Effect of Different Sampling Methodologies on Measured Methane Concentrations in Groundwater Samples |
| |
| Authors: | Lisa J. Molofsky Stephen D. Richardson Anthony W. Gorody Fred Baldassare June A. Black Thomas E. McHugh John A. Connor |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. GSI Environmental Inc., Austin, TX 78759;2. Universal Geoscience Consulting, Inc., Houston, TX 77006;3. Echelon Applied Geosciences, Murrysville, PA 15668;4. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Harrisburg, PA 17110;5. GSI Environmental Inc., Houston, TX 77098 |
| |
| Abstract: | Analysis of dissolved light hydrocarbon gas concentrations (primarily methane and ethane) in water supply wells is commonly used to establish conditions before and after drilling in areas of shale gas and oil extraction. Several methods are currently used to collect samples for dissolved gas analysis from water supply wells; however, the reliability of results obtained from these methods has not been quantified. This study compares dissolved methane and ethane concentrations measured in groundwater samples collected using three sampling methods employed in pre‐ and post‐drill sampling programs in the Appalachian Basin. These include an open‐system collection method where 40 mL volatile organic analysis (VOA) vials are filled directly while in contact with the atmosphere (Direct‐Fill VOA) and two alternative methods: (1) a semi‐closed system method whereby 40 mL VOA vials are filled while inverted under a head of water (Inverted VOA) and (2) a relatively new (2013) closed system method in which the sample is collected without direct contact with purge water or the atmosphere (IsoFlask®). This study reveals that, in the absence of effervescence, the difference in methane concentrations between the three sampling methods was relatively small. However, when methane concentrations equaled or exceeded 20 mg/L (the approximate concentration at which effervescence occurs in the study area), IsoFlask® (closed system) samples yielded significantly higher methane concentrations than Direct‐Fill VOA (open system) samples, and Inverted VOA (semi‐closed system) samples yielded lower concentrations. These results suggest that open and semi‐closed system sample collection methods are adequate for non‐effervescing samples. However, the use of a closed system collection method provides the most accurate means for the measurement of dissolved hydrocarbon gases under all conditions. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
|
|
