Water Recycling and Conservation: Advocacy and Public Policy
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
2 likes•601 views
I recently had the opportunity to speak at the 21st International Petroleum Environmental Conference on Water Recycling Advocacy and Public Policy. Water is a critical, finite resource and it's incumbent on all of us to find ways to ensure we have enough.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (12)
Similar to Water Recycling and Conservation: Advocacy and Public Policy
Similar to Water Recycling and Conservation: Advocacy and Public Policy (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (15)
Water Recycling and Conservation: Advocacy and Public Policy
- 1. Water Recycling & Conservation State Policy and Advocacy Jennifer Perkins Texas Water Recycling Association October 15, 2014
- 2. Water in Texas • Background and Future Planning • 2012 State Water Plan: 50 year planning horizon, based on 16 regional plans • Using 2010 Census as baseline, population to almost double by 2060 • Water demand projected to increase by 22% by 2060 • Municipal and irrigation use will continue to lead demand • Water Use for Mining Activity is Approximately 1.5% of Total Statewide Use
- 3. Challenges in Texas • Seems Manageable – What’s the Issue? • Drastically increasing population • Ongoing drought • Water ownership • Regional mining areas and water supply • Oil & Gas Industry Viewed as Part of the Problem
- 4. Use and Disposal Comparisons • Fresh & Brackish Water Used per Year: • 1,397,965,619 barrels • 58,714,555,998 gallons • 180,106 acre feet • Less than 1% of Total State Water Demand • Produced Water Disposed per Year: • 7,066,172,806 barrels • 296,779,257,852 gallons • 910,365 acre feet • Approximately 5% of 2010 Total State Water Demand Disposed • Recycling 2/3 of Produced Water Yields 26% of Projected 2060 Water Shortage
- 5. Bottom Line on Water: Shortages Will Hurt • Existing water supplies expected to decrease 10% by 2060 • Average expected shortfall: • 2020: 2.3M acre feet • 2040: 2.6M acre feet • 2060: 2.5M acre feet • Worst case scenario: • 2060: 8.3M acre feet shortfall
- 6. Economic Impact • By the year 2060, water shortages could account for $116 billion in lost income and 1.1 million lost jobs in the state of Texas alone.
- 7. Industry and the Environment • Unintended Technological Advances • Whaling industry and discovery of oil • Horse manure and horseless carriage • Change the Focus on Water • Recycling and conservation vs Disposal • Incentives vs Mandates
- 8. Texas Water Recycling Association • Newly Formed (2012) and Rapidly Growing • THE Voice of the Texas Water Recycling Marketplace • Technology- and Industry- Agnostic • Facilitate Bringing All Interested Industries Together • Working With State Legislators and Regulatory Agencies
- 9. What’s Been Accomplished by TWRA • Railroad Commission Has Been a Good Partner • Permit by Rule • Multi-Lease, Multi-Operator • Fresh Water Standard • Clean Saltwater • Recycling Pits • Solids • State Legislature Has Been Helpful • HB 2767 by Rep. Phil King
- 10. wr ites water used a less could have how they method A bill intr oduced by Rep. Lon Burnam, D- For t Worth, would charge a fee for water disposed of in an well. M accor ding in Texas, 50,000 injection wells than the more discharges into companies' fees for ges no per-Co barrel char mments the state operations. 0 E- mail wells, but gas Pr int their oil and charge for the use of which r egulates Ow ners Commission, the Texas Railroad to easur e t ak es aim at oil fiel d w ast ew at er By Emily Pic k r ell | Apr il 2, 2013 | Updated: April 2, 2013 10:46pm "The best way to encourage water r ecycling is to make waste injection more expensive," said Luke Metzger, founder and dir ector of Environment Texas. "It is far cheaper to inject waste undergr ound than to recycle it. In Pennsylvani a, it is mor e expens ive. They have to ship it to Ohio. As a result, the economics ar e more favorable to recycling than shipping it out of state." "In a certain geogr aphic area, you might have a lot of r ecycler s, and recycling could be done at a reasonable cost ," Por ter said. "In other areas, it would be absolutely cost pr ohi bitive to mandate recycling." But he said in an interview that he would rather see the cost of water r ecycling reduced by market competition than by regulations. Br ent Halldorson, chair man of the Texas Wat er Recycling Association, noted, however, that recycling reduces the need to purchase water. And because the recycling pr oc esses occ ur at or near the well, trans por tation costs ar e low er. Phot g e 1 of 2 Measu re- takes- aim - at- oi l- f ield - wastewater - 4 4 04763.php o By Harry Cabluck/ STF Pa someone of frac king or how they could have recycled it and used it again." The Railroad Commiss ion recently updated its rules to encour age more water recycling but stopped short of requiring operator s to recycle water used in oil and gas dr illing. Co mmis sioner David Porter declined t o c omment s pecifically on Burnam's bill. But it is the higher disposal costs in Pennsylvania that make recycling a more desirable option for many oper ators, said Judit h Herschell, CEO of Pittsburgh- based Herschell Environmental, a wat er and was tewat er engineering firm. He rschell sai d she has hear d Texas operat or s estimate that it cos ts as little as 25 c ents a bar rel to dispose of wastewater using an injection well, making the case for recycling much more difficult. "I t 's so cheap to dispose of water in wells, how can you blame them?" Herschell said. Photo By Harry Cabluck/ STF
- 11. Future Public Policy Recommendations • Texas Tax Policy/Incentives • Texas Tort Reform/Civil Liability • Federal Environmental Regulation
- 12. Help TWRA Advocate for Public Policy Changes Join the Texas Water Recycling Association in its advocacy efforts surrounding water recycling, reuse, and conservation in Texas. Help TWRA ensure the state’s growing water demand is met. Visit www.txwra.org for information on leadership, membership, and the Association’s current initiatives.
