An Integrated Framework for Treatment and Management of Produced Water

Colorado School of MinesJörg E. Drewes, Tzahi Y. Cath, Pei Xu

Kennedy/Jenks ConsultantsJim Graydon

Argonne National LaboratoryJohn Veil, Seth Snyder

RPSEA Unconventional Gas Project Review Meeting

April 14-15, 2009, Golden, Colorado

2

Outline

► Current Practices and Challenges regarding Management of Produced Water

► Project Objectives and Goals

► Project Impact● Opportunities and Technical Challenges

● Needed guidance regarding beneficial use

► Project Deliverables and Progress to Date

► Summary

3

Coal Bed Methane (CBM) Produced Water:The Options…

ReinjectionWell

Natural Gas Pipeline

SurfaceDischarge

Treatment forBeneficial Reuse…

4

• Drought- proof• Presently unused• Non-tributary water not subject to water rights

limitations

Reliable Resource

• Oil and gas development 30 to 70 more years• Water resource can continue to be mined up to

300 years

Long Term Supply

Produced Water as a Water Supply

5

Challenges for Widespread Beneficial Use

• Long distances between produced water sources and end users• High cost of water transportation

Geographic Challenges

• Fluctuating gas prices might deter investments in treatment technology

Gas Market Challenges

• Complex water rights• Interstate variations in environmental regulations and permits• Difficult to assess the quantity and scope of mitigation and

compensation owed to 3rd parties• Liability and uncertainties associated with conveyance and end use• Institutional boundaries between private management of oil and gas

resources and public management of water resources

Regulatory Challenges

6

Produced Water - What is It?

► In summary, it depends on your perspective….► To the oil & gas industry.…it’s a pain.

► To the environmental groups.…it’s a threat.

► To the regulators….it’s a challenge.

► To the water industry/landowners….it’s a resource.

► To RPSEA….it’s an opportunity for more cost-effective, environmentally sound, and most beneficial strategies for management and treatment of produced water.

7

An Integrated Framework for Treatment and Management of Produced Water

• Principal Investigators: Jörg Drewes, Tzahi Cath, Pei Xu• Nathan Hancock, Katharine Dahm, Katie Benko, Chris

Bellona, Dean Heil

Colorado School of Mines

• Principal Investigators: Jim Graydon• Jean Debroux

Kennedy/Jenks Consultants

• Principal Investigators: John Veil and Seth Snyder• YuPo, Bob Sullivan

Argonne National Laboratories

• Bob Raucher

Stratus Consulting

• Dave Stewart, Stewart Environmental Consultants• Jeff Cline, Cline Energy Consultants

Technical Advisors

8

An Integrated Framework for Treatment and Management of Produced Water

Project Goal►Develop an integrated guidance framework

that will link the composition of produced water to beneficial use applications and identify the most cost-efficient, environmentally sound, and most beneficial strategies for management and treatment of produced water from CBM and gas shale operations

Project Schedule: Sept. 2008 - Mar. 2011

9

An Integrated Framework for Treatment and Management of Produced Water ► Industry Advisory Council (IAC):

• Anadarko Petroleum Corporation• Chevron• Marathon Oil Company• Pinnacle Gas Resources• Pioneer Natural Resources• Triangle Petroleum Corporation• Petroglyph Operating Company• Williams Production RMT• EnCana Production• British Petroleum (BP)• Haliburton

• Technical Experts/Advisors:• Jeff Cline, Cline Energy Consultants• Dave Stewart, Stewart Environmental Consultants

10

An Integrated Framework for Treatment and Management of Produced Water ►Stakeholder Advisory Committee (SAC):

11

Value of the Research

Water Quality

• TDS bins• Specific microconstituents• Screen technologies

Technology Assessment• Site specific conditions• Operational considerations• Short list technologies

Beneficial Use Scenarios• Targeted outcome• Select best available process

Integrated Framework for Beneficial Use

12

Task 8: Development and Validation of GuidelinesPublish Guidelines Case Studies

Task 7: Assessment of Management OptionsCost Benefit Analyses Draft Integrated Decision

Framework Stakeholder Workshops

Task 6: Field ValidationPilot Studies Data Analysis

Task 5: Selection of Treatment TechnologiesCost Estimates Design Criteria Water Quality

Task 4: Classification of Produced Water Quality and Treatment TechnologiesWater Quality Water Quantity Treatment

Technologies Beneficial Uses

Technical Overview – Research Tasks

13

An Integrated Framework for Treatment and Management of Produced Water ► Task 4 - Classification of Produced Water Treatment

Technologies and Management Strategies• Characterize and classify produced water qualities into

different categories of treatability

• Determine produced water quantities (by basin and resource; gas/water ratios; current disposal/use strategies; etc.)

