This group brings together the best thinkers on energy and climate. Join us for smart, insightful posts and conversations about where the energy industry is and where it is going.

10,379 Members

Post

No Easy Answers When Disposing of Oil and Gas Wastewater

By Scott Anderson

We all want easy answers. And often times the harder the question, the easier we want the answer to be.

Source: Nicholas A. Tonelli Flickr

Increased natural gas use, for example, can help decrease U.S. greenhouse gas emissions as it has a lower carbon content compared to coal or oil. Natural gas also can help transition our energy mix to more renewable energy sources. This is because properly designed, gas-fired generation can respond quickly to pick up the slack if the wind suddenly dies or clouds unexpectedly roll in. But, these benefits mean nothing if the communities where gas is produced suffer air and water pollution, or if methane – a powerful global warming pollutant that is the primary ingredient in natural gas – is allowed to leak into the atmosphere unchecked.

We all should be worried about global warming and the role that sloppy oil and gas production and distribution practices contribute to the problem. But communities where oil and gas development is taking place are also worried about how oil and gas drilling is impacting their water supplies. This is a key issue and one aspect of the groundwater contamination concerns, rightfully gaining attention in these communities, is how and where toxic wastewater is disposed of that is produced along with oil and gas. But here, too, the answers don’t come easy.

The basic regulatory framework

More than 25 percent of the country’s approximately 700,000 injection wells handle produced water from oil and gas operations. The quantities are huge – at least 2 billion gallons per day. And this fluid is not harmless. Produced water from oil and gas operations is usually much saltier than sea water (it will kill plants and can ruin soil) and is often laced with heavy metals and radionuclides that are naturally present in the formation being drilled.  In addition, this produced water can contain hundreds of toxic chemicals – anti-freeze to name just one example.  The current standard practice for addressing this potential environmental hazard is through injection of the water into geologic formations suited to permanent disposal.

The 1974 Safe Drinking Water Act gave the EPA oversight of underground wells injected with chemical-laden fluids for disposal and other purposes. In most cases, EPA delegates the authority to state agencies, but in some states, such as Pennsylvania, EPA regulates the wells itself.

EPA’s Underground Injection Control (UIC) program generally has received high marks. In fact, many environmental advocates believe it is important to expand the program to include hydraulic fracturing of oil and gas wells, which was largely excluded from UIC regulation by the “Halliburton loophole” passed by Congress in 2005.

Challenges with existing methods

For all its high marks, the UIC program also has its problems. For starters, it is uncertain whether all states are following EPA’s definition of “Underground Source of Drinking Water”– the water that is supposed to be protected.

Leaks sometimes occur from storage tanks at UIC wells.

Other challenges include: inadequate investigations in some jurisdictions of the surrounding disposal area to make sure no unplugged wells or natural faults allow wastewater to migrate into water supplies; not always assuring that pressures during injection are held low enough to avoid breaks in caprock that protect aquifers;  failing to make sure that injection is always limited to permitted intervals;  and responding to the  increasing number of small and medium size earthquakes that are linked to injections.

Underfunding of regulatory programs compounds the problem, making it harder to provide the public with assurance that their water quality is protected from oil and gas development.

Wastewater Recycling: Buyer Beware

Recycling oil and gas wastewater for reuse in hydraulic fracturing operations is on the rise. The challenge, however, is that recycling requires storage and transport, and almost always requires some sort of treatment. How new residual waste streams are dealt with that carry far more toxic and concentrated substances than the water treated is a major environmental concern as companies jump on the recycling trend.Growing interest in the Appalachian Basin to treat oil and gas wastewater and discharge it into surface streams has heightened attention on these matters. Right now, these discharges are subject to EPA’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), but as EPA recently noted in its Preliminary 2014 Effluent Guidelines Program Plan, “current regulations may not provide adequate controls for oil and gas extraction wastewaters.”

Recycling wastewater does reduce the need for freshwater and reduce the volumes that need to be disposed, but it can make disposal much more challenging – particularly when we don’t know enough about the treatment process and resulting waste products.

Diligent oversight needed

Permanent storage using underground injection wells remains by far the most common disposal method. At this point, it also appears to be the least risky, not to be confused with “unrisky”.

