A Presentation at the

17th

International Petroleum & BioFuels Environmental Conference

August 31 – September 2, 2010, San Antonio, Texas

Methods and Applications of Hydraulic Fracturing

Technologies Applied

to In-Situ Biological, Chemical and Bio-Chemical Remediation

of Hydrocarbon-Impacted Sites

Vincent E. Barlock

1 P.G., John V. Fontana P.G.

1;

1Vista GeoScience LLC, 130 Capital Dr., Golden, CO 80401, (303) 277-1694

VBarlock@VistaGeoScience.com, JFontana@VistaGeoScience.com

Abstract

Recent advances in direct-push tooling and machinery, real-time ground surface

displacement monitoring, and state-of-the-art bio-enhanced or chemical-enhanced proppants,

in conjunction with a wide-variety of injectates, has thrust hydraulic fracturing into the

environmental mainstream for the in-situ remediation of hydrocarbon-impacted sites across

the U.S. Direct-push & hydrofracturing technology is used to install enhanced in situ biological

“treatment sheets” or oxidation corridors in impacted media at refineries, along gas

transmission corridors, compressor station, and down-stream retail facilities to chemically

oxidize or bioaugment and/or biostimulate indigenous microbes. Under a cooperative

agreement with the EPA, this technology was implemented in the mid-80s and in 1995.

The technology utilizes anthropomorphic fractures and proppants to improve contact

time with the contaminant and create an environment that accelerates the remediation

process. Tooling and technology refinements are presented that have allowed previously

inaccessible impacted media to now be fractured and remediated. The reagents include

chemical oxidants, reductive treatments, aerobic and anaerobic biological systems, bacteria

augmentation, and combinations of both.

Quantitative real-time surface deformation monitoring technologies are presented that

have advanced the accuracy of estimates of the ROI. 3D geophysical methods that have the

ability to monitor subsurface movement of fluids during injection and remediation are also

discussed.

Methods & Applications of Hydraulic Fracturing Technologies Applied to In-Situ Biological and Chemical Remediation of Hydrocarbon-Impacted Sites

Vincent E. Barlock P.G .(Director of Remediation Services)

John V. Fontana P.G.(President/Owner)

Outline• Concept and Background

– The Up-side of Hydraulic Fracturing to Remediation of Hydrocarbon Sites

– Temporal Changes in Hydrofracturing Technology since the early 80’s

• Types of Hydrocarbon-impacted Sites Being Fractured

• Key Factors Affecting Selection of Fracturing Methodology

• The Process of Hydraulic Fracturing (simplified)

– Rig types

• Direct & Indirect Advances in Fracturing Technology

– Proppants

• Permanent

• Temporary

– ROI Monitoring

• Case Studies

– (1) S-ISCO of a Hydrocarbon/Solvent-Impacted Site in Texas

– (2) Fracture Emplacement of BOS-200 & Microbac at a Pipeline Leak Site in Colorado

– (3) Hydrofracture PT to Enhance a Stalled Air Sparge UST Site in Colorado

Vista GeoScience

Fracturing to enhance oil field production had its inception as early as 1929

Technology undertaken at depths between 2,000 and 20,000 feet bgs

Vista GeoScience

O&G Well Heads Equipped for Hydraulic Fracturing.

O&G Fracture Depths: typically >2,000 ft

Vista GeoScience

The Up-Side of Hydraulic Fracturing to Hydrocarbon Remediation is:

• Enhanced Injection of Remedial Fluids/Solids

• Enhanced Sparging & Recovery of ImpactedFluids

• Enhanced Porosity and Reagent Storage to Improve Remediation Success

• Enhanced Radius-Of-Influence (Both Saturated and unsaturated)

• Decreased Capital Cost & Long-Term O&M Costs

Vista GeoScience

Temporal Changes in Hydraulic Fracturing Technology• The Technology has been taken to shallow depths

(i.e. 4 to 150 feet bgs) and effectively implemented for remediation of petroleum and chlorinated Sites since the mid-1980s.

• 1980s: Simple single fractures; horizontal; limited volumes, limited R.O.I monitoring.

• 1990s: EPA, D.O.E & D.O.D- funded grants for Multiple fractures per boring; larger volumes; horizontal and vertical; enhanced R.O.I monitoring.

