Resource is brought to you by the Alberta Energy Regulator.
Alberta - April 23, 2018

When an oil company proposed spraying drilling waste on Jeff Fluney’s fields, his response was an understandable “no.” But when the company came knocking again the next year, he had a change of heart.

Fluney says he decided to give it a try after learning that the waste had been extensively tested according to Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) requirements and it wasn’t going to hurt the land.

Landowner Jeff Fluney There are strict rules in place for companies to follow, and no one would violate that as there are consequences

Jeff Fluney, Landowner

“There are strict rules in place for companies to follow, and no one would violate that as there are consequences,” he says.

The Lloydminster-area landowner says that his crops “have been as good or better since the landspraying.” He has allowed the practice on his land for about six or seven years and reports that even some of his neighbours have agreed to have their land sprayed after seeing the outcome on his fields.

Landspraying—the spraying of drilling waste fluids onto fields—is one way to dispose of drilling waste. Drilling waste is drilling mud—fluids used in the drilling of oil and gas wells and pipelines—combined with dirt, clay, and crushed rocks (known as cuttings) that have returned to the surface during drilling.

Strong Controls In Place

Not just any waste is allowed to be sprayed onto fields, explains Dalene Meier, an AER environment technical specialist who works out of the Bonnyville Field Centre.

“The waste that can be landsprayed must be water-based. It must be tested for specific chemical levels, and based on the analysis, it will be determined whether it can be sprayed onto the land and what the allowable spray rate would be,” she says.

As for the effect on the land, there is no scientific evidence to show that it does improve crops, but landowners have said that the moisture is helpful, notes Meier.

In addition, a company must get permission from the landowner before spraying.

The AER requires companies to take several factors into account when determining whether land is appropriate for landspraying, including its slope and its proximity to water bodies.

“It’s all to make sure that the drilling waste that is applied to the land is staying where it is meant to be and not migrating somewhere that could cause a potential adverse effect,” says Meier.

Fluney can attest to this. Referring to a water body on his land, he said, “we go skating on that pond in the wintertime, and the water stays clear.”

To ensure that companies comply with the rules, AER inspectors inspect and audit land that has been sprayed, and they respond to any complaints.

Common drilling waste disposal methods

  • Mixing drilling waste with subsoil on the well site
  • Storing in pits and landfills at an approved waste management facility
  • Applying drilling waste on land through spraying onto land

We welcome all comments, and encourage you to be part of the discussion by sharing your thoughts and opinions on Resource stories. When leaving a comment, know that your first and last names will appear, but not your email. Also, all comments must adhere to the AER’s General Social Media Terms of Use and will be reviewed against these terms, which means that we may choose to publish only part or none of the comment. This also means that comments will not be published immediately.

Add new comment

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

5 + 6 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.

Story Comments

Andy McNabb

Mixing an environmentally friendly absorbent at the drill site to create a stackable solid under D50, 'Alternative Method' is an excellent choice to eliminate the cost of transportation to southern landsprayong options or anytime during winter months.

Mitch

Great article!
I would also like to add the fact that this mamagement method is critical in water use. It keeps our precious resource within the biologically-available environments, and we can consider the industrial activity as a “rental” of the water resource. The alternative is deep-well
Disposal, taking the water out of the hydrological cycle indefinitely.

Diana Daunheimer

What the AER is not telling the public, is that appreciable amounts of hydrocarbons, heavy metals, salts and other deleterious compounds are permitted to be applied in landspray while drilling. As well, drilling wastes may contain Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials, or NORMs, to which the AER does not mandate testing, therefore, landowners may be subjecting their land, water, air and livestock to dangerous and persistent and highly mobile radioactive compounds.

Near our home, Angle Energy applied diesel invert contaminated waste on agricultural lands and left contaminated waste in unlined sumps for 5 months.

Diana Daunheimer

What the AER is not telling the public, is that appreciable amounts of hydrocarbons, heavy metals, salts and other deleterious compounds are permitted to be applied in landspray while drilling. As well, drilling wastes may contain Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials, or NORMs, to which the AER does not mandate testing, therefore, landowners may be subjecting their land, water, air and livestock to dangerous and persistent and highly mobile radioactive compounds. Any decent and educated farmer would refuse to allow their land to be tainted with heavy metals, hydrocarbons, and all the distinct hazardous materials produced in returned drilling fluids.

Additionally, testing of drillings wastes and follow up testing of lands applied with drilling wastes are substandard, at best. Most waste parameters and soil end points are estimated, not tested.

Near our home, Angle Energy applied diesel invert contaminated waste on agricultural lands and left contaminated waste in unlined sumps for 5 months. Other wastes failed microtox testing but was mixed, buried and covered on site anyways.

