Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Produced Water | Session IX - JP Nicot
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Saving this for later?

Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime - even offline.

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Produced Water | Session IX - JP Nicot

1,038
views

Published on

Source and Fate of Hydraulic …

Source and Fate of Hydraulic
Fracturing Water in Texas

Published in: Education

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,038
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
16
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Source and Fate of Hydraulic Fracturing Water in Texas Jean-Philippe ‘JP’ Nicot Bureau of Economic Geology Jackson School of Geosciences The University of Texas at Austin Atlantic Council Workshop on “Fossil fuel produced water: asset or waste” Washington, D.C. – June 25, 2013
  • 2. 2 Bureau of Economic Geology BARNETT SHALE HAYNESVILLE SHALE EAGLE FORD SHALE PEARSALL SHALE SHALES TIGHT GAS Granite wash, Cleveland, Marmaton BOSSIER SHALE Cotton Valley, Travis Peak Spraberry and others Canyon Sands Vicksburg, Wilcox Olmos WOODFORD SHALE BARNETT SHALE AVALON / BONESPRING TIGHT OIL WOLFCAMP SHALE CLINE SHALE
  • 3. 3 Bureau of Economic Geology Final Result: Hydraulic Fracturing Water Use 2008: 36 kAF 2011: 81.5 kAF 1 AF = 325,851 gallons 1 AF = 2-3 households/yr 1kAF = 1.23×106 m3 Source of raw data: IHS Enerdeq database; in Nicot et al. 2012 report
  • 4. 4 Bureau of Economic Geology 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 M unicipal M anufacturing M ining Steam -electric Livestock Irrigation 2001-2010AverageWaterUse(kAF) Texas water use Total = ~15,000 kAF/yr
  • 5. 5 Bureau of Economic Geology 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 M unicipal M anufacturing M ining Steam -electric Livestock Irrigation 2001-2010AverageWaterUse(kAF) Texas water use Total = ~15,000 kAF/yr 2011 Mining consumption: Oil and Gas = ~120 kAF water use (HF, drilling, waterflooding) HF = ~81.5 kAF water use HF = ~65 kAF water consumption All others = ~100kAF Total consumption = ~190 kAF 2008 Mining consumption: Oil and Gas = ~60 kAF (~36 kAF HF) (HF, drilling, waterflooding) Coal/Lignite = ~20 kAF Aggregates = ~70 kAF Others= ~10 kAF Total= ~160 kAF HF water use is small at the state level, also true for water consumption
  • 6. 6 Bureau of Economic Geology GW/SW split: little known • 2006 survey in Barnett: ~60% groundwater Based on ~30% of water use SW GW
  • 7. 7 Bureau of Economic Geology GW/SW split: little known • 2006 survey in Barnett: ~60% groundwater • 2011-12 Barnett: ~20-30% groundwater • 2012 Haynesville-ETx: ~70% groundwater • 2012 Eagle Ford: ~90% groundwater • 2012 Permian B.: ~100% groundwater Based on ~30% of water use SW GW
  • 8. 8 Bureau of Economic Geology GW/SW split: little known • 2006 survey in Barnett: ~60% groundwater • 2011-12 Barnett: ~20-30% groundwater • 2013 Barnett: • ~60% groundwater Based on ~30% of water use SW GW
  • 9. 9 Bureau of Economic Geology Fraction from recycling / reuse and brackish East Texas: R/R: 5% BK: ~0% Eagle Ford: R/R: ~0% BK: 20% Barnett: R/R: 5% BK: 3% Anadarko: R/R: 20% BK: 30% Midland: R/R: 2% BK: 30% Delaware: R/R: 0% BK: 80% Based on ~30% of water use Fresh water R/R Brackish Large Operators: from 0% to 100% BK depending on play and operator
  • 10. 10 Bureau of Economic Geology Flowback at end of Year1 Haynesville: ~15% Eagle Ford: ~20% Barnett: ~60% Anadarko: ~100% Midland: ~75% Delaware: ~80% Cotton Valley: ~60% Based on ~30% of water use
  • 11. 11 Bureau of Economic Geology Monthly produced water percentiles – Barnett Shale Number of wells having produced that many months 90th percentile Median 5th percentile Nicot et al., in review
  • 12. 12 Bureau of Economic Geology 5th, 30th, 50th, 70th, and 90th monthly produced water percentiles – Barnett Shale Number of wells having produced that many months 75th percentile Median 30th percentile Nicot et al., in review
  • 13. 13 Bureau of Economic Geology 5th, 30th, 50th, 70th, and 90th cumulative produced water percentiles – Barnett Shale Number of wells having produced that many months 90th percentile Median 5th percentile Nicot et al., in review
  • 14. 14 Bureau of Economic Geology 5th, 30th, 50th, 70th, and 90th produced water fraction (%) percentiles – Barnett Shale Number of wells having produced that many months 75th percentile Median 30th percentile Nicot et al., in review
  • 15. 15 Bureau of Economic Geology Produced water time variability 2011 2011 2010 2010 2009 2008 2009 2008 2007 2005 2006 2007 Nicot et al., in review
  • 16. 16 Bureau of Economic Geology County-level produced water fraction
  • 17. 17 Bureau of Economic Geology •1 month •2 months •3 months •6 months •1 year •2 years •3 years County-level produced water fraction from well completion Nicot et al., in review
  • 18. 18 Bureau of Economic Geology • 2000 • 2001 • 2002 • 2003 • 2004 • 2005 • 2006 • 2007 • 2008 • 2009 • 2010 • 2011 Annual injection well volumes through time Nicot et al., in review
  • 19. Houston San Antonio Eagle Pass+ Laredo+ C.C. The Valley Credit: NASA - NOAA QUESTIONS?
  • 20. 20 Bureau of Economic Geology Source of data for publications? 2007 2011 2012