The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Methane contamination of drinking water accompanying gas-well drilling and hydraulic fracturing
Open accessAbstract
Directional drilling and hydraulic-fracturing technologies are dramatically increasing natural-gas extraction. In aquifers overlying the Marcellus and Utica shale formations of northeastern Pennsylvania and upstate New York, we document systematic evidence for methane contamination of drinking water associated with shale-gas extraction. In active gas-extraction areas (one or more gas wells within 1 km), average and maximum methane concentrations in drinking-water wells increased with proximity to the nearest gas well and were 19.2 and 64 mg CH 4 L -1 ( n = 26), a potential explosion hazard; in contrast, dissolved methane samples in neighboring nonextraction sites (no gas wells within 1 km) within similar geologic formations and hydrogeologic regimes averaged only 1.1 mg L -1 ( P < 0.05; n = 34). Average δ 13 C-CH 4 values of dissolved methane in shallow groundwater were significantly less negative for active than for nonactive sites (-37 ± 7‰ and -54 ± 11‰, respectively; P < 0.0001). These δ 13 C-CH 4 data, coupled with the ratios of methane-to-higher-chain hydrocarbons, and δ 2 H-CH 4 values, are consistent with deeper thermogenic methane sources such as the Marcellus and Utica shales at the active sites and matched gas geochemistry from gas wells nearby. In contrast, lower-concentration samples from shallow groundwater at nonactive sites had isotopic signatures reflecting a more biogenic or mixed biogenic/thermogenic methane source. We found no evidence for contamination of drinking-water samples with deep saline brines or fracturing fluids. We conclude that greater stewardship, data, and—possibly—regulation are needed to ensure the sustainable future of shale-gas extraction and to improve public confidence in its use.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Distribution of oxygen-18 and deuterium in river waters across the United States
Kendall, C., & Coplen, T. B. (2001) · Hydrological Processes · doi:10.1002/hyp.217 · Cited by 831
Cited by
Etiope, G., & Sherwood Lollar, B. (2013) · Reviews of Geophysics · doi:10.1002/rog.20011 · Cited by 620
The shale gas revolution: Barriers, sustainability, and emerging opportunities
Middleton, R. S., Gupta, R., Hyman, J. D., & Viswanathan, H. S. (2017) · Applied Energy · doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.04.034 · Cited by 359
Saha, D., Grappe, H. A., Chakraborty, A., & Orkoulas, G. (2016) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00745 · Cited by 316
Smith, K. R., Frumkin, H., Balakrishnan, K., Butler, C. D., Chafe, Z. A., Fairlie, I., Kinney, P., Kjellstrom, T., Mauzerall, D. L., McKone, T. E., et al. (2013) · Annual Review of Public Health · doi:10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031912-114404 · Cited by 285
Estimating the Carbon Sequestration Capacity of Shale Formations Using Methane Production Rates
Tao, Z., & Clarens, A. (2013) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es401221j · Cited by 163
Metadata
- Authors
- Osborn, S. G., Vengosh, A., Warner, N. R., & Jackson, R. B.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2011-05-09
- Volume
- 108
- Issue
- 20
- Pages
- 8172-8176
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W2162643797
- Cited by
- 1,285
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 104.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Methane contamination of drinking water accompanying gas-well drilling and hydraulic fracturing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.1100682108
- The paper
- Osborn, S. G., Vengosh, A., Warner, N. R., & Jackson, R. B. (2011). Methane contamination of drinking water accompanying gas-well drilling and hydraulic fracturing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1100682108
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.