• 2000- 2010: Diversity of Proppants; Fracturing in of Pure remedial compounds; 3-D modeling of fractures; Emplaced in more difficult geology

Vista GeoScience

Vista GeoScience

UST Sites Refineries

So - What Type of Sites are Being Hydraulically Fractured ?

D.O.D & NASAFacilities

(D.F.C; P.C.D; R.A)

Solid Waste FacilitiesMilitary and Private

Industrial /CommercialFacilities

Vista GeoScience

Ruptured or Leaking Gas Transmission

Pipelines

Compressor Stations

Vista GeoScience

• THE REAL QUESTIONS YOUR SHOULD ASK ARE

• WHAT is the Ultimate Purpose(s) of the Fractures? Both Short- and Long-term.

• WHAT Method of Fracture Emplacement is Best Suited to Meet This Purpose? And

• WHAT Are the Key Factors Affecting the Method Selected?

• Successful Remediation Is Directly Related To Strategic Targeting Of the Proposed Fractures

• Host Rock, Depth of Impact, Vertical & Horizontal Extent of Impact, and Contaminant Mass must be known.

So How Does One Proceed ?

HOWEVER THIS IS RARELY THE CASE

Vista GeoScience

(1) HYDRO GEOLOGY•Tightness (i.e., low “K” of the lithologic units); • Lithologic heterogeneity:

• Shale, siltstone/claystone, limestone, etc.• Cohesiveness of soils; plasticity;•Contaminant type, distribution, and concentration• Degree of cementation / induration;• Flow direction & Magnitude

(2) PROXIMITY TO STRUCTURE•Anthropomorphic (bldgs., pools, utilities)•Geologic (faults, antiforms/synforms, joints/fractures)

(3) CAN YOU MAINTAIN ISOLATION DURINGFRACTURING?

Key Factors Affecting Hydraulic Fracturing Method Selection

Vista GeoScience

Key Factors That Adversely Affect Fracturing Method Selection

• Where and how are the impacts distributed in the subsurface (i.e., COCs in discrete intervals or large smear zones) ??

• Very shallow 2-10 feet vs: 10 -100 ft• COC Distribution (spotty or massive) • Cohesiveness of the soils / induration of the bedrock

• Conflicting reports and questionable data;• Poor logging/sampling techniques; incorrect soil/rock

classifications;• Difficult geology: well indurated or highly-fractured bedrock;

massive or heterogeneous soils

SO Which Method Should You Use??

Vista GeoScience

Direct Push (DPT) or Packers, Single/Dual, or a Combination ?

Vista GeoScience

Individual DPT -Dual Wall Point

(Conductor-casing approach)

Or Multiple Individual DPT Drive Points

Courteous of Foremost

Solutions Inc

Vista GeoScience

Conceptually: What do these fractures look like in the subsurface?

Variety of Fracture Types in Unconsolidated Materials: DPT Method Best for Emplacement

Courtesy of Foremost Vista GeoScience

Conceptualized DPT-emplaced Bionets ™/Fractures at a Hydrocarbon-Impacted UST Site

•Courtesy V. Barlock / Paul Willet

Vista GeoScience

Packers w H.S.A Drilling Typically Best for moderately-indurated Bedrock, & Semi-Consolidated Soils

•Typical Bedrock Sandstone in Denver Formation

•Courtesy TAM International

Vista GeoScience

18

Various In-Situ Injection/Fracture Rigs

Vista GeoScience

90% of Fracture Rigs in U.S. Today Emplace Fractures Using cross-linked Guar-gum as Breaking Fluid and Carrier

•Courtesy Foremost Inc.

Vista GeoScience

The Process of Hydraulic Fracturing (Stage 1)

Vista GeoScience

Straddle-Packer Technology for Fracture and Proppant Emplacement (Stage 2)

•Video & Animation Courtesy: Mr. Paul Willett

Vista GeoScience

Advances in Hydraulic FractureHydrocarbon Remediation

• BIONETS ™ and VERTICAL FRACTURES

– Used to Enhance stalled AS and AS/SVE Systems / sluggish

Extraction Systems and accelerate a variety of In-situ

treatments

• PROPPANTS:

– Permanent: Proppant stays in the fracture and is not

degraded over time

• (i.e., porous ceramics; silica sands; synthetics)

– Temporary: Proppant degrades over time

• (i.e., chitin, solid oxidants [i.e., K MnO4])

