Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on February 5, 2014
US shale under fire over thirst for water
Water shortages have put the US oil and gas industry on a “collision course” with other users because of the large volumes needed for hydraulic fracturing, a group of leading investors has warned.
Almost 40 per cent of the oil and gas wells drilled since 2011 are in areas of “extremely high” water stress, according to Ceres, a network of investors that works on environmental and social issues. It highlights Texas, the heart of the US oil boom, and companies including Chesapeake Energy, EOG Resources, ExxonMobil and Anadarko Petroleum as the heaviest users of water.
Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, is essential for extracting oil and gas from the shale formations that have been responsible for the US boom of the past decade, and it requires large volumes of water: typically 2m gallons or more per well. The water is mixed with sand and chemicals and pumped underground at high pressure to open up cracks in the rock so the oil and gas will flow more freely. The water that flows back out again is often poured away into separate disposal wells.
Water shortages can create tensions with local communities and force companies into expensive solutions such as bringing the water to the wells by truck.
Monika Freyman of Ceres said water was a risk that was often overlooked. “People don’t worry about it until it’s gone,” she said. “If you are an investor in a company that is in a water-stressed area, you have to ask questions about how it is managing their water risks.”
Shareholders including the employee pension funds of New York city and state said this week they would file resolutions for the annual meetings of companies including Exxon, Chevron, EOG and Pioneer Natural Resources, calling for more detailed disclosure of their environmental impact, including water use.
Ceres identified Anadarko, Encana, Pioneer and Apache as the companies with the greatest exposure to water risk, meaning the greatest volume of water use in areas with extremely high stress. In those areas, 80 per cent or more of the available water has been committed for other users including homes, farms and businesses.
Exxon said XTO, its shale oil and gas subsidiary, “works with local authorities to ensure there is adequate supply.” It added that coal needed ten times as much water as gas produced through fracking for an equivalent energy content, and corn-based ethanol needing up to 1,000 times as much water.
Anadarko said it was “on the leading edge” of efforts to manage and conserve water, including recycling it wherever possible, and drawing on a range of sources such as municipal effluent and produced water from oil and gas wells. It is also working with environmental groups and others to develop best practices for water use.
Fracking accounts for a relatively small proportion of US water demand: less than 1 per cent even in Texas, according to a University of Texas study, compared to 56 per cent for irrigation. However, in some areas with the greatest oil and gas activity, such as the Eagle Ford shale of south Texas, it can be much more significant.
The potential problem in Texas is exacerbated by the protracted drought that has affected the state and the growth in its population caused by the strength of its economy.
Jean-Philippe Nicot of the University of Texas said the state’s farmers were using less water for irrigation and shifting to crops that could cope with drier conditions. “More and more water is needed for urban centres, and fracking is part of the picture,” he said.
“All the Texas aquifers are heavily taxed right now.”
Wood Mackenzie, the consultancy, argued in a report last year that the industry would need to address the issue to be able to develop shale oil and gas production around the world, with many of the most promising reserves in China, Africa and the Middle East in areas of water scarcity.
Jim Matheson of Oasys Water, a company that develops water treatment technology, predicted an “inexorable but slow” movement towards recycling.
“We’re very early in the evolution, but the future is one in which we’re going to have to figure out how to clean and reuse the same water resources,” he said.
21 Comments on "US shale under fire over thirst for water"
rockman on Wed, 5th Feb 2014 11:00 pm
Water for frac’ng is not a problem in S Texas. The folks with the privately held water rights sell as they have for decades: to the highest bidder. That might be a farmer, rancher or drilling company. In many cases it has been the farmers selling their rights because it was more profitable for them to do so then growing their normal crops.