But there are things that can be done right now to help us begin to minimize these risks, such as updating requirements for the installation and maintenance of pits and tanks, assessing risks posed by new forms of transport and adopting appropriate risk controls, and doubling down on efforts to identify and remediate leaks and spills.

Bottom-line: none of this is simple. And questions about management of this produced water from drilling operations further demonstrates why we need to stay vigilant in better understanding the environmental impacts of oil and gas development. Having worked most of my career on these issues, it is clear to me that incremental but near-constant improvements are essential to minimize risks and protect communities.

Photo source: Flickr/Nicholas A. Tonelli 

EDF  Energy Exchange's picture

Thank EDF for the Post!

Energy Central contributors share their experience and insights for the benefit of other Members (like you). Please show them your appreciation by leaving a comment, 'liking' this post, or following this Member.

Discussions

Roger DePoy's picture
Roger DePoy on Dec 17, 2014 6:37 pm GMT

One of the components in fracking fluids is dihydrogen monoxide, which kills 100’s of thousands of people every year, which according to the World Health Organization, places it among the top 10 causes of death. This odorless and tasteless compound is pervasive in our society, and has been proven to be a major component of acid rain, and has even been found in excised tumors, showing just how widespread and insidious it has become. How many more lives will be lost, before we come to our senses, and outlaw its use?

Roger DePoy's picture
Roger DePoy on Dec 17, 2014 6:37 pm GMT

One of the components in fracking fluids is dihydrogen monoxide, which kills 100’s of thousands of people every year, which according to the World Health Organization, places it among the top 10 causes of death. This odorless and tasteless compound is pervasive in our society, and has been proven to be a major component of acid rain, and has even been found in excised tumors, showing just how widespread and insidious it has become. How many more lives will be lost, before we come to our senses, and outlaw its use?

Hops Gegangen's picture
Hops Gegangen on Dec 17, 2014 9:29 pm GMT

 

Indeed, I live in the heart of the Marcellus shale gas play, and now that dihydrogen monoxide stuff comes out of my faucets!

 

 

Hops Gegangen's picture
Hops Gegangen on Dec 18, 2014 9:56 am GMT

 

But, seriously, I have not seen any signs of water contamination personally. I did hear reports a few years ago of toxic waste water dumped in streams. That resulted in some big fines and I haven’t heard any more about it. The highways here are certainly full of big trucks carrying tanks of water around. 

 As noted in other TEC articles, natural gas has displaced a lot of coal in this region. Coal is worse than gas in many ways, not just CO2 emissions. Even with the particulates are scrubbed out, a lot of fly ash is dumped in ponds that sometime fail catastrophically. What isn’t scrubbed out falls as fine particles with mercury, cadmium, and what not all over the region for us to breath and to end up in the water ways. And there was an incident not long ago where chemicals used to wash coal leaked into a river, rendering the water unsuitable for human use until it all went downstream.

So, it is not perfect, but an improvement. And as far as heating is concerned, there is no real alternative to natural gas in this part of the country, other than wood for rural homes, but that results in air pollution as well, so it is better to have cheap gas than drive people to burn wood.

We do have fair amount of nuclear power here stll. But for the Three Mile Island incident, we would have a lot more; there is plenty of water to boil.

Bob Meinetz's picture
Bob Meinetz on Dec 19, 2014 7:29 am GMT

Roger, the FDA could outlaw it’s use, but as you correctly observe it’s pervasive. My tap water analysis came back showing 999,963ppm DHM, so without many good options I bought a parcel of land in Hanford, WA and am building a house there – I’m told plutonium in the water supply displaces some of the DHM. Next they’re going to say that’s bad for you too!

Get Published - Build a Following

The Energy Central Power Industry Network is based on one core idea - power industry professionals helping each other and advancing the industry by sharing and learning from each other.

If you have an experience or insight to share or have learned something from a conference or seminar, your peers and colleagues on Energy Central want to hear about it. It's also easy to share a link to an article you've liked or an industry resource that you think would be helpful.

                 Learn more about posting on Energy Central »