WASTEWATER DISPOSAL

Wastewater disposal, refers to the management of contaminated water from

industrial, commercial or domestic sewage activities. For oil and natural gas
production, wastewater is generated during drilling and production operations.
In USA, Wastewater must be managed under one of two federal laws – the Clean
Water Act (CWA) or the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). The CWA regulates
wastewater that is discharged to surface waters. The SDWA regulates
wastewater that is injected into disposal wells. This Q&A addresses wastewater
managed under the SDWA.
These “injection wells” are regulated under the SDWA’s Underground Injection
Control (UIC) program. Wells used for disposing of wastewater from oil and
natural gas production – including hydraulic fracturing – are categorized as
“Class II” by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
When an oil or natural gas well is hydraulically fractured, typically several million
gallons of water (along with sand and other additives) are pumped into a
hydrocarbon bearing rock formation deep in the ground. Some of this water will
remain locked in the formation, but some will come back up through the well to
the surface. The water is known as “flowback.”
Underground deposits of oil and natural gas typically also contain large volumes
of water. Thus, when oil or natural gas is produced, salty water is typically
produced alongside it, which is known as “produced water” or brine. In
Oklahoma and California – two of the largest oil producing states in the country
– the amount of produced water from a conventional oil well often exceeds the
volume of oil by more than 10 to one.
Flowback and produced water can be treated and then reused in other oil and
natural gas wells. But often times, it must be injected into wastewater disposal
wells, which are drilled several thousand feet below the surface.
The wastewater (most of which is produced water) is deposited into deep
geologic structures, many of which have trapped brine for millions of years.
These structures are often a mile or more below underground drinking water
sources, separated by billions of tons of impenetrable rock.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has regulated underground injection

since the mid-1970s, after passage of the federal Safe Drinking Water Act. The
EPA also notes that widespread use of wastewater disposal wells began in the
1930s.

Properly constructed disposal wells do not pose a credible risk of water

contamination.
One of the main purposes of disposal wells is actually to reduce the risk of water
contamination, be it at the surface or underground. As the U.S. EPA notes: “By
injecting the brine deep underground, Class II wells prevent surface
contamination of soil and water.”

Scientists, especially in recent years, have been examining a possible link

between wastewater disposal and small seismic events. In the 1960s, scientists
determined that an injection well used by the Rocky Mountain Arsenal in
Colorado was linked to seismicity in the region.
Although some researchers have suggested a more definitive link than others,
most credible experts have noted that the risk of seismicity from wastewater
disposal is low. The U.S. Geological Survey says that, of the 40,000 disposal wells
used for oil and natural gas wastewater, “only a small fraction of these disposal
wells have induced earthquakes that are large enough to be of concern to the
public.”
The National Research Council, in noting that “only a very small fraction” of
energy-related injection activities have been linked to seismicity.
Much of the focus in recent years has been on Oklahoma, which has thousands
of wastewater disposal wells. The Oklahoma state geologist has cautioned that
there were “zero seismograph stations prior to late 1970s” in the state, and now
there are 20, suggesting recent observations about increased seismic activity
may be due in part to the increased ability to detect when those events occur.

In short, it’s possible for wastewater injection to induce seismic events, but the
scientific consensus is that the risk is low, and the overwhelming majority of
disposal wells operate safely. Still, states such as Texas, Oklahoma, Ohio, and
many others have updated their regulations in recent years to address concerns
of induced seismicity, including new permitting requirements and the ability to
shut down wells linked to seismicity.

The EPA classifies Injection Wells into six classes:

Class I Injection Wells may be permitted to inject hazardous waste into the
earth. They are very sophisticated wells and inject both hazardous and non-
hazardous wastes below the lowermost underground source of drinking water.
Injection occurs into deep, isolated rock formations that are separated from the
lower part of the underground source of drinking water by layers of
impermeable clay and rock. These wells are strictly regulated.

Class II Injection Wells are those that are associated with the oil and gas industry.
They include wells which inject brine and other fluids associated with oil and gas
production. The EPA estimates that there are 147,000 Class II Injection Wells in
the United States. At least 700 million gallons of fluids are injected into these
wells each year.
Class III Injection Wells are used for the solution mining of minerals. The EPA
estimates that there are 17,000 Class III Injection Wells in the United States.
These wells inject super-heated steam, water or other fluids into formations in
order to extract minerals. Then the fluids are pumped to the surface and the
minerals in solution are extracted. Generally the fluid is treated and re-injected
into the same formation. Fifty percent of the salt used in America is extracted
through Class III wells. Eighty percent of the uranium is extracted using Class III
wells.

