Produced Water | Session XI - Alleman
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Produced Water | Session XI - Alleman

on

  • 560 views

Produced Water Management in Unconventional Resource Plays: Strategies and Technology Needs

Produced Water Management in Unconventional Resource Plays: Strategies and Technology Needs

Statistics

Views

Total Views
560
Views on SlideShare
174
Embed Views
386

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0

1 Embed 386

http://www.atlanticcouncil.org 386

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Produced Water | Session XI - Alleman Produced Water | Session XI - Alleman Presentation Transcript

  • PRODUCED WATER MANAGEMENT IN UNCONVENTIONAL RESOURCE PLAYS: STRATEGIES AND TECHNOLOGY NEEDS Atlantic Council Workshop Fossil Fuel Produced Water: Asset or Waste Washington, DC June 24-25, 2013 Authors: J. Daniel (Dan) Arthur, P.E., SPEC David Alleman
  • The Future of Shale… • To fully develop US shales, something on the order of 1-3 million additional wellbores will be needed. This will NOT be easy! We can expect: − Increased use of brackish/saline water − Increased use of treatment technologies − Multi-well fluid management pits/impoundments − Centralized facilities and overland piping of produced water − and much more... • Oil imports have dropped from a high of about 65% to approximately 40% of demand • Several sources suggest that US oil production could rise 50-75% over the next 10 years, causing imports to drop to 5%. • Another study suggests the shale gas boom will account for ~1.5 million new jobs by 2015 (June 2012) – including recognition of the downturn in gas prices. June 2013 2Copyright (c) 2013 ALL Consulting
  • WATER MANAGEMENT EVOLUTION • Surface Discharge – Salt Creek & Elk Basin (1920s) – Black Warrior Basin (1989) – Powder River Basin CBM (1990s) • Reuse/Recycling of PW – Barnett Shale (2001) – Marcellus (2009) • Treatment – Powder River Basin CBM (2001) – Barnett Shale (2002/2008) – San Juan Basin (2003) – Woodford Shale (2008) – San Ardo (2008) – Piceance Basin (2009) – Fayetteville Shale (2009) – Eagle Ford (2011) June 2013 3Copyright (c) 2013 ALL Consulting
  • Technology: the “Game Changer” • Deep horizontal drilling • High volume hydraulic fracturing • 3-D Seismic Analysis • Multi-well drilling pads • Water sourcing and transport • Water treatment • HF Additives 4Copyright (c) 2012 ALL ConsultingJune 2013
  • Lifecycle Water Management Planning • A lifecycle approach is needed to address the many issues important to industry: – Regulatory timing & vulnerabilities – Legislative changes – Public opposition – Historical Activities – Competition for resources – Flowback recovery – Third-party options and risks – Environmental risks – Cumulative Impacts – Etc… • Pre-Development Assessment • Water Sourcing Availability & Issues • Well Site Construction & Drilling • Water Conditioning/Pre-Treatment • Well Completion/Fracturing • Flowback/Produced Water • Reuse/Disposal/Beneficial Use March 2013 5Copyright (c) 2013 ALL Consulting
  • Produced Water (PW) Management Four Primary Options • Injection: This has been the preferred option of most operators and regulatory agencies. • Surface Discharge: Infrequently used due to high treatment costs, liability concerns, and company policy. • Beneficial Use: Limited use due to water quality and quantity issues. • Reuse: Increasingly popular option, especially in areas of limited fresh water availability. June 2013 6Copyright (c) 2013 ALL Consulting
  • PW Management Considerations • Availability/Cost of Fresh Water: Fresh water is typically the preferred option when it is readily available, however a number of factors may make reuse of PW attractive • Availability of Injection Wells: Where injection wells are limited or distant, reuse is more common. • Volume of PW Available: Volumes of PW vary significantly between plays and within plays - smaller volumes can make blending for reuse more economic • Quality of PW : Quality of PW can vary significantly between plays and within plays – lower TDS concentrations can make blending for reuse more economic June 2013 7Copyright (c) 2013 ALL Consulting
