Hydrogen Organic Compounds Of Wells G & H

such as oil rigs and other major sources of chemical pollution from industries. Water samples from this region showed increased

4. The OTA analysis of the EPA monitoring study data provided limited, but not conclusive, indication that there may have been contamination in the EDA by toxic chemicals from Love Canal. OTA was able to examine only those data for chemicals known to have been disposed in Love Canal, as compared to the much larger universe of data analyzed by

Since I live in the Texoma area the majority of our drinking water comes from Lake Texoma. I think the three sources of groundwater contamination that might affect groundwater in my area would be human-made materials that are littered into the lake, agricultural activities, and human/animal wastes. There are a lot of people in the area who like to go fishing near the lake and drinking alcoholic beverages. These people throw their beer cans and all of their trash into the lake. They also urinate and defecate into the lake as well. There are many nearby farms and ranches to the lake and with all of the flooding water has run-off from these areas back into the lake.

In well 3A there was a chemical reaction between the sodium phosphate and copper sulfate. There was a light blue precipitate formation which proves there was a chemical reaction.

14. "ATRAZINE REMEDIATION IN THE LAKE LAVON WATERSHED of GRAYSON COUNTY, TEXAS," Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board, http://www.tsswcb.texas.gov/files/contentimages/01-07-FR-ATRGRAYSON-00-00-00.pdf.

Most on-base contamination was because of past disposal of hazardous waste due to their activities like maintenance of aircraft, tanks, and trucks, landfill operations etc that contributed to the contamination of soil and groundwater. The contaminants include volatile organic compounds (VOCs) like benzene, 1,2- dichloroethane, carbon tetrachloride, Chloromethane, trichloroethylene (TCE), total 1,2-dichloroethene (1,2-DCE), trans-1,2-DCE, and vinyl chloride, spent oils, fuels, PCB, pesticides (44-DDD and 44-DDT), metals and herbicides.

A half-mile neighborhood, in the town of Woburn, has a staggering 8 cases of Leukemia amongst children -- a rate that is three times the national average. These cases were discovered following the construction of local Wells G and H, both of which received complaints of water quality. Upon investigation, we discovered that the contamination of both of the wells is likely a significant factor in the health of Woburn residents. Pollutants used by companies in the area, trichloroethylene, are known to cause Leukemia. The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering discovered high amounts of trichloroethylene in wells G and well H. This chemical is commonly as a cleaning fluid -- the most efficient way to dispose of it being to simply discard the waste into a secluded body of water. In the case of Woburn, trichloroethylene seeped into soil which would later contaminate the water in both wells after they were built. Following the infrastructure of the water supply, the contaminated drinking water made its way to the neighborhood that would later experience the tragic loss of two children, and the following diagnosis of Leukemia in 6 others. We are hereby setting out to prove that the

Contaminated sediments are a significant problem in the Great Lakes basin. To reduced the discharge of toxic and persistent chemicals to the Great Lakes we must concentrations of contaminants in the bottom of rivers and harbors and have to raised considerable concern about potential risks to aquatic organisms, wildlife, and

7. The Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 established the basic framework for protecting the drinking water of the United States. Most ground water used for drinking water occurs near the earth’s surface and is easily contaminated .The major concern is the potential contamination of underground sources of the drinking water by any of the hundreds or thousands of subsurface wastewater disposal .Waste disposal wells dispose of approximately more than 11% of the nation’s toxic fluid waste. The injection wells can be good or bad and cause a major problem. Some of the wells are used many different ways like for a aquifer recharge and the production of oil, gas, or minerals. Also for improper usage as disposal of toxic and hazardous waste. The EPA

The site is characterized by contaminated groundwater encompassing an area approximately 800 acres underlying the city of Olean, the Town of Olean and the Town of Portville, and by contaminated soil at certain locations in the city and town of Olean. The site is approximately 65 miles southeast of Buffalo, New York, and seven miles north of the New York/Pennsy/Vania border. The

