Abstract: Carbon dioxide (CO2) enhanced oil recovery (EOR) provides a pathway for economic reuse and storage of CO2, a greenhouse gas. One challenge with this practice is ensuring CO2 injection does not result in target reservoir fluids migrating into overlying shallow (\textless1000 m) groundwater formations. Effective monitoring for leakage from storage formations could involve measuring sensitive chemical indicators in overlying groundwater units and within the producing formation itself for evidence of deviation from an initial state. In this study, produced waters and overlying groundwaters were monitored over a five-year period to evaluate which geochemical signals may be useful to ensure that oilfield produced waters did not impact overlying groundwaters. During this five-year period, a mature carbonate oil reservoir in the Permian Basin transitioned from a waterflooding operation to a water-alternating-gas injection (WAG), in which the formation was flooded with CO2 and various mixtures of produced water. Significant increases in dissolved inorganic constituents [alkalinity, TDS, Na+, Cl−, SO42−] were observed in produced waters following CO2 injection; however, carbonate reservoir dissolution-precipitation reactions appear to be minimal and injected CO2 appears to be stored via solubility trapping. Although there are statistically significant geochemical variations following CO2 injection, applying isometric log-ratios to certain parameters establishes a narrow range for post-CO2 injection produced waters. This narrow range can be considered a baseline for post-CO2 injection produced waters; this baseline can be utilized to monitor overlying local groundwaters for produced water intrusion. Additionally, certain parameters [Na+, Ca2+, K+, Cl−, alkalinity, and TDS] display large concentration disparities between produced water and overlying groundwaters; these parameters would be sensitive indicators of produced water intrusion into overlying groundwaters.

Abstract: Settlement in Israel’s Negev desert historically has been dependent on water conservation techniques. Fieldwork carried out on settlement sites constructed during the Byzantine period, when agriculture and trade flourished, revealed a variety of water installations some of which are in use today. Perennial springs in the Negev are generally small and difficult of access. Cisterns were the most common conservation devices and came in both large, enclosed and single, open forms. Cisterns were common particularly in the towns, where they were usually built as part of house foundations. Dams were discovered at several sites but proved to be inefficient and easily abandoned because of evaporation and siltation problems. Public reservoirs were part of the structure of the largest towns and were open and among the larges structures uncovered at settlement sites. Wells were distributed widely throughout the desert and were part of the only conservation system that did not depend directly on surface rainfall. A qanat system was located in the eastern Negev dating from the late settlement period before the area was abandoned at the turn of the eighth century. These various water systems raise questions about their builders and their origins, and suggests that builders originating in more humid Mediterranean environments tended to produce less adaptable installations than builders derived from the south or the east.

Abstract: Water harvesting is the intentional collection and concentration of rainwater and runoff to offset irrigation demands. Secondary benefits include decreased flood and erosion risk. Water harvesting techniques include micro- and macro-catchment systems, floodwater harvesting, and rooftop and groundwater harvesting. The techniques vary with catchment type and size, and the method of water storage. Micro-catchment water harvesting, for example, requires the development of small structures and targets increased water delivery and storage to the root zone whereas macro-catchment systems collect runoff water from large areas. The sustainability of water harvesting techniques at the local level are usually constrained by several factors such as labor, construction costs, loss of productive land, and maintenance, suggesting that multiple solutions are required to sustain the benefits of water harvesting techniques.