IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v15y2022i13p4521-d844029.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Characterizing Various Produced Waters from Shale Energy Extraction within the Context of Reuse

Author

Listed:
  • Tiffany Liden

    (Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, The University of Texas at Arlington, 700 Planetarium Place, Arlington, TX 76019, USA)

  • Zacariah L. Hildenbrand

    (Collaborative Laboratories for Environmental Analysis and Remediation, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX 76019, USA
    Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, The University of Texas at El Paso, 500 W. University Ave, El Paso, TX 79968, USA)

  • Ramon Sanchez-Rosario

    (Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, The University of Texas at El Paso, 500 W. University Ave, El Paso, TX 79968, USA)

  • Kevin A. Schug

    (Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, The University of Texas at Arlington, 700 Planetarium Place, Arlington, TX 76019, USA
    Collaborative Laboratories for Environmental Analysis and Remediation, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX 76019, USA)

Abstract

Environmental concerns with unconventional oil and gas development are frequently centered on elevated water usage and the induction of seismic events during waste disposal. Reuse of produced water for subsequent production well stimulation can effectively address these concerns, but the variability among such samples must be well understood. Twenty-four samples of wastewater from unconventional oil and gas development were collected from south and west Texas to assess their variability and feasibility for direct reuse. Bulk metrics were collected, including total organic carbon, total nitrogen, as well as total dissolved and suspended solids. The profiles of pertinent inorganic constituents were also evaluated. Variations were not only seen between regions but also among samples collected from the same region. For example, the average total organic carbon for Eagle Ford samples collected was 700 ± 500 mg/L, while samples collected from the Permian Basin featured an average total organic carbon concentration of 600 ± 900 mg/L. The Permian Basin total organic carbon ranged from 38 to 2600 mg/L. The total dissolved solids levels had the same variability between regions, with an average value for Eagle Ford of 20,000 ± 10,000 mg/L and a Permian Basin value of 150,000 ± 40,000 mg/L. However, samples were more reproducible within a given region. Collectively, the data indicate that the direct reuse of raw produced water for subsequent production well development without treatment is not feasible based on the reported reuse thresholds. Unconventional development wastewater samples from the Permian Basin were also compared to produced water values from conventional oil and gas wells in the same region, as reported by the United States Geological Survey. Samples collected in the Permian Basin consistently demonstrated lower ionic strength compared to conventional produced water data.

Suggested Citation

  • Tiffany Liden & Zacariah L. Hildenbrand & Ramon Sanchez-Rosario & Kevin A. Schug, 2022. "Characterizing Various Produced Waters from Shale Energy Extraction within the Context of Reuse," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-15, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2022:i:13:p:4521-:d:844029
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/13/4521/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/13/4521/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ebenezer T. Igunnu & George Z. Chen, 2014. "Produced water treatment technologies," International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(3), pages 157-177.
    2. Wang, Qiang & Chen, Xi & Jha, Awadhesh N. & Rogers, Howard, 2014. "Natural gas from shale formation – The evolution, evidences and challenges of shale gas revolution in United States," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 1-28.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sharafian, Amir & Talebian, Hoda & Blomerus, Paul & Herrera, Omar & Mérida, Walter, 2017. "A review of liquefied natural gas refueling station designs," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 503-513.
    2. Xiaoyan Zou & Xianqing Li & Jizhen Zhang & Huantong Li & Man Guo & Pei Zhao, 2021. "Characteristics of Pore Structure and Gas Content of the Lower Paleozoic Shale from the Upper Yangtze Plate, South China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-29, November.
    3. Sofia Dahlgren & Jonas Ammenberg, 2021. "Sustainability Assessment of Public Transport, Part II—Applying a Multi-Criteria Assessment Method to Compare Different Bus Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-30, January.
    4. Luis Sarmiento & Thorsten Burandt & Konstantin Löffler & Pao-Yu Oei, 2019. "Analyzing Scenarios for the Integration of Renewable Energy Sources in the Mexican Energy System—An Application of the Global Energy System Model (GENeSYS-MOD)," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-24, August.
    5. Wang, Qiang & Li, Shuyu & Li, Rongrong & Ma, Minglu, 2018. "Forecasting U.S. shale gas monthly production using a hybrid ARIMA and metabolic nonlinear grey model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 378-387.
    6. Cuilin Li & Ya-Juan Du & Qiang Ji & Jiang-bo Geng, 2019. "Multiscale Market Integration and Nonlinear Granger Causality between Natural Gas Futures and Physical Markets," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-23, October.
    7. Cai, Zhengyu & Maguire, Karen & Winters, John V., 2019. "Who benefits from local oil and gas employment? Labor market composition in the oil and gas industry in Texas and the rest of the United States," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    8. Xue-Ting Jiang & Rongrong Li, 2017. "Decoupling and Decomposition Analysis of Carbon Emissions from Electric Output in the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-13, May.
    9. Wang, Qiang & Li, Rongrong, 2016. "Journey to burning half of global coal: Trajectory and drivers of China׳s coal use," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 341-346.
    10. Kuchler, Magdalena & Höök, Mikael, 2020. "Fractured visions: Anticipating (un)conventional natural gas in Poland," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    11. Wang, Qiang & Jiang, Feng, 2019. "Integrating linear and nonlinear forecasting techniques based on grey theory and artificial intelligence to forecast shale gas monthly production in Pennsylvania and Texas of the United States," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 781-803.
    12. Furlan, Claudia & Mortarino, Cinzia, 2018. "Forecasting the impact of renewable energies in competition with non-renewable sources," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 1879-1886.
    13. Yi Hu & Feng Liu & Yuqiang Hu & Yong Kang & Hao Chen & Jiawei Liu, 2019. "Propagation Characteristics of Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Induced Fractures under True Tri-Axial Stresses," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-13, November.
    14. Ikonnikova, Svetlana & Gülen, Gürcan & Browning, John & Tinker, Scott W., 2015. "Profitability of shale gas drilling: A case study of the Fayetteville shale play," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 382-393.
    15. Reda Abdel Azim & Saad Alatefi & Ahmad Alkouh, 2023. "A Coupled Poro-Elastic Fluid Flow Simulator for Naturally Fractured Reservoirs," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-26, September.
    16. Rongrong Li & Xue-Ting Jiang, 2017. "Inequality of Carbon Intensity: Empirical Analysis of China 2000–2014," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-12, April.
    17. Xuan Yang & Rongrong Li, 2018. "Investigating Low-Carbon City: Empirical Study of Shanghai," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, April.
    18. Blundell, Wesley & Kokoza, Anatolii, 2022. "Natural gas flaring, respiratory health, and distributional effects," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    19. Wang, Qiang & Li, Rongrong, 2016. "Natural gas from shale formation: A research profile," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 1-6.
    20. Wen Li & Yuxi Liu & Siqi Xiao & Yu Zhang & Lihe Chai, 2018. "An Investigation of the Underlying Evolution of Shale Gas Research’s Domain Based on the Co-Word Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-23, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2022:i:13:p:4521-:d:844029. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.