The water used for frac’ng in S Texas belongs to the folks who own it…not the oil companies. The water rights are not a part of the minerals rights companies lease.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Wed, 5th Feb 2014 11:38 pm
Thanks rockman good to know in this debate
Water is energy and vice versa. Close to half US water withdrawals are for thermoelectric power generation and another 1/3 is for crops. Some of the crop water is for corn destine to be a biofuel. So there is plenty of water if we drag it from these other sources. Less electric somewhere or less dry land crops. Yet, the real issue is local water withdrawals and that will be hard to solve in some areas when it is a farm or the drilling rig operator….who wins. Like Rockman said the biggest pocket. California is another animal. It has been shown the tight oil resource is much smaller then hyped. Then you have the worst drought in 100 years and I imagine the fracking will be shelved for a period.
action on Thu, 6th Feb 2014 12:02 am
The midwest aquifers are already being depletedfaster than replenishment just with farming. I dont know I there are any heavy fracracking sites in that region, but does give pause for thinking about what the priorities are – my guess is oil will be considered a quick point to downfall than well depletion, so fracking will continue at the expense of a minority residing in the regions – for the good of the majority of course. Just another contestant in the race for what gets depleted or destroyed first.
Welch on Thu, 6th Feb 2014 12:17 am
I’m sure someone here knows more about this than I do and can fill me in–what percentage of the water used for fracturing is renewable (ie recovered and cleaned)? I ask this as I understand that it is pumped down well below the water table, is it not? Anyway, this would seem to be an important element of the sustainability equation, as there is after all a finite amount of fresh water. Cheers.
Plantagenet on Thu, 6th Feb 2014 12:31 am
Water use isn’t an insurmountable problem. The drillers can easily shift to waterless fracking.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Thu, 6th Feb 2014 1:02 am
Welch on Thu, 6th Feb 2014 12:17 am
I’m sure someone here knows more about this than I do and can fill me in–what percentage of the water used for fracturing is renewable (ie recovered and cleaned)?
It is actually a growth business to recycle the fracking liquids. I am sure Rockman knows…Rockman where are you when we need you!
Nony on Thu, 6th Feb 2014 1:10 am
Water is cheap.
Makati1 on Thu, 6th Feb 2014 1:23 am
Without oil you can live forever.
Without water you can live about 3 days.
Fools…
Davy, Hermann, MO on Thu, 6th Feb 2014 3:31 am
Makati1 but 9 billion of us must have oil.
Keith on Thu, 6th Feb 2014 3:36 am
9 billion must also have water. catch 22
GregT on Thu, 6th Feb 2014 3:58 am
All 9 billion of us will have neither.
The 7 billion of us, will make sure of that
Northwest Resident on Thu, 6th Feb 2014 4:45 am
What it boils down to is this: We are desperate for oil. To get the oil that civilization craves, we will sacrifice water supply, natural habitat and whatever else it takes to get that oil. And I’m sure we ain’t seen nothing yet.
Newfie on Thu, 6th Feb 2014 10:06 am
Peak Water.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Thu, 6th Feb 2014 12:18 pm
Yeap, GregT/NR, us 7BIL will make sure the 9BIL has less water or more toxic soup. Do you guys really think we can hit 9BIL pop and how bad could a die off be? Man, I mean if you look at the four important variables energy/chem, water, soil, and stable climate they are all in decline. Let us just take Gail’s last oil supply graph which I would say fits the collapse many of us see coming. Water stress is now very real on every continent. Just ask Sao Paulo, California, and 17 other extreme risk countries. We see soil loss for multiple reason. Look at China and we see normal Ag erosion, increased development, toxic pollution, desertification, and built out hydo. Multiply that across the globe as typical. Through in unstable climate. Let’s face it we only have civilization now because of stable climate that allowed agriculture. I am hearing John Lennon’s song “Imagine”. Imagine climate never stabilized adequately for agriculture. We still could be a normal stable ecosystem species. OK, I am doing a mental what if looking at the above variables. We can use 2020 collapse time frame. Energy will be down 30% based upon Gail’s graph. UN water numbers indicate 2.5% annum world increase. Let’s say today is the base and we have just enough water averaged across the earth. We get a 15% decline. We can use a decline of 1% a year global average or 6% by 2020 for soil. For climate instability rough numbers based upon rough UN numbers or 3%. Recap 30% energy, 15% water, 6% soil, and 3% adverse climate. I don’t know how to combine these numbers to get an impact figure so let’s average to get 13% adversity index. We need 15% more food by 2020. So there is not enough food to grow to 9BIL to start with. These numbers say we could have a population decline of 13% in 6 years or 900MIL or one in seven. OK, bash me please for being messy but some kind of decline or cap looks inevitable.