Editor's Notes
- Due to water efficiency advances and a decline in irrigation use, total demand is only projected to increase 22%. However, municipal use is expected to increase by 73% by 2060.
- Water demand is forecast to only increase by 22% by 2060. So what’s the problem? The first one is self explanatory. Texas adds roughly 1,000 people per day to its population. By 2060, nearly 47 million people will call Texas home, up from 25 million in 2010. People need water to survive. Currently, thanks to the recent rains, only 70% of Texas is in some stage of drought. This is a marked improvement over previous years. However, almost 30% of Texas is in a severe, extreme, or exceptional drought. The map shows you where those areas are: many are oil and gas E&P areas. Water law in Texas is different than in many states. In Texas, ground water belongs to the property owner, who can sell it as private property or use it for his own purposes. The law has consistently ruled that ground water owners can pump all the water they want from their land, regardless of the impact to owners of adjacent wells. This can complicate recycling, depending on how leases are written – not all landowners who sell their water support recycling as it can impact their bottom line. Surface water belongs to the state and its use must be approved and permitted. Mining activities may account for only 1.5% of total statewide water usage on average, but most mining activity occurs in regions with very little water availability. Compound that with the fact that oil and gas exploration and development is a water-intensive industry and these mining areas become mini-boom towns overnight, further straining the water supply. Despite the oil and gas industry being viewed as part of the problem, there is some good news. Brackish water is being treated and adapted more frequently for use in E&P activities. And produced water is increasingly being seen as an asset once it’s recycled.
- These figures are just for oil and gas exploration and production activities. TWRA is working to make in-roads into other industries and hopefully we’ll have the chance to discuss those statistics with you at a future conference. However, water management strategies, such as removing contaminants and thus being able to reuse water, can add more than 400K acre feet of water to the supply by 2060.
- Existing water supplies—categorized as surface water, groundwater, and reuse water—are projected to decrease about 10 percent by 2060. Existing supplies are those that are physically and legally available: the amount of water that can be produced with current permits, contracts, and infrastructure during drought. Groundwater supplies are projected to decrease 30 percent by 2060 due primarily to reduced supply from the Ogallala Aquifer as a result of its depletion over time and reduced supply from the Gulf Coast Aquifer due to mandatory reductions in pumping. The strategies recommended by the 16 regional water planning groups would provide, if implemented, 9 million acre-feet per year in additional water supplies by 2060. These strategies include conservation, drought management, reservoirs, wells, water reuse, and desalination plants. About 34 percent of the volume of these strategies, or 34% of 9 million acre feet, would come from conservation and reuse, so we have to get moving on making it easier and more economically viable for companies to recycle and for recyclers to operate. Without developing other water supplies or management strategies, in a severe drought such as the one faced by 70% of the state now, Texas could have an annual average shortfall of 8.3M acre feet (2.7T gallons) by 2060. If we do nothing, in 2060, more than 50% of the state’s population would face a water need of more than 45% of their demand. Half the folks in Texas would have access to half the water they need to survive.
- If Texas’ future water demand issues aren’t resolved, the economic impact will be staggering. The potential $116 billion loss will include: Regional income, including wages, salaries plus benefits; corporate income; and rental income. State and local business taxes, like sales and excise taxes and licensing fees. Number of full- and part-time jobs available, including self-employment. Population losses, which of course impacts the number of people available to be hired for work. And declines in school enrollment, which impacts the ready availability of a trained workforce. Recycling alone won’t solve the entire puzzle. Of course, there are other improvements that need to be made, like upgrading and repairing the state’s water infrastructure, and developing more water efficient products and methods, akin to what’s being done in the area of energy efficiency. Recycling will help but it’s by no means a panacea. But without water, everything stops.
