Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on August 2, 2011 at 10:02

Yes, but can I get to that place without walking through the mud?  I have never seen the lake this low in my lifetime and I was fishing and hunting on it when it was brand new.  It's falling a half inch to an inch a day and I may have to wade fish in September because there will be no operable boat ramps remaining.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on August 2, 2011 at 10:16

I was thinking moonshine fracs but then all the corn burned up.  Seriously there is one and only one solution - rain.  However this temporary drought is a great reason to solve the challenge of reconditioning and reusing frac water.  Much better for the environment and the long term bottom lines of the operators even after the rains return.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sarah on August 2, 2011 at 13:51

And tropical storm Don was a big disappointment.  Praying ya'll get rain soon.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by dbob on August 2, 2011 at 15:35

Ok, to get back on topic

 

Ben, there are many technologies that can treat flowback for reuse.  Reserve osmosis and distillation can result in pure water without the negative characteristics I mentioned.  Either method produces a volume of concentrated waste (salt water and some precipitated salts) that need to be handled.  Ion replacement and ion membrane technologies can be used to reduce the concentration of ions that cause some of the issues (such as calcium, magnesium, sulfate, ferrous or ferric iron).  This recycled water will have a TDS/ionic strength similar to the flowback or produced water, and may not be directly suitable for re-use.  Where you can arrive at a suitable ionic composition, this water can be used to dilute the volume of freshwater needed.  There are other treatment technologies that can be used depending on the targets and flowback chemistry.  

 

Part of the problem is actually the limited flowback - if you get say 30% of the water back from a Haynesville well at one year, with high volumes at first and much lower volumes later on, you either have to have a centralized treatment system, or on-site treatment.  Any flowback you move, you do either in trucks or traditional saltwater lines.  You can't move it in the above ground temporary lines used for freshwater due tot eh risk of spills or leaks.  Trucking really hurts the economics.   If you were getting flowback more evenly over a longer period and/or large volume it would make more sense to develop the infrastructure.  

 

I'll post more related stuff in a bit, after I finish getting a few things done tonight.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ben Elmore on August 3, 2011 at 3:05

There seem to be significant limitations (time, money, processing, lack of reuse) to using produced water/recycled water.  I would think the industry would concentrate on finding an alternative fluid, such as LPG, that would be more efficient and potentially reusable. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Craig Wascom on August 2, 2011 at 15:58

Hi Ben. I live in the Permian Basin and I can assure you that there will be a water showdown. We just don't have any left. My question is will this shift drilling to Louisiana where there is no shortage of fresh water?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ben Elmore on August 3, 2011 at 3:02

I don't think it will shift all drilling to LA, because we are talking about significant oil reserves in the Permian and wet gas/oil reserves in the Eagle Ford.  I think there will be (and probably already is) concerted action taken to solve the problem.  Drilling will likely slow down and I would expect companies will move some of their focus to their other prospects until a solution is reached (companies may even use the slow down as leverage to get the water they want).  It will definitely be a political battle with probably competing studies on the effect of fracing on the water supply, etc...  Those on the water conservation side are likely to point to alternatives, which is why I posted this out of curiosity to see what is out there.  I represent some non-operating stakeholders and landowners who are concerned they might not get drilled because of the water situation.  Of course, that is not the only variable as to whether or not they get drilled, but it is the variable a lot of folks are focused on.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by dbob on August 3, 2011 at 2:53

Going forward, there are a vareity of companies offering services. Here is a press release from Fountain Quail regarding an RRC permit for water recycling in the Eagle Ford. http://www.fountainquail.com/assets/Aqua-Pure_Eagle_Ford_Permit.pdf

Fountain Quail has done a good bit of work in the Barnett, but not in the Haynesville, to my knowledge.


and here is one in PA: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/the-first-pennsylvania-dep-...
Note the reference to making road salts or water softening salts with the byproduct. IMHO, that isn't going to be feasible due to some of the concerns with trace minerals.

These type techonologies and companies can certainly fill a void if the GCD conservation districts clamp down on frac supply. More on that - for those not familiar, in Texas, a GCD, once established, can generally permit and regulate local water withdrawal. There are certain exemptions, such as rig supply, but in general, if a GCD sees fit to make a rule that generally conforms to state law, there isn't much a company could do. This could include limiting the flow rate on a per well basis based on the area associated with the water well, limiting the total volume of water withdrawal from a well, etc. Obviously companies could pay landowners (if they agreed) for additional lands on which to put frac water wells. GCDs can also regulate the export of water from their GCD. So a hypothetical Shelby county GCD could prevent use of its water in adjacent counties.

In the Haynesville Shale play, as well as most areas east of I-35, surface water is relatively abundant and could potentially make up shortfalls if GCDs clamped down. West of I-35, the precipitation rates, evaporation rates, and prior allocation of water rights make it more difficult to use primarily surface water.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by dbob on August 3, 2011 at 3:15

In the context of avoiding GCD induced slow downs, there are some things operators might want to look at. For the purposes of discussion, lets call them "good neighbor" policies.

First, in many parts of the state, there are multiple zones or formations of fresh to brackish water available. In conjunction with the GCD, and/or by using TWDB data, an operator could target the less desireable water for frac water use. In many cases, this will be water with moderate TDS (700-2000 ppm) and/or problems with iron, sulfate, etc. It may require some treatment, but should generally be more cost effective than treating flowback or produced water. It also avoids taking the water the GCD and locals most highly value.

Next up is water well spacing - many operators tend to cluster wells at a frac pond. spreading those wells out, even a few hundred more feet, may make a difference. Building on that, where possible, operators should plan in advance and pump at a lower rate in terms of gallons per minute. The specific rate should be based on the aquifer characteristics. Spacing wells out, coupled with moderate flow rates, will generally produce a more modest cone of depression around the frac supply wells. This can help prevent adjacent landowenr wells from going dry and/or experiencing taste and odor problems.

Water well completion design is also an issue. Some waterwell drillers screen across multiple freshwater zones of variable quality. This can lead to the introduciton of poor quality water into freshwater of better quality. Many of the GCDs will require plugging to wells of this type.

Next up, as a good neighbor, companies might wish to offer adjacent well owners water testing services from a fully acredited lab. Many times, well owners have never had their water tested before, haven't done maintenance on the well, and have wells with casing or other issues. If accomplished before fracing, good quality testing can identify some of these problems.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ben Elmore on August 3, 2011 at 3:29

Helpful stuff dbob.  Thanks a lot.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by dbob on August 3, 2011 at 5:49

In PetroHawks quarterly report today, they note using recycled water in about half their wells, and if I read correctly, meeting about 20% of their frac water needs with recylced flowback.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page