  • Water Use Varies Between Plays June 2013 8Copyright (c) 2013 ALL Consulting Shale Basin/Play Minimum Reported Water Usage (gal.) Maximum Reported Water Usage (gal.) Average Reported Water Use (gal.) Well Sample Barnett 1,004,556 11,970,504 3,961,550 1,247 Bakken 1,005,064 9,597,540 2,101,984 638 Eagle Ford 1,098,846 13,659,790 4,295,282 1,523 Fayetteville 1,730,415 11,282,621 5,294,829, 456 Haynesville 1,023,414 14,850,612 5,824,728 931 Marcellus/Utica 1,006,004 10,781,652 4,423,310 1,514 Woodford 1,017,828 11,782,600 4,181,026 369 WATER USE FOR SELECT PLAYS (2011)
  • WATER USE VARIES SPATIALLY June 2013 9Copyright (c) 2013 ALL Consulting
  • PW QUALITY AND VOLUME VARIATION June 2013 10Copyright (c) 2013 ALL Consulting Shale Play Produced Water TDS Concentration (mg/L) Percent of Fracture Fluid Volume Typically Recovered During Flowback Barnett 40,000 – 240,000 40 – 50 % Eagle Ford 10,000 – 200,000 15 – 40% Fayetteville 8,000 – 30,000 30 – 50 % Haynesville 150,000 – 250,000 30- 50 % Marcellus 50,000 – 300,000 5 – 30 % Utica 40,000 – 200, 000 15 – 20%
  • PW Treatment Goals • Three primary treatment goals – Reduce TDS (desalination) for discharge/beneficial use – Reduce volume for disposal – Reduce solids, scaling, and bio-fouling for reuse June 2013 11Copyright (c) 2013 ALL Consulting
  • Treatment of Produced Water • Water quality requirements for reuse can vary and may depend on factors such as: – Composition of the target formation – The specific chemicals being used (especially friction reducers) • Common treatment goals – Remove suspended solids – Prevent scale formation and bio-fouling – Reduce dissolved solids (desalination) – Reduce disposal volumes • Most operators do not desalinate • PW disposal strategies vary by play June 2013 12Copyright (c) 2013 ALL Consulting
  • PW Management Strategies • Bakken: Most PW is disposed of via injection wells • Marcellus/Utica: Many operators in PA reuse PW due to a lack of injection wells – Low PW volumes facilitate this approach – Operators in Ohio (Utica) typically use injection wells – Operators in Western PA may truck water to Ohio for disposal • Barnett: Both reuse and disposal via injection wells are common • Eagle Ford: Most PW is disposed of via injection wells even though the climate is semi-arid – Reuse in many areas is inhibited by land-owner water agreements • Fayetteville: UIC disposal is common but limited in some areas due to induced seismicity concerns June 2013 13Copyright (c) 2013 ALL Consulting Bakken Barnett Marcellus
  • PW Technology Needs • As demands on fresh water grow, expect to see increased reuse and use of saline groundwater • New technologies are needed to ensure that these strategies are economic • Major technology breakthroughs in water treatment seem unlikely – Expect some continued incremental improvements – Primary gains will likely come from tailoring treamtment to play- specific needs • HF chemicals that allow use of lower quality water seem to be a likely technology that will allow increased reuse of PW – Enhanced friction reducers have already become widely used – New friction reducers are being developed that will allow use of water with up to 200 ppm Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) – As costs come down, these friction reducers should allow more operators to reduce their fresh water demands June 2013 14Copyright (c) 2013 ALL Consulting
  • Citation Information: Arthur, J.D., and David Alleman (ALL Consulting). Produced Water Management in Unconventional Resource Plays: Strategies and Technology Needs”. Presented at the Atlantic Council Workshop on Produced Water: Asset or Waste?, June 24-25, 2013. Contact Information David Alleman Environmental Manager dalleman@all-llc.com ALL Consulting 1718 S. Cheyenne Ave. Tulsa, OK 74119 www.all-llc.com June 2013 15Copyright (c) 2013 ALL Consulting