↓ Skip to main content

Increased stray gas abundance in a subset of drinking water wells near Marcellus shale gas extraction

Overview of attention for article published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
22 news outlets
blogs
19 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
431 tweeters
facebook
85 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
8 Google+ users
reddit
8 Redditors

Readers on

mendeley
395 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Increased stray gas abundance in a subset of drinking water wells near Marcellus shale gas extraction
Published in
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, June 2013
DOI 10.1073/pnas.1221635110
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert B. Jackson, Avner Vengosh, Thomas H. Darrah, Nathaniel R. Warner, Adrian Down, Robert J. Poreda, Stephen G. Osborn, Kaiguang Zhao, Jonathan D. Karr, Jackson RB, Vengosh A, Darrah TH, Warner NR, Down A, Poreda RJ, Osborn SG, Zhao K, Karr JD, R. B. Jackson, A. Vengosh, T. H. Darrah, N. R. Warner, A. Down, R. J. Poreda, S. G. Osborn, K. Zhao, J. D. Karr

Abstract

Horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing are transforming energy production, but their potential environmental effects remain controversial. We analyzed 141 drinking water wells across the Appalachian Plateaus physiographic province of northeastern Pennsylvania, examining natural gas concentrations and isotopic signatures with proximity to shale gas wells. Methane was detected in 82% of drinking water samples, with average concentrations six times higher for homes <1 km from natural gas wells (P = 0.0006). Ethane was 23 times higher in homes <1 km from gas wells (P = 0.0013); propane was detected in 10 water wells, all within approximately 1 km distance (P = 0.01). Of three factors previously proposed to influence gas concentrations in shallow groundwater (distances to gas wells, valley bottoms, and the Appalachian Structural Front, a proxy for tectonic deformation), distance to gas wells was highly significant for methane concentrations (P = 0.007; multiple regression), whereas distances to valley bottoms and the Appalachian Structural Front were not significant (P = 0.27 and P = 0.11, respectively). Distance to gas wells was also the most significant factor for Pearson and Spearman correlation analyses (P < 0.01). For ethane concentrations, distance to gas wells was the only statistically significant factor (P < 0.005). Isotopic signatures (δ(13)C-CH4, δ(13)C-C2H6, and δ(2)H-CH4), hydrocarbon ratios (methane to ethane and propane), and the ratio of the noble gas (4)He to CH4 in groundwater were characteristic of a thermally postmature Marcellus-like source in some cases. Overall, our data suggest that some homeowners living <1 km from gas wells have drinking water contaminated with stray gases.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 431 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 395 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 15 4%
United Kingdom 6 2%
Germany 3 <1%
Canada 3 <1%
France 2 <1%
Mexico 2 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 363 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 83 21%
Student > Master 78 20%
Researcher 78 20%
Student > Bachelor 65 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 4%
Other 74 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 110 28%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 91 23%
Engineering 55 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 45 11%
Social Sciences 24 6%
Other 70 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 720. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 May 2017.
All research outputs
#4,994
of 9,726,436 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#197
of 53,185 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51
of 130,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#6
of 940 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,726,436 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 53,185 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 130,982 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 940 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.