Class IV Injection Wells are shallow wells used to inject hazardous or radioactive
wastes into or above a geologic formation that contains an underground source
of drinking water. There are approximately 40 Class IV Injection Wells in the
United States according to reports from the EPA. In 1984, the use of Class IV
wells to dispose of waste was banned. They were banned under the
Environmental Protection Agencies Underground Injection control program
because they directly threaten public health.

The difference between Class IV and Class V Injection Wells is the quality of the
fluid being injected. Class V wells may only inject non-hazardous fluids that will
not endanger USDWs. If a Class V well is misused and receives hazardous waste,
the well would be considered a Class IV well and therefore be banned.

Class V Injection Wells are used for the shallow injection of non-hazardous fluids
only. It is estimated that we have 500,000 to 685,000 Class V injection wells in
the United States. These wells are not included in the other classes. Most Class
V wells are “low-tech” wells, such as septic systems and cesspools. However,
some are technologically advanced wastewater disposal systems used by the
industry.
For the most part they are shallow and depend upon gravity to drain or “inject”
liquid waste in the ground above or into underground sources of drinking water.
There is little or no protection against possible ground water contaminations
because of their simple construction. Therefore, it becomes important to control
what goes into them.

They are typically shallow, on site-disposal systems, such as floor and sink drains
which discharge directly or indirectly to ground water, dry wells, leach fields,
and similar types of drainage wells.

The largest number of Class V wells is shallow wells that “inject” non-hazardous
fluids into very shallow aquifers that are or can be used as sources of drinking
water. The majority of Class V well owners are small business and municipalities.
The two most numerous types of Class V wells are storm water drainage and
large capacity septic systems. The government has established guidelines for
Class V Injection Wells:

1. The well cannot endanger underground sources of drinking water.

2. Well owners must submit inventory information.

3. There are additional specific requirements for motor vehicle waste disposal
wells and large capacity cesspools.

The variety of Class V wells includes but is not limited to agricultural drainage
wells, storm water drainage wells, large capacity septic systems, mine backfill
wells, aquifer remediation wells, heat pump/air conditioning return flow wells,
aquifer recharge wells, aquifer storage and recovery, saltwater intrusion barrier
wells, subsidence control wells, and industrial disposal wells. Not all Class V wells
are used for disposal. Examples of Class V practices which are not disposal
related include: aquifer recharge, aquifer storage and recovery, and saltwater
intrusion control.

Class VI wells are wells used for injection of carbon dioxide (CO2) into
underground subsurface rock formations for long-term storage, or geologic
sequestration. Geologic sequestration refers to a suite of technologies that may
be deployed to reduce CO2 emissions to the atmosphere to help mitigate
climate change.

Waste disposal

One application is waste water disposal, in which treated waste water is injected
into the ground between impermeable layers of rocks to avoid polluting fresh
water supplies or adversely affecting quality of receiving waters. Injection wells
are usually constructed of solid walled pipe to a deep elevation in order to
prevent injectate from mixing with the surrounding environment.

Injection wells are widely considered to be the best method for disposal of
treated waste water. Unlike outfalls or other direct disposal techniques,
injection wells utilize the earth as a filter to further clean the treated wastewater
before it reaches the receiving water. This method of waste water disposal also
serves to spread the injectate over a wide area, further decreasing
environmental impacts.

Critics of waste water injection wells cite concerns relating to the injectate
polluting receiving waters. Most environmental engineering professionals,
however, consider waste water treatment followed by disposal through
injection wells to be the most cost effective and environmentally responsible
method of waste water treatment. The only known alternatives to injection
wells are direct discharge of treated waste water to receiving waters or
utilization of the treated water for irrigation. Direct discharge does not disperse
the water over a wide area; the environmental impact is focused on a particular
segment of a river and its downstream reaches, or on a coastal waterbody.
Extensive irrigation is often prohibitively expensive and requires ongoing
maintenance and large electricity usage.
 Description of DEEP WELL INJECTION