- In 1859 the first significant oil well was drilled in Titusville, PA, ushering in the modern petroleum era, quickly supplanting whale oil as the preferred illuminant for lamps. With the discovery and processing of petroleum, kerosene became available at less than ¼ the cost of whale oil. Kerosene also burned with less odor than whale oil. By 1860, 40 kerosene production plants were in use. In 1800, the population of NYC was ~ 30,000. By 1900, it had grown to 4.5 million. More people equals a need for more transportation. In 1800, the horse population in NYC was ~ 200K. This many horses on the roads produced ~ 5 million manure pounds and ~ 1.6 million urine gallons per day. With that amount of animal waste, it didn’t take long for the city to develop significant health problems, such as: Cholera Typhoid Typhus Yellow Fever Malaria The mortality rate skyrocketed. New technology being developed simultaneous to the population explosion resulted in the horseless carriage, which was able to capitalize on the growing petroleum as motor fuel industry. The increasing need for additional water supplies could likely result in this generation’s unintended consequence of improved recycling technology and implementation. TWRA is working with legislators, regulators, and stakeholders to make the case for leveling the playing field between recycling and conservation and disposal into injection wells, in which case the water is permanently removed from the hydrological cycle. It is more expensive to recycle, but the environmental benefits should far outweigh the financial costs. We’re trying to make it at least equitable with disposal. Recycling water, particularly produced and flowback water, doesn’t merely return water to the hydrological cycle. It ADDS water to the cycle. And that can have huge consequences for meeting future water demand in Texas. TWRA is exploring its options for the next session, but one thing is for certain: we are focused on incentives, NOT mandates.
- In less than 2 years, TWRA has been successful in reshaping the discussion of water recycling. Working with the RRC to achieve Permit by Rule has probably been the biggest win to date. If a producer re-uses their PW with no treatment or adds their own treatment (i.e.: filter) this is and has been fine, as long as it happens within the oilfield. TWRA’s question was why then should a permit be needed if a 3rd party performs treatment (filter or other)? Now any operator that recycles for their own re-use is essentially “permitted-by-rule”. The “on-lease” vs. “off-lease” stipulation was scrapped. The new definition is “non-commercial fluid recycling.” We can now recycle from multiple leases and multiple operators as long as the facility is under the jurisdiction of an oilfield operator. For example, PW from Salt Water Disposal can be recycled and sold to another producer as frac supply water. Other jurisdictions (i.e.: Pennsylvania) have been making rules to “de-waste” recycled water. However, TWRA viewed this as flawed logic because the PW itself is already RCRA exempt waste. As long as treated water meets a freshwater standard (we recommended EPA secondary drinking water standards), it should not require de-wasting as long as it remains within the oilfield. The RRC agreed. In fact, they singled out distilled water: “If the treatment of the fluids results in distilled water, the Commission authorizes any reuse other than discharge to water of the state.” Any level of recycling in which the end product remains saltwater used to be referred to as “partial” treatment. The new rules are simple. Clean saltwater is handled the same way as PW. H-11 pits are necessary, and you cannot use fast-line or other transfer designed for freshwater, which makes sense. Recycling pits are now authorized as long as some very reasonable conditions are met, such as contacting and informing the nearest RRC office, etc. Temporary above ground pits with a liner-only (no bottom) are now classified as “pits” rather than “tanks”, vastly simplifying the ability to use them. With respect to solids, in Texas it is permitted to bury drill cuttings on-lease. The RRC now allows solids generated from recycling to likewise be buried on-lease. We may ask for some clarification on any testing required (chlorides, etc.) prior to burial to make sure there won’t be future issues, but that’s still a discussion in process. House bill 2767 amended the Natural Resources code to say that a company that recycles oil and gas fluid waste, and then transfers or sells that recycled product to another entity, is not liable for subsequent uses of that recycled waste. This issue had been a hindrance to smaller water recycling operators who are now freed up liability-wise to more actively participate in the recycling marketplace.
- In January of this year, the Speaker of the Texas House issued interim charges for Committees to study before the next legislative session, which begins January, 2015. Committees have been meeting throughout the year, inviting specific testimony from experts, such as TWRA. Of interest to the TWRA was a charge in front of the House Committee on Energy Resources. House Energy Resources studied the impact of the expanding oil and gas exploration and production occurring across the state, specifically the positive impacts of the exploration and production as well as the new challenges they are presenting. The committee report, which will be available later this year, will address projected water needs and how those fit with our state water plan. Also of interest to the TWRA is the House Committee on Natural Resources, which was to evaluate the availability, management, and development of groundwater in the state. Consider the economic, environmental, and social impacts of groundwater usage and production in the agricultural, municipal, and energy sectors. In particular, Natural Resources was to examine methods to facilitate further development of brackish groundwater, which will be instrumental in helping meet the state’s water needs into the future. We know from meetings with legislators during this interim period between legislative sessions that water will remain a very important topic in 2015. The House Natural Resources committee will have new leadership so TWRA will continue working to educate new leadership and make the case for recycling incentives, should our members decide to move in that direction. We must work to protect the gains made under HB 2767 regarding liability. And the EPA is contemplating greater involvement in oversight of water bodies around the US. TWRA will work with legislators and regulators to ensure that Texas isn’t encroached upon in the way we manage our water supply and demand. In fact, Texas has done such a good job to date that other states are asking TWRA to help them draft guidelines for their own regulations.
- TWRA is a member-driven Association and we encourage you to join us and help advocate for water recycling policy in Texas. [Reiterate benefits of recycling and water in general.] Thank you for letting the Texas Water Recycling Association participate in your conference. I’m happy to answer any questions.