Included in the report are various organic and inorganic chemicals that may or may not be naturally occurring, amounts found, and where the chemicals are thought to be originating from. Like every city in the United States there is going to be elements and chemicals that are found that will scare some people. But the important thing to look at is the part per amount in the water. The water reports normally list every compound found in the water, as well as non-regulated compounds found. This is great because they do not discriminate on which compounds to list. After they receive the list, they then measure the amount usually parts million (ppm) or parts per billion (ppb). The Environmental Protection Agency has done extensive testing and found safe cutoff levels of these chemicals and in order for a city to produce drinking or potable water, they must adhere to these

In the United States, fracking and resulting injection wells are considered to be seriously contentious environmental issues because of how they add damage to water resources and the resulting effects on citizens that arise. A major question that one might ask from this is what is an injection well and how does it apply to how we define water pollution in 2018? The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines an injection well (UIC) as “a bored, drilled, or driven, shaft who’s depth is greater than the width; or an improved sinkhole; or a subsurface fluid distribution system. (EPA 1)” For the purpose of this study, the focus will be on wastewater injection wells, specifically in Oklahoma and Texas. According to the EPA, injection wells have

My goal after this course is to increase my knowledge in the groundwater contamination area and hopefully have my paperwork in the UIC library at work for future employees and also have it available online in Google Scholar. One of my topics that I am thinking is to research and study the long term effects of chemicals disposal underground. The disposal of chemicals and hazardous waste by underground injection has been performed around the world since the 1930’s. The are billions of gallons of chemicals disposed in the United States every month. Since I started working for the EPA and learned a lot about UIC, I am still wondering what will happen in the future if we continue to inject chemicals underground. The groundwater topic is very interesting and hope to learn a lot more while doing this research. I am excited because this has been a long road with many obstacles that I was able to cross. After this course I will

In recent years, technological advancement in analytical geochemistry has offered a new suite of non-traditional geochemical proxies developed from trace metals (e.g., Sr/Ca, Mg/Ca, Ba/Ca, B/Ca) (Lea and Spero, 1992, 1994; Nurnberg et al., 1996; Rosenthal et al., 1997; Lea et al., 1999; Lear et al., 2000; Martin et al., 2002; Billups and Schrag, 2003, 2004; Honisch and Hemming, 2004; Yu and Elderfield, 2007; Foster, 2008; Allen et al., 2009) and isotopic compositions (e.g., 87Sr/86Sr, δ11B, δ44/40Ca, and δ26Mg) of foraminiferal calcite (DePaolo and Ingram, 1985; De La Rocha and DePaolo, 2000; DePaolo, 2004; Fantle and DePaolo, 2005; Fantle, 2010; Hodell et al., 2007; Higgins and Schrag, 2012; Fantle and Tipper, 2014; Pogge von Strandmanss et al., 2014) that are complementary to the traditional foraminifera-based isotopic proxies. Moreover, the emerging metal isotopic proxies have potential to reconstruct past variability in seawater chemistry and thereby contribute strongly to understanding the long-term variation in metal cycling (e.g. Ca, Sr, Mg) that are directly linked to the global carbon cycle (Richter et al., 1992; Zhu and Macdougall, 1998; de La Rocha and DePaolo, 2000; Fantle and DePaolo, 2005; Hodell et al., 2007; Griffith et al., 2008; Higgins and Schrag, 2010; Higgins and Schrag, 2012, Fantle and Tipper, 2014; Pogge von Strandmanss et al., 2014). However, due to

Interactions between groundwater and surface water are complex. Consequently, groundwater pollution, sometimes referred to as groundwater contamination, is not as easily classified as surface water pollution.[7] By its very nature, groundwater aquifers are susceptible to contamination from sources that may not directly affect surface water bodies, and the distinction of point vs. non-point source may be irrelevant. A spill or ongoing releases of chemical or radionuclide contaminants into soil (located away from a surface water body) may not create point source or non-point source pollution, but can contaminate the aquifer below, defined as a toxin plume. The movement of the plume, a plume front, can be part of a Hydrological transport model or Groundwater model. Analysis of groundwater contamination may focus on the soil characteristics and site geology, hydrogeology, hydrology, and the nature of the contaminants.