crops when they
| elected Trump they certainly won't care about their land.
| They'll just do as Fox tells them to do at any price.
| totalZero wrote:
| "Radium, typically the most abundant radionuclide in brine, is
| often measured in picocuries per liter of substance and is so
| dangerous it's subject to tight restrictions even at hazardous-
| waste sites. The most common isotopes are radium-226 and
| radium-228, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission requires
| industrial discharges to remain below 60 for each. Four of
| Peter's samples registered combined radium levels above 3,500,
| and one was more than 8,500."
|
| I wonder how many of these trucks full of radium have driven
| beside me on the freeway.
| acidburnNSA wrote:
| Nice to see some numbers. Lot's of articles leave out numbers,
| which really matter in thing like radiation where the
| detectable level is sometimes many orders of magnitude below
| the hazardous level.
|
| Ra-226 is mostly an alpha emitter and can't reach you through a
| piece of paper. Don't drink it though. Ra-228 is primarily a
| beta emitter which can't go through a metal tank. Also don't
| drink it.
| capableweb wrote:
| > Ra-226 is mostly an alpha emitter and can't reach you
| through a piece of paper. Don't drink it though. Ra-228 is
| primarily a beta emitter which can't go through a metal tank.
| Also don't drink it.
|
| What about being in constant contact with the skin via let's
| say you have a bit of it your shoes?
|
| > the rest of the uniform hardly offers protection from
| brine. "It's all over your hands, and inside your boots, and
| on the cuticles of your toes, and any cuts you have -- you're
| soaked," he says.
| acidburnNSA wrote:
| Alpha particles generally cannot penetrate the skin, much
| less clothing or shoes. Betas can get through skin but
| probably not shoes. There is some energy dependence.
| Secondary decays and energy transitions often emit gamma
| rays as well which can go through everything, but the
| majority of the energy with these nuclides are alphas and
| betas.
|
| These are primarily dangerous because they're water soluble
| and present an ingestion and inhalation hazard. Once a
| large amount of a strong alpha-emitter is in your
| intestines it can really cause damage.
| capableweb wrote:
| > These are primarily dangerous because they're water
| soluble and present an ingestion and inhalation hazard.
| Once a large amount of a strong alpha-emitter is in your
| intestines it can really cause damage.
|
| So since the workers are getting it all over their hands
| and feet, which probably has sweat on it, would it pose a
| danger? Also, would getting it on wounds like cuts be
| dangerous as well?
| Spooky23 wrote:
| Yes. If you are appropriately protected you can work with
| it. If you're paying people $16/hr to haul hazmat (that
| you are concealing), you're not providing appropriate
| protection or procedure.
|
| Don't listen to the apologists here. If you've worked in
| a place that handles toxic materials, you wouldn't read
| about worried truck drivers keeping samples in mayonnaise
| jars. The driver would contact the industrial hygienist
| or safety officer at work.
| azernik wrote:
| The article focuses on the fact that the workers aren't
| given the training or opportunity to decontaminate before
| eating.
| throwawaymanbot wrote:
| Did you read the article? it already mentions how its wrong
| to say its not harmful. You are making it sound like its
| harmless. Are you astroturfing?
| [deleted]
| jiofih wrote:
| > There are over 1 million active oil-and-gas wells across 33
| states
|
| This is insane. One well per 300 inhabitants of the USA. How is
| that even economically viable?
| throwaway100773 wrote:
| I'm guessing here, but I think the number seems high because
| shale wells have short lifespans. The declines are much higher
| than conventional wells, and so there are a great many of them
| to maintain production as the wells decline. There are large a
| number of DUCs, or drilled but uncompleted wells. They maintain
| these so that when one well runs dry, another can be brought
| online to maintain production targets. Also it's more economic
| to drill as many wells as you can as quickly as possible even
| if it exceeds targets because there are economies of scale when
| it comes to moving and leasing rigs that drill the wells.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Have you ever looked at Google maps/Earth of Texas? Zoom out to
| a couple thousand feet, and look at all of the little white
| dots across the surface. Each one of those little dots is a
| fracking well. Seeing it from this view is quite shocking. Look
| at how close houses/schools/etc are next to these well sites.
| adammunich wrote:
| Spoiler, it's not. Gas companies have been bleeding money.
| _pmf_ wrote:
| Wait until they hear about neodymium processing for wind
| turbines.
| jschwartzi wrote:
| What are you saying? That we can't talk about any environmental
| issues because we don't list every single environmental issue
| we're aware of?
|
| I'm sure everyone discussing this article is aware that
| neodymium processing is very hazardous. But right now we're
| learning that "simple" oil & gas extraction is also extremely
| hazardous, that the hazards are completely ignored, that non-
| employees of the extraction companies are deeply affected by
| the hazardous waste, that the extraction companies themselves
| work very hard to make it appear safe when in reality it can
| make you very sick, and generally that oil & gas extraction
| companies do not care at all about the treatment of these
| people on whom they are dumping these chemicals.
