1. This article examines the organic-compound composition of shale-gas wastewater samples, with a focus on identifying compounds that may be formed from hydraulic fracturing additives in subsurface transformations.
2. The study uses purge and trap coupled to GC–flame ionization detection or GC–MS, as well as liquid–liquid extraction followed by GC–MS, GC×GC–FID, and GC×GC–TOF-MS.
3. Compounds are classified according to their possible origin (geogenic or anthropogenic) and those likely formed as transformation products are postulated based on chemical structure or abundance patterns.
The article “Indications of Transformation Products from Hydraulic Fracturing Additives in Shale-Gas Wastewater” is an informative and comprehensive examination of the organic-compound composition of shale-gas wastewater samples. The authors use a variety of analytical techniques to identify compounds that may be formed from hydraulic fracturing additives in subsurface transformations, and classify them according to their possible origin (geogenic or anthropogenic). The authors also provide confidence criteria for compound assignment, such as NIST library agreement with forward and reverse similarity greater than 85%, plausible retention behavior in accordance with the NIST Kovats retention indices, and confirmation with authentic standards.
The article is generally reliable and trustworthy; however, there are some potential biases that should be noted. For example, the authors rely heavily on NIST library matches for compound identification; while this is useful for many applications, it is not ideal for nontarget analysis due to its relatively poor mass resolution and slow acquisition time. Additionally, the authors note that HDPE bottles are not ideal for any organic chemical analyses due to potential losses to the headspace and polyethylene; however, they do not discuss any potential implications this could have on their results. Furthermore, while the authors provide postulated reactions by which certain compounds may form as transformation products, they do not provide evidence for these claims or explore counterarguments.
In conclusion, this article provides a thorough examination of shale-gas wastewater samples; however, readers should be aware of potential biases related to reliance on NIST library matches for compound identification and potential losses due to sample collection methods.