Groundwater methane in a potential coal seam gas extraction region

Study region: This study investigates dissolved methane distribution in groundwater from the Richmond River Catchment (New South Wales, Australia) before proposed coal seam gas (CSG, or coal bed methane) development. Study focus: Unconventional gas exploration has rapidly expanded in recent years. H...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Marnie L. Atkins, Isaac R. Santos, Damien T. Maher
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2015-09-01
Series:Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214581815000853
_version_ 1818061943438573568
author Marnie L. Atkins
Isaac R. Santos
Damien T. Maher
author_facet Marnie L. Atkins
Isaac R. Santos
Damien T. Maher
author_sort Marnie L. Atkins
collection DOAJ
description Study region: This study investigates dissolved methane distribution in groundwater from the Richmond River Catchment (New South Wales, Australia) before proposed coal seam gas (CSG, or coal bed methane) development. Study focus: Unconventional gas exploration has rapidly expanded in recent years. However, the impact of these operations on groundwater systems is poorly understood. A total of 91 groundwater samples were analyzed from 6 geological units. Our observations act as regional baseline research prior to CSG extraction and may assist with long term impact assessment. New hydrological insights for the region: Methane was found in all geological units ranging between 0.26 and 4427 μg L−1 (median 10.68 μg L−1). Median methane concentrations were highest in chloride-type groundwater (13.26 μg L−1, n = 58) while bicarbonate-type groundwater had lower concentrations (3.71 μg L−1). Groundwater from alluvial sediments had significantly higher median methane concentrations (91.46 μg L−1) than groundwater from both the basalt aquifers (0.7 μg L−1) and bedrock aquifers (4.63 μg L−1); indicating geology was a major driver of methane distribution. Methane carbon stable isotope ratios ranged from –90.9‰ to –29.5‰, suggesting a biogenic origin with some methane oxidation. No significant correlations were observed between methane concentrations and redox indicators (nitrate, manganese, iron and sulphate) except between iron and methane in the Lismore Basalt (r2 = 0.66, p < 0.001), implying redox conditions were not the main predictor of methane distribution.
first_indexed 2024-12-10T13:56:21Z
format Article
id doaj.art-8e2c90f0e19a49798c091c3179994527
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2214-5818
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-10T13:56:21Z
publishDate 2015-09-01
publisher Elsevier
record_format Article
series Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies
spelling doaj.art-8e2c90f0e19a49798c091c31799945272022-12-22T01:45:57ZengElsevierJournal of Hydrology: Regional Studies2214-58182015-09-014PB45247110.1016/j.ejrh.2015.06.022Groundwater methane in a potential coal seam gas extraction regionMarnie L. Atkins0Isaac R. Santos1Damien T. Maher2School of Environmental Science and Management, Southern Cross University, Lismore, New South Wales 2480, AustraliaSchool of Environmental Science and Management, Southern Cross University, Lismore, New South Wales 2480, AustraliaSchool of Environmental Science and Management, Southern Cross University, Lismore, New South Wales 2480, AustraliaStudy region: This study investigates dissolved methane distribution in groundwater from the Richmond River Catchment (New South Wales, Australia) before proposed coal seam gas (CSG, or coal bed methane) development. Study focus: Unconventional gas exploration has rapidly expanded in recent years. However, the impact of these operations on groundwater systems is poorly understood. A total of 91 groundwater samples were analyzed from 6 geological units. Our observations act as regional baseline research prior to CSG extraction and may assist with long term impact assessment. New hydrological insights for the region: Methane was found in all geological units ranging between 0.26 and 4427 μg L−1 (median 10.68 μg L−1). Median methane concentrations were highest in chloride-type groundwater (13.26 μg L−1, n = 58) while bicarbonate-type groundwater had lower concentrations (3.71 μg L−1). Groundwater from alluvial sediments had significantly higher median methane concentrations (91.46 μg L−1) than groundwater from both the basalt aquifers (0.7 μg L−1) and bedrock aquifers (4.63 μg L−1); indicating geology was a major driver of methane distribution. Methane carbon stable isotope ratios ranged from –90.9‰ to –29.5‰, suggesting a biogenic origin with some methane oxidation. No significant correlations were observed between methane concentrations and redox indicators (nitrate, manganese, iron and sulphate) except between iron and methane in the Lismore Basalt (r2 = 0.66, p < 0.001), implying redox conditions were not the main predictor of methane distribution.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214581815000853Stable isotopesAquiferBaseline researchGeologyCatchmentHydrochemistryCoal bed methaneUnconventional gas
spellingShingle Marnie L. Atkins
Isaac R. Santos
Damien T. Maher
Groundwater methane in a potential coal seam gas extraction region
Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies
Stable isotopes
Aquifer
Baseline research
Geology
Catchment
Hydrochemistry
Coal bed methane
Unconventional gas
title Groundwater methane in a potential coal seam gas extraction region
title_full Groundwater methane in a potential coal seam gas extraction region
title_fullStr Groundwater methane in a potential coal seam gas extraction region
title_full_unstemmed Groundwater methane in a potential coal seam gas extraction region
title_short Groundwater methane in a potential coal seam gas extraction region
title_sort groundwater methane in a potential coal seam gas extraction region
topic Stable isotopes
Aquifer
Baseline research
Geology
Catchment
Hydrochemistry
Coal bed methane
Unconventional gas
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214581815000853
work_keys_str_mv AT marnielatkins groundwatermethaneinapotentialcoalseamgasextractionregion
AT isaacrsantos groundwatermethaneinapotentialcoalseamgasextractionregion
AT damientmaher groundwatermethaneinapotentialcoalseamgasextractionregion