|
| But by all means, let's also talk about neodymium production in
| China to distract ourselves from what's going on in our own
| back yards.
| briandear wrote:
| They won't hear about it. The "proper" narrative is to promote
| the terribleness of oil and gas.
| sdoering wrote:
| I wouldn't say that. I would even say lots of people know
| about that. At least knowledgeable people do. But they also
| know how to not derail.
|
| Because whataboutism doesn't help a discussion.
|
| So I am glad that most people discussing here do not try to
| derail or play smoke and mirrors.
| wiggler00m wrote:
| https://min-eng.blogspot.com/2013/02/the-real-cost-of-using-...
|
| _" Neodymium is found most often in monazite and bastnasite.
| Due to the fact that these minerals also contain lanthanides
| and other rare earth elements, it is difficult to isolate
| neodymium. The first isolation process involves extracting the
| lanthanides and metals out of the ores in their salt form. This
| step is carried out using sulphuric acid, hydrochloric acid,
| and sodium hydroxide. To further isolate the neodymium from
| other lanthanides and metals, procedures such as solvent
| extraction and ion exchange are used. Once neodymium has been
| reduced to its fluoride form using these processes, it can be
| reacted with pure calcium metal in a heated chamber to form
| pure neodymium and calcium fluoride. Some calcium contaminants
| remain in the neodymium, and vacuum processes are used to
| remove any of these contaminants. It is an expensive and
| potentially environmentally harmful process.
|
| In a recent posting (February 1st), it was noted that China
| produces over 90% of the world's rare earths, and that
| Beijing's export reductions in recent years have forced high-
| tech firms to relocate to China. An article in a UK newspaper
| claims to have uncovered the distinctly dirty truth about the
| process used to extract neodymium: it has an appalling
| environmental impact that raises serious questions over the
| credibility of so-called green technology.
|
| According to the report, hidden out of sight behind smoke-
| shrouded factory complexes lie vast, hissing cauldrons of
| chemicals in tailing lakes that are often very poorly
| constructed and maintained; throughout the extraction process
| large amounts of highly toxic acids, heavy metals and other
| chemicals are emitted into the air that people breathe, and
| leak into surface and ground water.
|
| The report concludes that whenever we purchase products that
| contain rare earth metals, we are unknowingly taking part in
| massive environmental degradation and the destruction of
| communities. It is a real dilemma for environmentalists who
| want to see the growth of the renewables industry but we should
| recognise the environmental destruction that is being caused
| while making these wind turbines."_
| Tade0 wrote:
| Regarding the last paragraph:
|
| From that same article:
|
| _A direct-drive permanent-magnet generator for a top
| capacity wind turbine would use around 2 tonnes of neodymium-
| based permanent magnet material._
|
| https://roskill.com/news/rare-earths-changing-magnet-
| composi...
|
| _The rare earth content in neodymium-iron-boron (NdFeB)
| magnets is 29-33% and the main rare earths used are neodymium
| and praseodymium (NdPr), typically at a ratio of 3:1._
|
| Given this data your typical wind turbine contains ~650kg of
| rare-earths.
|
| https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277639048_An_Assess.
| ..
|
| _We estimate that approximately 0.44 kg of rare earths are
| used in a typical conventional sedan, with approximately80%
| of the rare earth content in magnets. As such, neodymium is
| the most extensively used rare earth, followed by
| cerium,which is used mainly in catalytic converters. The mass
| of rare earths in a full hybrid electric vehicle with a
| nickel metal hydride battery is approximately 4.5 kg. A full
| hybrid electric vehicle with a lithium-ion battery contains
| approximately 1kg of rare earth elements._
|
| Basically one turbine is equivalent to ~1500 cars in terms of
| rare earths, which may seem high, but if you compare the
| production scale, wind turbines are unlikely to be the main
| consumers of neodymium, or rare earths in general.
| ljf wrote:
| This blog post relies on the Daily Mail as it's main source.
| Are there any other articles or sites you can point me too,
| DM has plenty of links to big oil and regularly prints
| dubious anti 'green' material. This sounds believable though,
| so interested to read more.
| jandrewrogers wrote:
| Now measure coal waste.
| Frost1x wrote:
| There's a lot. A lot more than I imagined according to a DOE
| seminar I sat through.
|
| It's interesting because an incredibly small fraction of coal
| (coal varies a reasonable amount in composition across
| geological regions) contains various radioactive isotopes with
| long high-lifes.
|
| When you burn/combust coal, especially without care and
| consideration in the process, a lot of these small components
| are released in the air as particulates.
|
| Now at first thought, it doesn't seem like much (were talking
| 1ppm/1ppb or less levels in some cases depending on the coal
| type/geological area), but when you consider the entire volume
| of coal combusted worldwide, that small fraction turns out to
| be more radioactive waste than is produced by all controlled
| nuclear energy in the world at the time (about 8-10 years ago).
|
| I wish I still had the slide set with all the reference
| material and derivations.
| Krasnol wrote:
| > Now look elsewhere
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-01-25 23:00 UTC)