From our legal action:

"117. Tests indicated that one of the sump pits contained quantities of benzene, ethyl-benzene, toluene and hydrocarbon that were above disposal guidelines. In particular, the sump pit contained levels of F2 hydrocarbons that were 773 times the disposal guidelines, and levels of F3 hydrocarbons that were 836 times the disposal guidelines.
118. Test conducted on the sump pit #1 for Well 09-15 detected significant levels of arsenic, barium, boron, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, tin, vanadium and zinc and detectable levels of antimony, hexavalent chromium, mercury, uranium, benzene, toluene, ethyl-benzene, xylene, and petroleum hydrocarbons F1 to F4, as well as high levels of chlorides, sodium, sulphur and potassium. This waste was buried on-site, despite failing micro-toxicity testing in April of 2013."

No wonder there is no scientific evidence such waste applications improve soil quality, since it is incomprehensible and scientifically impossible to suggest or fake studies that would show amending soil with hazardous wastes are advantageous. The AER and industry are using our agricultural lands as toxic waste dumps.

Diana Daunheimer

What the AER is not telling the public, is that appreciable amounts of hydrocarbons, heavy metals, salts and other deleterious compounds are permitted to be applied in landspray while drilling. As well, drilling wastes may contain Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials, or NORMs, to which the AER does not mandate testing, therefore, landowners may be subjecting their land, water, air and livestock to dangerous and persistent and highly mobile radioactive compounds. Any decent and educated farmer would refuse to allow their land to be tainted with heavy metals, hydrocarbons, and all the distinct hazardous materials produced in returned drilling fluids.

Additionally, testing of drillings wastes and follow up testing of lands applied with drilling wastes are substandard, at best. Most waste parameters and soil end points are estimated, not tested.

Near our home, Angle Energy applied diesel invert contaminated waste on agricultural lands and left contaminated waste in unlined sumps for 5 months. Other wastes failed microtox testing but was mixed, buried and covered on site anyways.

From our legal action:

"117. Tests indicated that one of the sump pits contained quantities of benzene, ethyl-benzene, toluene and hydrocarbon that were above disposal guidelines. In particular, the sump pit contained levels of F2 hydrocarbons that were 773 times the disposal guidelines, and levels of F3 hydrocarbons that were 836 times the disposal guidelines.
118. Test conducted on the sump pit #1 for Well 09-15 detected significant levels of arsenic, barium, boron, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, tin, vanadium and zinc and detectable levels of antimony, hexavalent chromium, mercury, uranium, benzene, toluene, ethyl-benzene, xylene, and petroleum hydrocarbons F1 to F4, as well as high levels of chlorides, sodium, sulphur and potassium. This waste was buried on-site, despite failing micro-toxicity testing in April of 2013."

No wonder there is no scientific evidence such waste applications improve soil quality, since it is incomprehensible and scientifically impossible to suggest or fake studies that would show amending soil with hazardous wastes are advantageous. The AER and industry are using our agricultural lands as toxic waste dumps.

Diana Daunheimer

What the AER is not telling the public, is that appreciable amounts of hydrocarbons, heavy metals, salts and other deleterious compounds are permitted to be applied in landspray while drilling. As well, drilling wastes may contain Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials, or NORMs, to which the AER does not mandate testing, therefore, landowners may be subjecting their land, water, air and livestock to dangerous and persistent and highly mobile radioactive compounds. Any decent and educated farmer would refuse to allow their land to be tainted with heavy metals, hydrocarbons, and all the distinct hazardous materials produced in returned drilling fluids.

Additionally, testing of drillings wastes and follow up testing of lands applied with drilling wastes are substandard, at best. Most waste parameters and soil end points are estimated, not tested.

Near our home, Angle Energy applied diesel invert contaminated waste on agricultural lands and left contaminated waste in unlined sumps for 5 months. Other wastes failed microtox testing but was mixed, buried and covered on site anyways. Angle violated rules, which are not strict, and there were no consequences.

From our legal action:

"117. Tests indicated that one of the sump pits contained quantities of benzene, ethyl-benzene, toluene and hydrocarbon that were above disposal guidelines. In particular, the sump pit contained levels of F2 hydrocarbons that were 773 times the disposal guidelines, and levels of F3 hydrocarbons that were 836 times the disposal guidelines.
118. Test conducted on the sump pit #1 for Well 09-15 detected significant levels of arsenic, barium, boron, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, tin, vanadium and zinc and detectable levels of antimony, hexavalent chromium, mercury, uranium, benzene, toluene, ethyl-benzene, xylene, and petroleum hydrocarbons F1 to F4, as well as high levels of chlorides, sodium, sulphur and potassium. This waste was buried on-site, despite failing micro-toxicity testing in April of 2013."

No wonder there is no scientific evidence such waste applications improve soil quality, since it is incomprehensible and scientifically impossible to suggest or fake studies that would show amending soil with hazardous wastes are advantageous. The AER and industry are using our agricultural lands as toxic waste dumps.

Contributors

Sign up for our weekly stories!