• FRACTURE MONITORING

– Ole-school: Survey and Rods for Radius of Influence (R.O.I)

– Today: Enhanced Real-time 3D modeling of R.O.I

Direct Advances

Vista GeoScience

• BIOREMEDIATION

• (Bio-stimulation & Bio-augmentation via fractures)

• Pre-inoculated support matrices using commercially available inoculums: (i.e., inoculation of Isolite)

• Emplacement of Bio-augmented Reactive Lenses/Fractures or Reactive Columns for treating various plume configurations

• Enhance and “Sustain” bioactivity with primary organic nutrient formulation injections via either DPT of open-bore hydraulic fractures

Direct Advances in Hydraulic Fracture Remediation (cont.)

Vista GeoScience

Proppants (Permanent)

• Silica Sand

– (Most Widely use Proppant)No. 10/20 mesh

– (Ne ~25-32%)

Vista GeoScience

Example of an Emplaced Sand Fracture/BioNet ™

•EPA Site: (courtesy: Foremost Solutions Inc.)

Vista GeoScience

Proppants (Permanent)• Isolite – Porous Ceramic

– 1 gram = 55 ft 2 surface area

– Can house up to 100M microbes

– 0.5-2 mm (Ne ~ 54-62%)

Vista GeoScience

Example of Emplaced Isolite Fracture/Bionet ™EPA Site: (Courtesy: Foremost Solutions Inc.)

Vista GeoScience

Proppants (Permanent)

28

• Various Resin-coated Silica Beads

– (Ne ~32%)

– Reduced Friction & Enhanced Air/Fluid flow

Vista GeoScience

Proppants (Temporary)

•Courtesy EPA

• IRON

• Zero Valent Iron

Vista GeoScience

Proppants (Temporary)

• Chitin (Polysaccharide)

• A class of carbohydrates, such as starch and cellulose

•Courtesy EPA Vista GeoScience

Proppants (Temporary)

• Solid Oxidants (Potassium

Permanganate- KMnO4)

•Courtesy EPA

•Courtesy Carus Chemicals

Vista GeoScience

Fracture ROI Monitoring Advances

Past:Visual Inspection of Tilt-Rods to measure ground displacement

Current:Survey & RodTo measure grounddisplacement (Pre & Post)

Vista GeoScience

Advances in R.O.I Monitoring

Real-Time:Sensitive Tilt Meters for Monitoring Ground Deformation in Real Time

Vista GeoScience

3,600 Arc-sec in 1º of tilt

(i.e., business card ~650 arc-seconds)

Advances in R.O.I Injection Monitoring Technology

•Conventional Bi-axial Tilt Meters

•Future “Wireless”

• Very Sensitive • Quickly Deployed•Courtesy Slope Indicator Inc.,

Vista GeoScience

35

Characteristic Temporal Injection / Hydraulic Fracture Tilt Meter Responses

Vista GeoScience

Monitoring Advances In Fracture / Bionet ™ Imaging

36

Accurate GIS Mapping of Monitoring Array Locations

•2-D & 3-D Plots of Inferred Fracture Morphology and ROI.

Vista GeoScience

Indirect AdvancesEnhanced Vertical Profiling to Target Fracture:

– MEMBRANE INTERFACE PROBE (MIP)

– (Example Presented)

– Fiber optic & Laser detection

– PDBs / Permeable membrane technology

– Heat-pulse or electromagnetic boreholeflow meters

Fracture/ Bionet ™ Mapping/Delineation

•Tilt meters

•Conventional and new wireless tech.

•Electrical Resistance Mapping

Vista GeoScience

Membrane Interface ProbeReal-time In the field readings allow for modifications to proposed fracture locations and depths

Vista GeoScience

CASE STUDY No. 1: SISCO Persulfate Injections; Texas: Initial MIP investigation (2008)

• Initial Location of Source (Hydrocarbons & Solvents)

• Clays (CL) and Silts (ML)

• Bedrock surface w/DNAPL

• Aquifer(Void Areas = SP/SW)

Vista GeoScience

Plume Configuration Pre-Surfactant Enhanced Pressure Injections (July 2008)

CASE STUDY No. 1: SISCO Persulfate Injections; Texas:

Initial MIP investigation (2008)

Vista GeoScience

CASE STUDY No. 1: Enhanced MIP Investigation 2009. Can Now StrategicallyTarget Fractures/Injections

•The Smoking Gun!! (neutralization tanks)

• Located the Vertical Conduit to Bedrock surface w/ DNAPL

• Initial Location of Source (Hydrocarbons and Chlorinated Solvents)

•Courtesy Columbia Technologies

Vista GeoScience

Plume ConfigurationPost- 2nd Rd. ofSurfactantEnhanced PressureInjections (July 2010)

CASE STUDY No. 1: SISCO Persulfate Injections; Texas:

Vista GeoScience

Case Study No. 2: NG-Transmission Pipeline Release, Colorado.