rockman on Thu, 6th Feb 2014 12:37 pm
There are systems developed no for filtering produced frac fluids and recycling them. But expensive. They are also trying to develop chemistry to allow using salt water. But expensive. And then there is using propane etc. for frac’ng. Expensive.
So it still comes down to most economical approach to use. While the millions of gallons of water used per frac job seems like a lot compared to your monthly water bill we use more resources to keep the golf course green then all the frac’ng combined. In fact, I don’t have the number, but I suspect we use much more water annually to wash the 200+ million vehicles in the US.
But the bottom line is the same: the water used in frac’ng is bought from the person owning it. It’s that person’s business who they sell it to: a fracker, a farmer growing corn for ethanol or the city of San Antonio to keep the golf courses green. Their business…no one else’s. Thus the problem with “free societies”: folks tend to make decisions based upon self-interest. Where’s a benevolent dictator when we need one? LOL.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Thu, 6th Feb 2014 1:12 pm
Yeap, Rockman, we are talking no easy solutions and trade offs. Less dry land corn or cattle and more oil or gas in those dry regions. Looks like the oil boys are winning at moment. I imagine food/water for human consumption will play an ever increasing cap on shale gas/oil exploitation. Yet, you are not going to stop the market forces until like Rockman say a “higher power dictates the usage”
rockman on Thu, 6th Feb 2014 2:24 pm
Davy – I would say the land owners are winning bigger than anyone. Last year I heard about a fellow that sold the water from his large manmade lake for $800,000 to a fracker. Granted S Texas doesn’t get a lot of rain but in a few years (or one tropical storm)his lake will refill. In the meantime he can sit on his front porch and stare at the cancel check instead of his dry lake bed. LOL.
Northwest Resident on Thu, 6th Feb 2014 3:46 pm
“Look at China and we see normal Ag erosion, increased development, toxic pollution, desertification, and built out hydo.” One of the documents that Snowden leaked to the press was a classified U.S. Military document that stated categorically that China would begin to suffer significant loss of food production in …. (drum roll please) … 2015. The Guardian (U.K.) ran an article on that document, and it was shocking to read. I saved the link. A couple of days later I accessed the link and the article had been trimmed down quite a bit. A day or two later, that article wasn’t there anymore — very strange. And I can’t find any evidence of it by searching Google either — like, it just disappeared. But let’s just say this — China is TOAST. Not my words — that’s an article over on Doomstead Diner. But so very true. Just wait and see.
Kenz300 on Thu, 6th Feb 2014 3:53 pm
Short term profits at the expense of long term sustainability.
Greed over common sense.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Thu, 6th Feb 2014 4:35 pm
NR, your China point well taken. I feel food insecurity may become the greatest risk to the system so your 2015 date could beat J-Gav 2017. Somebody has to be optimistic so I am hoping 2020.
Sudhir Jatar on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 12:56 pm
I understand that one frac job needs 3-5 million gallons of water. After a job is done, 70 % water comes back. It needs to be treated for suspended and dissolved solids. For the next job, 30 % fresh water is added. Every cycle needs extra new water. As long as the total dissolved solids remain within 15000-20000 ppm, the water can be reused.
It is a complicated process to calculate accurately because the water quality differs and as some one has said, it is expensive to treat frac water.