Measurement and Testing


treated, desalinated, and then discarded responsibly. Generally, membrane-based modalities such as reverse osmosis are ideal for the removal of trace metals and salts. However, oilfield wastes can exhibit salt concentrations more than four times that of seawater, which can render traditional modalities ineffective and cost- prohibitive. This challenge, to desalinate brine solutions of notable ionic strength, coincides with significant financial implications, particularly with respect to the potential extraction of precious metals and the production of valuable chemicals.


Financial


Irrespective of the environmental benefits of produced water recycling, the widespread adoption and utilization of this ostensibly novel paradigm hinges on economics. And while it is often difficult, at least as an academic research group, to quantify the exact costs of buying fresh water, paying for trucking to deliver said water to a production site, paying for trucking to transport the resulting waste to a nearby salt water disposal site, and then paying the disposal fees – the cumulative costs appear to range between $1.75 and $2.75 per barrel, depending on logistics. As such, if produced water could be treated to the point of reuse and/or where it could be repurposed for agricultural applications for less than $1.75/bbl, then this method of waste management would be economically favorable for operators. Fortunately, the excitement surrounding ‘Permainia’ has triggered significant competition in the water treatment industry, and this is being reflected in operational expenditures. We have seen start up companies like Challenger Water Solutions transform highly variable oilfield waste into a reusable resource for approximately $1.00/bbl. Again, as one considers the amount of produced water that is being generated by the large unconventional production wells in the Permian region, even a cost savings of $0.75/bbl is substantial and would make any O&G CFO smile.


As previously mentioned, the inherent geochemical richness of produced water offers opportunities to extract precious elements during the recycling process. For example, in many shale energy


Author Contact Details - Zacariah Hildenbrand1,2 1 Inform Environmental, LLC, Dallas, TX 2


basins the representative produced water can exhibit extremely high levels of lithium, iron, and cobalt (Kang et al., 2017), which are of critical importance to the production of lithium-ion batteries. In other words, the recycling of produced water could not only save operators money by obviating the need to dispose of their waste through subsurface injection, it could also provide a source of revenue as the extracted metals are sold to battery manufacturers like Tesla. Further to this point, there are also now companies, such as Enviro Water Minerals, that can transform highly saline produced waters into hydrochloric acid, magnesium hydroxide, caustic agents, and other useful industrial chemicals. Collectively, the recycling of produced water can transform a waste source into a prized resource that can generate revenue from a number of different sectors.


Litigative


Risk mitigation is another reason why the systematic recycling of produced water makes sense for all operators, especially for those operating in Texas. According to Chapters 122 and 123 of the Natural Resource Code of Texas (treatment and recycling for beneficial use of fluid oil and gas waste, and treatment and recycling for beneficial use of drill cuttings, respectively), when oilfield waste is transferred from an operator to a recycling/treatment company, that waste is now the property of the recycler and so too is the liability. In fact, section 122.003 specifically states that the transfer of oilfield waste relinquishes liability in tort for any consequences of the subsequent use of the transferred product. In other words, upon transferring produced water to a recycler, the operator is no longer liable for any surface spills and/or the mismanagement of the waste. This has positive financial implications as it greatly reduces operator risk during an era when the amount of waste water being produced continues to grow.


Collectively, the benefits of recycling produced water are growing, as


are the incentives. This relatively new paradigm represents a significant opportunity within the oil and gas industry to champion environmental stewardship, all while reducing overhead costs associated with water management and potential liability. To learn more about produced


and Kevin Schug2,3 Affiliate of the Collaborative Laboratories for Environmental Analysis and Remediation (CLEAR), University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX 3 Department of Chemistry & Biochemistry, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX


51


water recycling and the various technologies that currently available, we invite you to join us in Arlington, TX on October 13th for the 2nd Annual Responsible Shale Energy Extraction Conference (www. shalescience.org). This year’s event will feature panel presentations with experts covering waste management strategies, water infrastructure, and emerging technologies. Bringing scientists, engineers, regulators, operators, technology developers, service companies, and the investment community together, this event is poised to be a unique environment for new collaborations, partnerships, and opportunities.


