Literature DB >> 24467212

Source and fate of hydraulic fracturing water in the Barnett Shale: a historical perspective.

Jean-Philippe Nicot1, Bridget R Scanlon, Robert C Reedy, Ruth A Costley.   

Abstract

Considerable controversy continues about water availability for and potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing (HF) of hydrocarbon assets on water resources. Our objective was to quantify HF water volume in terms of source, reuse, and disposal, using the Barnett Shale in Texas as a case study. Data were obtained from commercial and state databases, river authorities, groundwater conservation districts, and operators. Cumulative water use from ∼ 18,000 (mostly horizontal) wells since 1981 through 2012 totaled ∼ 170,000 AF (210 Mm(3)); ∼ 26 000 AF (32 Mm(3)) in 2011, representing 32% of Texas HF water use and ∼ 0.2% of 2011 state water consumption. Increase in water use per well by 60% (from 3 to 5 Mgal/well; 0.011-0.019 Mm(3)) since the mid-2000s reflects the near-doubling of horizontal-well lengths (2000-3800 ft), offset by a reduction in water-use intensity by 40% (2000-1200 gal/ft; 2.5-1.5 m(3)/m). Water sources include fresh surface water and groundwater in approximately equal amounts. Produced water amount is inversely related to gas production, exceeds HF water volume, and is mostly disposed in injection wells. Understanding the historical evolution of water use in the longest-producing shale play is invaluable for assessing its water footprint for energy production.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24467212     DOI: 10.1021/es404050r

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Sci Technol        ISSN: 0013-936X            Impact factor:   9.028


  7 in total

Review 1.  Extensive review of shale gas environmental impacts from scientific literature (2010-2015).

Authors:  Daniele Costa; João Jesus; David Branco; Anthony Danko; António Fiúza
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2017-04-28       Impact factor: 4.223

Review 2.  Organic Pollutants in Shale Gas Flowback and Produced Waters: Identification, Potential Ecological Impact, and Implications for Treatment Strategies.

Authors:  Andrii Butkovskyi; Harry Bruning; Stefan A E Kools; Huub H M Rijnaarts; Annemarie P Van Wezel
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2017-04-18       Impact factor: 9.028

3.  Unconventional oil and gas development and risk of childhood leukemia: Assessing the evidence.

Authors:  Elise G Elliott; Pauline Trinh; Xiaomei Ma; Brian P Leaderer; Mary H Ward; Nicole C Deziel
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2016-10-23       Impact factor: 7.963

4.  Stream Vulnerability to Widespread and Emergent Stressors: A Focus on Unconventional Oil and Gas.

Authors:  Sally A Entrekin; Kelly O Maloney; Katherine E Kapo; Annika W Walters; Michelle A Evans-White; Kenneth M Klemow
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-09-23       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Impact of shale gas development on water resources: a case study in northern poland.

Authors:  Ine Vandecasteele; Inés Marí Rivero; Serenella Sala; Claudia Baranzelli; Ricardo Barranco; Okke Batelaan; Carlo Lavalle
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2015-04-16       Impact factor: 3.266

6.  Effects of Resin Chemistries on the Selective Removal of Industrially Relevant Metal Ions Using Wafer-Enhanced Electrodeionization.

Authors:  Humeyra B Ulusoy Erol; Christa N Hestekin; Jamie A Hestekin
Journal:  Membranes (Basel)       Date:  2021-01-09

7.  Hydraulic fracturing water use variability in the United States and potential environmental implications.

Authors:  Tanya J Gallegos; Brian A Varela; Seth S Haines; Mark A Engle
Journal:  Water Resour Res       Date:  2015-07-24       Impact factor: 5.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.