Hydraulic Properties of a Sandy Loam Soil following Spent Drilling Mud Application on Native Prairie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Water‐based drilling mud (WBM) systems are used by the petroleum industry during drilling of oil and natural gas wells. Provincial regulations in western Canada allow disposal of spent WBM on cropland and sometimes native prairie at low rates. There is concern, however, that application of drilling waste on native prairie in semiarid climates may alter soil properties, which may adversely affect soil biophysical processes and overall ecosystem productivity. This study was initiated to examine the effects of single and multiple applications of differential rates (0, 40, and 80 m 3 ha −1 ) of summer‐applied WBM on hydraulic conductivity ( K ψ ) and macropore indices. Results from unconfined, steady‐state infiltration measurements taken at −0.03‐ and −0.01‐m supply pressure potentials (ψ) at the soil surface provide evidence of a significant alteration of these hydraulic parameters with excessive (80 m 3 ha −1 ) drilling mud application. Across the ψ range investigated, K ψ measured 5 to 7 wk after a single mud application and the effective water‐transmission macroporosity (θ Δψ ) calculated using the K ψ decreased by 54 and 61%, respectively, at 80 m 3 ha −1 compared with the control (0) and 40 m 3 ha −1 rates. Corresponding decreases 5 to 8 wk after a third annual mud application were 62 and 72%. While the rate effect had disappeared 1 yr after the single application, the effect of three annual applications persisted into the following summer. By modifying soil hydrophysical properties, excessive drilling mud applications may adversely affect the soil water balance and alter the plant community structure in this sensitive ecosystem, with important implications on overall biological productivity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".