References (As they appear)


Backstrom, J., 2018. Groundwater Regulations and Hydraulic Fracturing: Reporting Water Use in the Permian. College Station.


Scanlon, B.R., Reedy, R.C., Male, F., Walsh, M., 2017. Water Issues Related to Transitioning from Conventional to Unconventional Oil Production in the Permian Basin. Environ. Sci. Technol. acs. est.7b02185. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b02185


Khan, N.A., Engle, M.A., Dungan, B., Holguin, F.O., Xu, P., Carroll, K.C., 2016. Volatile-organic molecular characterization of shale- oil produced water from the Permian Basin. Chemosphere 148, 126–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2015.12.116


Hornbach, M.J., Jones, M., Scales, M., DeShon, H.R., Magnani, M.B., Frohlich, C., Stump, B., Hayward, C., Layton, M., 2016. Ellenburger wastewater injection and seismicity in North Texas. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 261, 54–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pepi.2016.06.012


Hildenbrand, Z.L., Santos, I.C., Liden, T., Carlton Jr., D.D., Varona- Torres, E., Martin, M.S., Reyes, M.L., Mulla, S.R., Schug, K.A., 2018. Characterizing variable biogeochemical changes during the treatment of produced oilfield waste. Sci. Total Environ. 634, 1519–1529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.03.388


Jang, E., Jang, Y., Chung, E., 2017. Lithium recovery from shale gas produced water using solvent extraction. App. Geochem. 78, 343- 350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeochem.2017.01.016


The 2nd Annual Responsible Shale Energy Extraction Conference Hosted by the Collaborative Laboratories for Environmental Analysis


and Remediation The University of Texas at Arlington October 12-13, 2018 The Responsible Shale Energy Extraction (RSEE 2018) Conference is a unique event that brings together scientists, engineers, industry professionals, regulators, technology innovators, and concerned citizens to discuss the state of environmental stewardship within the shale energy sector. This year’s event will focus on freshwater and wastewater management and will include round table discussions on produced water recycling, water infrastructure, and emerging new technologies with industry leaders on these respective topics. This event will also feature a series of presentations by female pioneers in the shale sciences. The goals of the Responsible Shale Energy Extraction Conference are to further illustrate that shale energy extraction and environmental stewardship can be accomplished conjointly and that the further utilization of available technologies can have favorable environmental and economic implications.


The Responsible Shale Energy Extraction Conference will be hosted by the Collaborative Laboratories for Environmental Analysis and Remediation (CLEAR) at the University of Texas at Arlington, which is a multi-disciplinary research consortium led by Drs. Kevin Schug and Zacariah Hildenbrand. CLEAR is a neutral and objective entity that strives to provide data to inform decision-making and policy promulgation. CLEAR collects relevant scientific and engineering expertise to enable objective multidisciplinary research to examine anthropogenic processes within the context of environmental and human health. More specifically, CLEAR specializes in the comprehensive analysis and remediation of air, soil, and water quality and has developed numerous highly sensitive analytical methods for the characterization of contamination events. Most recently, CLEAR has collaborated with industry partners to better understand the extraction of hydrocarbons under ‘downhole’ conditions and to develop novel technologies for the recycling and reuse of produced oilfield waste. While we at CLEAR are not for or against shale energy extraction, we believe that it should be performed without impacting the environment.


RSEE 2018 will be held at the brand new state-of-the-art Science and Engineering Innovation & Research (SEIR) building (www.uta.edu/seir), set to open August, 2018 on the south-side of the U.T. Arlington campus. A Friday evening event will feature student research and networking, as well as a catered dinner. On Saturday, the whole day will be dedicated to presentations and panel discussions. Food will be served. Current status of the program, including featured speakers, sponsors, and registration, can be found at www. shalescience.org.


For More Info, email: email:


For More Info, email: 46967pr@reply-direct.com AUGUST / SEPTEMBER • WWW.PETRO-ONLINE.COM


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68