Deep well injection is a liquid waste disposal technology. Injection wells are
man-made or improved “holes” in the ground, which are deeper than their
widest surface dimension. This alternative use injection wells to place treated or
untreated liquid waste into geologic formations that have no potential to allow
migration of contaminants into potential potable water aquifers. A typical
injection well consists of concentric pipes, which extend several thousand feet
down from the surface level into highly saline, permeable injection zones that
are confined vertically by impermeable strata. The outermost pipe or surface
casing, extends below the base of any underground sources of drinking water
(USDW) and is cemented back to the surface to prevent contamination of the
USDW. Directly inside the surface casing is a long string casing that extends to
and sometimes into the injection zone. This casing is filled in with cement all the
way back to the surface in order to seal off the injected waste from the
formations above the injection zone back to the surface. The casing provides a
seal between the wastes in the injection zone and the upper formations. The
waste is injected through the injection tubing inside the long string casing either
through perforations in the long string or in the open hole below the bottom of
the long string. The space between the string casing and the injection tube,
called the annulus, is filled with an inert, pressurized fluid, and is sealed at the
bottom by a removable packer preventing injected wastewater from backing up
into the annulus.
 Fig. No. 1: Diagram of Deep Injection Well

Applicability and Limitations

The target contaminant groups for deep well injection are VOCs, SVOCs, fuels,
explosives, and pesticides. However, existing permitted deep well injection
facilities are limited to a narrow range of specific wastes. Success at expanding
existing permits to manage hazardous wastes seems unlikely. Factors that may
limit the applicability and effectiveness of these processes include;

• Injection well will not be used for hazardous waste disposal in any areas
where seismic activity could potentially occur.
• Injected wastes must be compatible with the mechanical components of
the injection well system and the natural formation water. The waste
generator may be required to perform physical, chemical, biological, or
thermal treatment for removal of various contaminants or constituents
from the waste to modify the physical and chemical character of the
waste to assure compatibility.
 • High concentrations of suspended solids (typically >2 ppm) can lead to
plugging of the injection interval.
• Corrosive media may react with the injection well components, with
injection zone formation, or with confining strata with very undesirable
results. Wastes should be neutralized.
• High iron concentrations may result in fouling when conditions alter the
valence state and convert soluble to insoluble species.
• Organic carbon may serve as an energy source for indigenous or injected
bacteria resulting in rapid population growth and subsequent fouling.
• Waste streams containing organic contaminants above their solubility
limits may require pretreatment before injection into a well.
• Site assessment and aquifer characterization are required to determine
suitability of site for wastewater injection.
• Extensive assessments must be completed prior to receiving approval
from regulatory authority.

One important part is the evaluation of the history of earthquake activity. If a

location shows this type of instability in the subsurface, it may mean that fluids
will not stay contained in the injection zone, indicating the well should not be
located in that particular location. Scientists, especially in recent years, have
been examining a possible link between wastewater disposal and small seismic
events. In the 1960s, scientists determined that an injection well used by the
Rocky Mountain Arsenal in Colorado was linked to seismicity in the region.

Although some researchers have suggested a more definitive link than others,
most credible experts have noted that the risk of seismicity from wastewater
disposal is low. The U.S. Geological Survey says that, of the 40,000 disposal wells
used for oil and natural gas wastewater, “only a small fraction of these disposal
wells have induced earthquakes that are large enough to be of concern to the
public.”

The National Research Council, in noting that “only a very small fraction” of
energy-related injection activities have been linked to seismicity, also
concluded:

“Tens of thousands of waste water disposal wells have been drilled in the United
States to dispose of the water generated by geothermal and oil and gas
production operations, including shale gas production. Water injection for
disposal has been suspected or determined a likely cause for induced seismicity
at approximately 8 sites in the past several decades.”

Much of the focus in recent years has been on Oklahoma, which has thousands
of wastewater disposal wells. The Oklahoma state geologist has cautioned that
there were “zero seismograph stations prior to late 1970s” in the state, and now
there are 20, suggesting recent observations about increased seismic activity
may be due in part to the increased ability to detect when those events occur.
Also, as the Oklahoma Independent Petroleum Association (OIPA) has noted:
“Because crude oil and natural gas is produced in 70 of Oklahoma’s 77 counties,
any seismic activity within the state is likely to occur near oil and natural gas
activity.”

In short, it’s possible for wastewater injection to induce seismic events, but the
scientific consensus is that the risk is low, and the overwhelming majority of
disposal wells operate safely. Still, states such as Texas, Oklahoma, Ohio, and
many others have updated their regulations in recent years to address concerns
of induced seismicity, including new permitting requirements and the ability to
shut down wells linked to seismicity.
 References

1. injection wells_EPA by All star training Inc. 2014

2. INJECTION WELLS- An Introduction to Their Use, Operation, and Regulation-

publication by ground water protection council, USA

3. https://www.epa.gov/uic/general-information-about-injection-
wells#well_def