Vista GeoScience

Case Study No. 2: LG-Transmission Pipeline Release, Colorado.

• Evaluation of Micro-Bac and BOS- 200

• BOS- 200 injections following hydraulic fracturing of sandstone bedrock

Vista GeoScience

Case Study No. 2 (Cont.) Bos-200 & Micro-bac Hydrofrac Treatment Area

Vista GeoScience

GW Flow

6”-LNG line

Treatment Area

Case Study No. 2 (Cont.)

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Ben

zen

e C

on

cen

trait

on

(m

g/l

)

Sampling Date

Benzene Trends Following BOS-200 Injections

MW-17 Benzene BOS-1 Benzene BOS-2 Benzene BOS-3 Benzene

Vista GeoScience

Case Study No. 2 (Cont.)

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

Ben

zen

e C

on

cen

trait

on

(m

g/l

)

Sampling Date

Benzene Trends Following Micro-bac Injections

MW-16 Benzene MICRO-1 Benzene MICRO-2 Benzene MICRO-3 Benzene

Vista GeoScience

Case Study No. 3: UST Site: Air Sparge/Frac/Air Sparge(ATC Associates; Denver, CO.)

• Standard Testing for Pressure and DO Distribution

• Initial Air-Sparge System Install & Testing

48

Conceptualized DPT-emplaced Bionets ™/Fractures at a Hydrocarbon-Impacted UST Site

•Courtesy V. Barlock / Paul Willet

Vista GeoScience

Case Study No. 3: UST Site: Air-Sparge/Frac/Air-Sparge(ATC Associates; Denver, CO.)

Vista GeoScience

•Hydraulic fracture emplacement in progress at 23 ft bgs.

•TM-array deployed and real-time monitoring occurring

•Test in same bore as Air-Sparge Well

Pressure vs: ROI Results

Vista GeoScience

Dissolved Oxygen vs: R.O.I Results

Vista GeoScience

Dissolved Oxygen DistributionAir Sparge (Pre Hydrofrac) vs:Air Sparge (Post Hydrofrac ) ROI

Vista GeoScience

Results:• Post-Frac breakthrough pressure is 40% less than

Traditional AS; with 5X greater flow.

• D.O : 4X increase in the 5 mg/l contour area

• OPS (The UST Regulatory Agency) has authorized that 9 additional Air Sparge Wells be installed & hydraulically fractured prior to sparging

• OPS is recommending to Environmental Consultants with similar Sites in Colorado that they evaluate hydrofracturing as a viable technology to accelerate remediation of problematic

hydrocarbon-impacted facilities.

Vista GeoScience

Conclusions:

• Hydraulic Fracturing Via DPT and Conventional Packer Methods

is becoming the most-widely accepted means of in-situ remediation for hydrocarbon-impacted Sites constrained by low permeability soils and elaborate infrastructure.

• Hydraulic Fracturing and Enhanced Pressure Injections significantly improves the distribution of remedial solutions and contact time with contaminants, and accelerates the clean-up period, dramatically reducing costs $$$.

• Advances in the monitoring of the distribution of hydraulic fractures and or injection of viscous fluids has refined characterization of R.O.I and reduced the need for physical confirmation and additional spending.

Vista GeoScience

Figure, Animation, and Photo Acknowledgements

Vincent E. Barlock P.G . & John Fontana P.G.

John Ritchie P.E.,

Seth Hunt

Paul Willett

WebSite

57

Thank YouFor More Information Contact us at:

Vincent E. Barlock P.G . &

John V. Fontana P.G.

www.vistageoscience.com

Seth Huntwww.foremostsolutions.com

Ron Bell, Geophysicistswww.IGSdenver.com

International Geophysical

Services LLC (HGI)