Jump to content

Anybody Interested In Water?


Don Andersen
 Share

Recommended Posts

Folks,

 

Another energy company is applying for a fresh water extraction well on the shores of the N. Sask.

Enerplus is applying for a volume of 1,111,370 cubic meters of fresh water/year for oilfield water injection.

The extraction well location is SE23-047-08-W5.

Only those people directly effected can object to this use of fresh water.

I cannot do it, I am not directly effected however, last I looked Edmonton's water supply comes from the same fresh water source.

You have ONE month only to file an objection.

 

I have been involved with these type of issues for the past 10 years. Need more, call or send email and I'll get you started in the how's of advocating for preservation of fresh water.

 

Note: 1,111,370 meters is the volume required for a city population of <> 750,000 people. When fresh water is gone from the earth surface - it is gone!

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

Don

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Don

Does not the water eventually find its way down there anyway if the oil is extracted via another method..?

 

I don't understand all the ramifications but I would look at any info you would share and consider sending a letter..

 

altawolf@hotmail.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. n . [Well Completions, Enhanced Oil Recovery]

A method of secondary recovery in which water is injected into the reservoir formation to displace residual oil. The water from injection wells physically sweeps the displaced oil to adjacent production wells. Potential problems associated with waterflood techniques include inefficient recovery due to variable permeability, or similar conditions affecting fluid transport within the reservoir, and early water breakthrough that may cause production and surface processing problems.

See: hot waterflooding, injection well, low-salinity waterflooding, residual oil, secondary recovery

 

http://www.spe.org/a...57996-page1.pdf

 

http://www.environme...Policy_2006.pdf

 

 

Here is some background information so that people can make an informed decision based on their own knowledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.cpge.utex.../SPEdislect.pdf

 

More information on how it works.

 

I have problems with water being remove from our local lakes as that has proven to significantly reduce the water level on that body with in its drainage system An example would be Cold Lake for the steam or SAGD projects in the region, combined with a significant long term drouth in the last 2 decades. And in lakes the water recovery is not as significant as it is in major flowing water drainages that are fed by rain water, snow and ice melt. So in my mind there is a significant difference in disposable or useable water. In the NSR I would suspect that the vast majority of it runs to the ocean and I dont really see a significant long term effect. IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys,

 

For the past 15 years I've been involved with fresh water issues in the Central Alberta area. A group of grey haired men and women took on the issue of fresh water usage. The group started as a result of Petro-Canada wanting a water extraction well in the Stauffer Creek aquifer. This group is called the Butte Action Committee. For a whole whack of info on fresh water use in Alberta see: http://www.waterdropcycle.com

The Butte Action Committee is the reason that most Alberta residents now have a clue on where fresh water goes.

Over the years we opposed fresh water extraction wells in our area. Doing so encouraged companies to switch to alternate sources of enhanced recovery. Many companies switched all or in part to other sources.

 

Note: fresh water is not finite. Once it's gone - it's gone! And curiously, trout really like fresh water.

 

 

Don

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are we affected as Edmonton residents or as fishermen? Maybe we should bring this up at the next Wednesday meeting before we get into chicken talk. Since there is a deadline, we cannot wait for the next business meeting or executive meeting. Alberta is a dry place. The glaciers are receding. We've had some good snow pack the last couple of years, but aquifers are more of a long-term issue. This is more serious than a city of a million, because not all the water used by a city is lost to evaporation, some of it goes back to the river. The evaporated water is also not lost from the hydrological cycle. Water pumped down an oil well is gone for a while...We're talking geological time scales now. As far as we are concerned, that is as good as for ever.

Florin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Florin,

 

Time sensitive it is. This is the reason the Butte Acton Committee had to represent the Town of Eckville when one company wanted to remove 650 m/d of fresh water next to Eckville's town water supply. We represented members throughout Central Alberta.

The issue is always revolves around the Dept. of environment's definition of "directly effected".

Sometimes the directly effected area is very tiny suggesting some influence of the definition.

With Edmnton's drinking water coming from the same source, the Dept. of En. may have to see Edmonton's residents as directly effect.

Mind you, I wouldn't put money on it!

 

Regards,

 

 

Don

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Graham,

 

I did not compare NSR with Stauffer. I shared why the Butte Action Committee got started.

While the group was originally concerned only about Stauffer, they soon realized that issue was much larger and few cared!

Took the Govt nearly 2 years to figure out what various water users really used. Took nearly the same time for the Dept. of En. to figure out who was responsible for enforcement. They originally told me that the fish cops did it. That surprised both them and me.

The oil companies were taken by surprise that people even cared about water. After all, they had been taking it with or without permission for 50 years. After we got a couple of hearings going did the oil companies realize that the worm had turned. Soon various oil company groups produced some very slick commercials.

Still, there were many oil companies that took an active interest in fresh water replacement which we acknowledged in new articles.

We also meet with the Minister of the Environment regarding fresh water usage. One of the subjects was fresh water displacement for enhanced recovery by using CO2 derived from the coal fire plants SW of Edmonton. Obviously hasn't happened yet!

Still, the question remains - is this a good use of fresh water?

Enhanced oil production benefits all of us. Fresh water has been the low cost source for many years for water floods.

 

Clearly this issue is something I see as important and I could go on forever on the how's and whys of the issue but I'm done.

Fortunately through the efforts of the geezers of the Butte Action Committee, fresh water is now seen as important.

See Govt "Water for Life" strategy.

 

 

Regards,

 

 

Don

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...