Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Bird Mortality in Oil Field Wastewater Disposal Facilities

  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Commercial and centralized oilfield wastewater disposal facilities (COWDFs) are used in the Western United States for the disposal of formation water produced from oil and natural gas wells. In Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming, COWDFs use large evaporation ponds to dispose of the wastewater. Birds are attracted to these large evaporation ponds which, if not managed properly, can cause wildlife mortality. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) conducted 154 field inspections of 28 COWDFs in Wyoming from March 1998 through September 2008 and documented mortality of birds and other wildlife in 9 COWDFs. Of 269 bird carcasses recovered from COWDFs, grebes (Family Podicipedidae) and waterfowl (Anatidae) were the most frequent casualties. Most mortalities were attributed to oil on evaporation ponds, but sodium toxicity and surfactants were the suspected causes of mortality at three COWDFs. Although the oil industry and state and federal regulators have made much progress in reducing bird mortality in oil and gas production facilities, significant mortality incidents continue in COWDFs, particularly older facilities permitted in the early 1980’s. Inadequate operation and management of these COWDFs generally results in the discharge of oil into the large evaporation ponds which poses a risk for birds and other wildlife.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albers PH (2003) Petroleum and individual polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. In: Hoffman DJ, Rattner BA, Burton GA Jr, Cairns J Jr (eds) Handbook of ecotoxicology, 2nd edn. Lewis publishers, Boca Raton, FL, pp 341–371

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryner G (2006) Energy outlook in the West relative to extractive industries and disposition of produced waters. Produced Waters Work Shop, April 4–5, Colorado Water Resources Institute, Colorado State University, Information Series No. 102. Fort Collins, Colorado, pp 20–25

  • Energy Information Administration (EIA) (2007) Number of Producing Gas and Gas Condensate Wells. Available at http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/-ng/ng_prod_wells_s1_a.htm (Accessed July 2007)

  • Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (1997) Guidance on the use of Section 7003 of RCRA. EC-G-1998-378. Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies-/civil/rcra/rcrasect7003-rpt.mem.pdf. Accessed Dec 2008

  • EPA (2003) Report of the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 8 oil and gas environmental assessment effort 1996–2002. Available at: http://epa.gov/region08/-land_waste/ogeafinalreport.pdf. Accessed Oct 2006

  • Esmoil BJ, Anderson SH (1995) Wildlife mortality associated with oil pits in Wyoming. Prairie Naturalist 27(2):81–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Flickinger EL (1981) Wildlife mortality at petroleum pits in Texas. Journal of Wildlife Management 45(2):560–564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flickinger EL, Bunck CM (1987) Number of oil-killed birds and fate of bird carcasses at crude oil pits in Texas. Southwestern Naturalist 32:377–381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grau CR, Roudybush T, Dobbs J, Wathen J (1977) Altered yolk structure and reduced hatchability of eggs from birds fed single doses of petroleum oils. Science 195:779–781

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Grover VL (1983) The reduction of wildlife mortality in the sump pits of southeast New Mexico. Bureau of Land Management Report, Albuquerque, NM

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartung R (1965) Some effects of oiling on reproduction of ducks. Journal of Wildlife Management 29(4):872–874

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartung R (1967) Energy metabolism in oil-covered ducks. Journal of Wildlife Management 31(4):798–804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartung R, Hunt GS (1966) The toxicity of some oils to waterfowl. Journal of Wildlife Management 30(3):564–570

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs RPWM, Grant ROH, Kwant J, Marqueine JM, Mentzer E (1992) The composition of produced water from shell operated oil and gas production in the North Sea. In: Ray JP, Englehart FR (eds) Produced water. Plenum Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • King K, LeFever CA (1979) Effects of oil transferred from incubating gulls to their eggs. Marine Pollution Bulletin 10:319–321

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lee RC (1990) Bird kills in contained oil: a biopolitical enforcement strategy. Proceedings Annual Conference Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies 44:444–447

    Google Scholar 

  • Leepen EM (1976) Symposium weighs effects of oil pollution. BioScience 26(10):601–604

    Google Scholar 

  • Lustick S (1976) Wetting as a means of bird control. Bird Control Seminars Proceedings 7:41–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Meteyer CU, Dubielzig RR, Dein FJ, Baeten LA, Moore MK, Jehl JR Jr, Wesenberg K (1997) Sodium toxicity and pathology associated with exposure of waterfowl to hypersaline playa lakes of southeast New Mexico. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostics Investigation 9:269–280

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) (2005) Produced water from oil and natural gas operations—setting the context. Program Facts. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy. Available at: http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/oil-gas/publications/AP/Program063.pdf. Accessed July 2007

  • Office of Technology Assessment (OTA), U.S. Congress (February 1992) Managing industrial solid wastes from manufacturing, mining, oil and gas production, and utility coal combustion-background paper. Chap. 4: Oil and gas wastes. OTA-BP-O-82. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, pp 66–88

  • Ramirez P Jr (2005) Oilfield-produced water discharges into wetlands: benefits and risks to wildlife. Environmental Geoscience 12(2):65–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ronconi RA, St. Clair CC, O’Hara PD, Burger AE (2004) Waterbird deterrence at oil spills and other hazardous sites: potential applications of radar-activated on-demand deterrence system. Marine Ornithology 32:25–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Szaro RC (1979) Bunker C fuel oil reduces mallard egg hatchability. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 22:731–732

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Trail P (2006) Avian mortality at oil pits in the United States: a review of the problem and efforts for its solution. Environmental Management 38:532–544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veil JA, Puder M, Elcock D, Redweik R Jr (2004) A white paper describing produced water from production of crude oil, natural gas, and coal bed methane. Argonne National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory. Contract W-31-109-Eng-38, 79 pp

Download references

Acknowledgments

This article is based on work by the author as well as Randy Lamdin, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, RCRA Enforcement Program; Dennis Lamb, Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality; and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Office of Law Enforcement Special Agents: Tim Eicher, Roy Brown, and Dom Dominici. Special thanks are extended to George T. Allen, Dan Blake, and Scott Hicks, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, for reviewing this manuscript and providing useful advice and information. The findings and conclusions in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pedro Ramirez Jr..

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ramirez, P. Bird Mortality in Oil Field Wastewater Disposal Facilities. Environmental Management 46, 820–826 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-010-9557-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-010-9557-4

Keywords

Navigation