MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2464959755 · doi:10.1021/acs.est.5b01780

Characterization and Analysis of Liquid Waste from Marcellus Shale Gas Development

2015· article· en· W2464959755 on OpenAlexaff
Jhih-Shyang Shih, James E. Saiers, Shimon C. Anisfeld, Ziyan Chu, Lucija Muehlenbachs, Sheila M. Olmstead

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlfred P. Sloan Foundation
KeywordsWastewaterEffluentEnvironmental scienceHydraulic fracturingProduced waterWaste managementOil shaleEnvironmental engineeringPetroleum engineeringGeologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydraulic fracturing of shale for gas production in Pennsylvania generates large quantities of wastewater, the composition of which has been inadequately characterized. We compiled a unique data set from state-required wastewater generator reports filed in 2009-2011. The resulting data set, comprising 160 samples of flowback, produced water, and drilling wastes, analyzed for 84 different chemicals, is the most comprehensive available to date for Marcellus Shale wastewater. We analyzed the data set using the Kaplan-Meier method to deal with the high prevalence of nondetects for some analytes, and compared wastewater characteristics with permitted effluent limits and ambient monitoring limits and capacity. Major-ion concentrations suggested that most wastewater samples originated from dilution of brines, although some of our samples were more concentrated than any Marcellus brines previously reported. One problematic aspect of this wastewater was the very high concentrations of soluble constituents such as chloride, which are poorly removed by wastewater treatment plants; the vast majority of samples exceeded relevant water quality thresholds, generally by 2-3 orders of magnitude. We also examine the capacity of regional regulatory monitoring to assess and control these risks.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.355
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.178 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations115
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207