Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

So ... oil drilling creates radioactive waste? Interesting.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
eppur_se_muova Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-27-10 04:43 PM
Original message
So ... oil drilling creates radioactive waste? Interesting.
Radium-bearing barite (radiobarite) is a common constituent of scale and sludge deposits that form in oil-field production equipment. The barite forms as a precipitate from radium-bearing, saline formation water that is pumped to the surface along with oil. Radioactivity levels in some oil-field equipment and in soils contaminated by scale and sludge can be sufficiently high to pose a potential health threat.
***
Barium sulfate (barite) is one of the more common minerals that occur as coatings or sediments in oil-field production equipment (Wilson, 1994). Precipitates of barite form when saline formation water (produced water) is pumped to the surface with oil and is then separated from the oil and disposed of, most commonly via an injection well. Produced water can become oversaturated with barite in response to decreases in solution temperature, pressure, or salinity ( Blount, 1977).

As early as the 1930s it was recognized that some of these barite precipitates are unusually radioactive (Kolb and Wojcik, 1985). The ionizing radiation originating from barite is derived from radioactive decay of naturally occurring radium isotopes (226Ra and 228Ra) and their decay products (Kolb and Wojcik, 1985). Radium and barium are chemically similar alkaline-earth elements and dissolved radium is efficiently sequestered by barium sulfate precipitates ( Doerner and Hoskins, 1925). Oil-field brines, particularly chloride-rich varieties, can contain tens to thousands of picocuries per liter (pCi/l) of dissolved 226Ra (Fisher, 1998). For comparison, the US drinking water standard for total dissolved radium (226Ra+228Ra) is 5 pCi/l (Federal Register, 1976. National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations. 41 CFR, Part 132, 28404, July 9, 1976.Federal Register, 1976). Barite scale and barite-bearing sludge can likewise contain tens to thousands of picocuries per gram (pCi/g) of radium ( Wascom, 1994), compared to typical soil values of 0.55.0 pCi/g ( American Petroleum Institute, 1992).

Concerns about the possible health risks of radioactivity in the US oil industry were raised to a higher level in the 1980s, as industry and regulators realized that the problems were more widespread than originally thought and that some radioactivity levels could be quite high. Radioactive oil-field equipment, and radium-bearing scale and sludge from oil-field operations are varieties of a special type of waste designated as naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM). At present (1999) there are no federal regulations in the United States that specifically address the handling or disposal of NORM from oil-field production. Several States with significant amounts of oil production have implemented their own regulations for oil-field NORM (NORM Report, 1996). The magnitude of the oil-field NORM problem in the United States has been estimated ( Otto, 1989), but it remains to be completely assessed.

Assessment of radioactive contamination at oil-field production sites typically requires detailed radiation surveys of equipment and contaminated soil, and measurements of radium isotopic abundance in selected soil samples. Clean-up costs are largely determined by the volume of material that exceeds State regulatory thresholds for radioactivity of equipment or for total radium concentration of soil. Individual States have enacted or are considering regulations that allow as little as 5 pCi/g or as much as 30 pCi/g of radium in the upper 15 cm of soil (NORM Report, 1996). Surface radioactivity of oil-field equipment is typically limited to some low multiple of local background values.
***
more: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VB5-42YW1SJ-7&_user=558534&_coverDate=08%2F31%2F2001&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1350809123&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000028489&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=558534&md5=cb0c0d0e294c2aaefccbb25cd4357544
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
NNadir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-27-10 05:38 PM
Response to Original message
1. I have lots and lots of references on this point, and some day, when I want to have some fun
with my friends here who declare as a matter of faith that the oil company greenwasher (and anti-nuke) Amory Lovins is an "environmentalist" I'll cite some of these references, all from the primary scientific literature.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arctic Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-27-10 05:48 PM
Response to Original message
2. Yes it does.
It gets in the pipe and refining equipment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-27-10 07:51 PM
Response to Original message
3. Just like burning coal does.
and the waste just gets casually dumps into ash ponds.

It's just coal radiation much safer than that ebil reactor radiation. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Codeine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-27-10 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. No problems finding a waste storage facility for coal radiation;
lots of air in that big ol' sky.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-28-10 03:43 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. There's a reason the EPA says 50 mile proximity to a coal plant is 10x more radiative...
...than the same proximity to a nuclear plant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nihil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-28-10 04:43 AM
Response to Original message
6. .
:popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-28-10 07:20 PM
Response to Original message
7. Kick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-28-10 08:00 PM
Response to Original message
8. If anyone cared to look...
... I'll bet they could find quite a bit of skulduggery going on in the oil pipe recycling business.

There's probably guys working right now who don't know the pipes they are descaling are too radioactive for the recyclers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 09th 2021, 02:44 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC