Transcript Slide 1

Background Information



Extraction of CBM requires
withdrawal of large amounts of
water from coal seams containing
methane.
Projections call for disposal or
management of one quarter million
acre-feet of product water annually
in the Powder River Basin.
Water quality issue: common
signature of CBM product water is
salinity x sodicity at varying levels.
MSU CBM Product Water
Management Team Research Goals



Understand the chemistry, quantity, and
distribution of CBM product water in the
Powder River Basin.
Assess the interaction between surface
dispersed CBM product water and soil,
water, plants, groundwater and land
resources.
Conduct research to help define CBM
product water management strategies
which will ensure sustainability of
Montana’s soil, plant, and water
resources while allowing for CBM
development.
Objectives



What is saline water? What is sodic
water?
MSU research on interaction of CMB
product water with soil, plants, water,
ground water, and land resources
Can we manage CBM product water?
What is saline water and why is it
considered saline?


Saline water has a relatively high concentration of
dissolved salts.
Salinity of water is referred to in terms of Total Dissolved
Solids (TDS),


salinity is estimated by measuring the Electrical Conductivity (EC)
of water
The U.S. Department of Agriculture defines water with an
EC greater than 3.0 dS/m as saline, ~ 1,920 ppm.
What is sodic water and
why is it considered sodic?

The sodicity of water is expressed as the
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) which is:


SAR  Na / (CA + MG) / 2
(These values are in meq/L)
Sodic water is any water with a SAR greater
than 12. Sodic water is not necessarily saline.
Generalizations about CBM
Product Water Quality

Range in TDS of PRB CBM product water is 270-2,730
ppm, average is 740 ppm; median is 838 ppm

Drinking water standard is 500 ppm

Livestock water standard is 5,000-10,000 ppm

SAR range of 5-68.7, median 8.8; threshold = 12

EC (SP) ranges from < 0.5 to > 10 dS/m across basin;
threshold = 3.0 dS/m
CBM product water in the
Powder River Basin - knowns

Trend of increasing sodium adsorption
ratio (SAR), electrical conductivity (EC)
and total dissolved solids (TDS)
progressing north and west through the
basin (Rice et al., 2000).
Additional knowns



Most wells in southern portion are
within the irrigation standards;
Most wells in the northern section are
above the limits for salinity and sodicity
(Rice et al., 2002).
Soils are generally high in clays and can
be saline-sodic.
North
Dakota
Miles City
Forsyth
1
South
Dakota
32
24
3
Montana
53
45
Wyoming
18
24
8
32
Circle size is
Proportional to TDS
Number is SAR
29
7
11 7
6
Casper
Figure compliments of John Wheaton,
Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology
What are the common difficulties
with the use of sodic water for
irrigation?

Use of sodic water for irrigation can be risky
business on soils having significant amounts of
swelling clay. On such soils:


sodium changes soil physical properties, leading to poor
drainage and crusting, which can affect crop growth
and yield.
Irrigation with sodic water on sandy soils does not
cause crusting and poor drainage. However, if the
water is saline-sodic, it may affect crop growth and
yield.
REDUCED HYDRAULIC
CONDUCTIVITY
-Shainberg and Letey, 1984
EC/ SAR RELATIONSHIP, INCLUDING
SOIL TYPE AND RAINFALL EFFECT
-Saskatchewan, 1995
Management of Sodic Soils

Basic rule –



the first thing you need is good drainage an outlet to which to send the sodium
when it is displaced.
a source of calcium (already in the soil or
as an amendment), and exchange process,
a source of water to flush the sodium from
the system
Management of Saline Soils

Saline soil reclamation requires as a
minimum:





assessment of the problem
diagnosis
mechanisms for drainage
a water supply
Leach the soil with enough non-saline
water that the salts are moved below
the root zone.

Adequate drainage is absolutely necessary
for this procedure to be successful!
Sustainability of crop production in
Saline/Sodic Conditions

Certain conditions need to be met:





the soil being irrigated must be well-drained
salt tolerant crops should be the primary crops
grown
rotations should be planned to provide for a
sequence of progressively more salt tolerant crops
salts should be leached out of the soil in the spring
or winter
as the salinity of either the irrigation water or soil
solution increases (with prolonged crop water use
and through the irrigation season), the volume of
irrigation water applied should be progressively
increased.
Salinity & Sodicity Tolerance of Selected Plant
Species of the Northern Cheyenne Reservation
Nikos Warrence – M.S. Candidate
Tolerance and/or sensitivity of selected plants
on the Northern Cheyenne Reservation to
salinity, sodicity, and flooding



Understand how native and culturally
significant plants would respond to
increases in salinity and sodicity.
A list of native and culturally significant
plant species was obtained from the
Department of Environmental
Protection, Northern Cheyenne Tribe.
A thorough search of references
dealing with salinity and sodicity
tolerances for the plants in question
was then completed.
Tolerance and/or sensitivity of culturally significant plant
species on the Northern Cheyenne Reservation to
salinity, sodicity, and flooding 
Sensitive (EC < 2 dS/m,
SAR 1.6 - 8








June/Service Berry
Red Osier Dogwood
Red Shoot Goose
Berry
Chokecherry
Wild Plum
Quaking Aspen
Leafy Aster
Red Raspberry

Moderately Sensitive
(EC 2-4 dS/m, SAR <8)











Common Spikerush
Field Horsetail
Horsemint
Sweet Medicine
Sandbar Willow
Snowberry
Cattail
Sweet Grass
Saw Beak Sedge
Stinging Nettle
Western Yarrow
Water Quantity and Quality Will
Dictate Water Management Options

Discharge to surface streams




Surface discharge, spreading, irrigation
Discharge to impoundments



Ephemeral v. perennial
Loosing v. gaining
Evaporation v. infiltration
Long term recharge v. abandonment
Re-Injection – shallow v. deep
Options for Beneficial Use







Livestock – watering, dispersals,
enhancement of forage utilization- ???
Fish and wildlife –flow augmentation and
salinity modification-quality dependent
Industrial – dust, fire, extraction, new uses
Irrigation and added rainfall effects-???
Aquifer recharge, water storage ???
Recreation ???
Augmentation of domestic supplies – wells
Saline and sodic conditions promote
new plant communities


Typically, encroachment by saline and
sodic water promotes development of
salt-tolerant, halophytic communities
Commonly occurring species include:



Prairie cordgrass Cattail
Baltic rushes
American bullrush
Salt cedar
Alkali grass
Native, establishment, survivor plants
first appearing in areas exposed to
saline-sodic water






With addition of saline-sodic water these plants will
invade/occupy moist to wet zones of the channel
bank
Inland saltgrass (Distichlis spicata)
Prairie and alkali cordgrass (Spatina
pectinata/gracilis)
Baltic rush (Juncus balticus)
Nuttalls alkaligrass (Pucinellia nuttalliana – not very
competitive, colonizer)
Foxtail barley (Hordium jubatum – not very
competitive, colonizer)
Plants that will occupy dry/moist
transition areas when exposed to
CBM product water





Canada wildrye – Elymus Canadensis
Slender wheatgrass/inland saltgrass – Elymus
trachycaulus
Western wheatgrass – Pascopyrum smithii
Tall wheatgrass – Thinopyrum ponticum
Timothy, meadow foxtail, bromegrass
Pers. Comm: Q. Skinner, UWyoming
Options for salt-tolerant species





Amshot grass
Atriplex species
Sudan grass
Seacoast barley
Sharp-leaved rush
Helalia et al., 1990
Hay barley
Sunflower
Upland rice
Maritime barley
Samaar moor
rush
Effects of surface irrigation water
quality and water table position on
the ability of selected plant species
to remove salts and sodium
Shannon D. Phelps, Graduate Student
M.S. in Land Rehabilitation Department
of Land Resources and Environmental
Sciences. Montana State University,
Bozeman. Dec. 2002
Species selection

Selection criteria



Documented capability as a perennial
source of livestock forage
Documented halophytic
characteristics
Species
Wytana saltbush (Atriplex wytana.),
extremely salt tolerant shrub
naturally occurring in Montana,
Washington, and Wyoming
(Mackie et al., 2001)
Big saltbrush (Atriplex lentiformis),
moderately salt tolerant, native shrub
known for high productivity and
quality forage potential (Watson et
al., 1987)
Maritime Barley (Hordeum marinium),
salt tolerant, flood tolerant species
found in coastal environments
reported to provide high nutritional
value (Redman and Fedec, 1987)

Planting

Direct seed 30 per column
Control
Treatment
35.00
30.00
Dry biom ass(g)
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
Ariplex w ytana
Atriplex lentiformis
Hordeum marinium
Species
Average dry biomass of Atriplex wytana,Atriplex lentiformis, and
Hordeum marinium over three harvests irrigated with control and
treatment water quality (average across all water table positions; no
drainage)
35.00
Atriplex w ytana
Atriplex lentiformis
Hordeum marinium
30.00
dry biomass(g)
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
114cm
76cm
38cm
Depth to w ater table
Average biomass production over three successive harvests for columns
maintained at three separate water table positions. Water table
positions are maintained at 114, 76, and 38cm below soil surface
0.10
Cum ulative salts(g/g dry w eight)
0.09
control
0.08
treatment
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.00
Atriplex wytana
Atriplex lentiformis
Hordeum marinium
Sp ecies
Cumulative salt content reported as grams of total salts (Ca, Mg, Na) per
gram of dry matter irrigated with treatment and control water
averaged over three water table positions and three harvests for
Atriplex wytana, Atriplex lentiformis, and Hordeum marinium.
11.00
CBM SAR
10.00
control-Atriplex wytana
treatment-Atriplex wytana
9.00
8.00
SAR
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
PR SAR
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
Weeks
SAR of shallow groundwater over a 32-week period of irrigation of Atriplex
wytana(no drainage, average of all water table positions) Bold horizontal lines
at SAR=3.5 and SAR=10.5 correspond to applied water SAR
EC of shallow groundwater over a 32-week period of irrigation of Atriplex
wytana(no drainage, average of all water table positions) Bold horizontal lines at
EC=1.9dS/m and EC=3.5dS/m correspond to applied water EC.
1 1 .00
CBM SAR
1 0.00
9.00
control-Hordeum marinium
8.00
treatment-Hordeum marinium
SAR
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
PRSAR
3.00
2.00
1 .00
0.00
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
Weeks
SAR of shallow groundwater over a 32-week period of irrigation of
Hordeum marinium(no drainage, average of all water table positions)
Bold horizontal lines at SAR=3.5and SAR=10.5 correspond to applied
water SAR
EC of shallow groundwater over a 32-week period of irrigation of
Hordeum marinium(no drainage, average of all water table positions)
Bold horizontal lines at EC=1.9dS/m and EC=3.5dS/m correspond to
applied water EC
Summary
Sustainable CBM product water management
requires rigorous monitoring and
coordinated management





Essential requirements –
Soil, water, and plant baseline information
Amount and quality of CBM product water
Rigorous monitoring at all points
Coordinated water management with multiple
strategies
A Strategy for CBM product
water management

Key elements to CBM product water
management





Watershed based water management
Surface and ground water in concert
Maximize beneficial uses – infrequent
water spreading
Maximize plant consumptive use –
reducing water volumes with wetlands
Minimize deep drainage
MSU CBM product water
management group







Shannon Phelps – M.S. graduated
Nikos Warrence – M.S. pending
Meg Buchanan – Jon Wraith
Melissa Mitchem – Doug Dollhopf
Holly Sessoms – M.S. candidate
Amber Kirkpatrick – M.S. candidate
Jason Drake – B.S. – Field/Greenhouse
Technician








Allison Levy – B.S. Candidate
Natalie McGowan – B.S. Candidate
Keri Garver – Ph.D. Candidate
Kim Hershberger – M.S. Res. Assoc.
Krista Pearson – B.S. – Proj. Assist. – Tech Transfer
Suzanna Roffe – B.S. – Proj. Assist. - Education
Kristin Keith – M.S. – Associate – Outreach/Education
Bernie Schaff – M.S. – Proj. Assist.-Field Operations

Subcontracts –



Drake Engineering, Helena – Product water
treatment plant
Suzanne Mickelson – Dept. Plant Sciences
– forage barley genetics/enhancement
Susan Capalbo – pending – Economics of
CBM development
Funding Sources 






U.S. Department of Energy in conjunction with
Bureau of Land Management
Montana Board of Commercialization and Technology
Transfer
U.S.D.A. – Federal Extension Service
U.S.D.A. – C.S.R.E.E.S. Regional Water Quality
program – Northern Great Plains and Mountains
Northern Cheyenne Tribe
Prairie County Conservation District
U.S.D.I. – Bureau of Reclamation & Buffalo Rapids
Irrigation District
MSU Water Quality Web Site

http://waterquality.montana.edu/