• Compile a comprehensive database on existing and emerging desalination technologies, hybrid configurations, and concentrate management strategies

• Develop a beneficial use matrix considering natural and engineered conveyance systems, water qualities of beneficial non-potable and potable uses, and quantity and quality of residuals generated

14

Produced Water Quality: Salt Composition

Benko and Drewes (2008), Env. Eng. Science 25, 2, 239

15

Produced Water Quality

Salt tolerant crops

Drinking waterSalt sensitive crops

Livestock

Seawater

Benko and Drewes (2008), Env. Eng. Science 25, 2, 239

16

Classification of Water QualitiesOperationally defined water quality bins: Bin 1: Very low salinity (< 2,000 mg/L TDS)

• requires no additional treatment or desalination for discharge

Bin 2: Low salinity (2,000 mg/L to 5,000 mg/L TDS)• depending on chemical makeup, low-level technical options

may be possible to use at low cost

Bin 3: Moderate salinity (5,000 mg/L to 20,000 mg/L TDS)• suitable for lower cost desalination technologies

Bin 4: High salinity (20,000 mg/L to 40,000 mg/L TDS)• suitable for moderate cost desalination technologies

Bin 5: Very high salinity (greater than 40,000 mg/L TDS)• may require thermal desalination methods

17

Beneficial UsesExample of Beneficial Use Key Water Quality Constituents

Drinking Water Primary MCL, TDS < 500 mg/L…Surface Discharge Depending on Discharge Permit

A. TDS < 500 mg/L, SAR < 3…B. TDS <2,000 mg/L, SAR < 14…C. …

Aquifer Storage and Recharge (Class V Wells)

Depending on state regulationsA. Drinking Water StandardsB. TDS < 1,000 mg/L…C. TDS < 2,000 mg/L…

Agricultural Irrigation Depending on soils, and cropsA.TDS <1,500 mg/L, SAR 12, B < 2 mg/L…B.…

Livestock Watering Depending on classes of livestockA. TDS < 5,000 mg/L, B < 5 mg/L…B. …

18

An Integrated Framework for Treatment and Management of Produced Water ► Task 5 - Selection of Treatment Technologies for

Produced Water• Explore most appropriate and cost-efficient technologies

for treatment of produced water considering water composition categories (Task 4)

• Identification and evaluation of robust, low-maintenance, modular treatment technologies as well as brine management and disposal strategies (considering both well-established conventional as well as emerging desalination technologies)

• Develop cost modules for management options

19

Treatment Design Considerations (Task 2)► Geographical Issues

● Water generated at individual wells or well clusters● Limited conveyance systems● Difficult to supply chemicals and dispose of brine

► Infrastructure considerations● Modularity: ability to implement technology in treatment train● Mobility: Ease of relocation● Footprint

► Operations and maintenance considerations● Labor demands: Degree of automation● Flexibility: Ability to accommodate a wide range of feed water qualities● Reliability: Minimal maintenance and system downtime● Robustness: Ability of equipment to withstand harsh conditions● Pretreatment● Chemical & energy demand● Post-treatment

20

Technologies Assessed

Pre-Treatment► Trickling filter*

► Hydrocyclone*

► Dissolved air flotation► Adsorption► Media filter*

► Oxidation*

► Settling pond*

► Ultraviolet disinfection*

► Ceramic MF/UF membrane++

► Polymeric MF/UF membrane► Zeolite adsorption++

Membrane Desalination► Seawater RO*

► Brackish water RO*

► Nanofiltration (NF) *

► Ceramic NF++

► Electrodialysis (ED), ED reversal (EDR), & HEED*

► Membrane distillation++

► Forward osmosis w/ RO++

► Dual pass NF► Dual RO w/ HERO► Dual RO w/ SPARRO

++ novel technology * established for produced water

21

Technologies Assessed (cont.)

Thermal Desalination► Multi-stage flash (MSF)► Multi-effect distillation (MED)► Vapor compression (VC) *

► MED-VC*

► Freeze-thaw*

► Ion exchange (IX) *

► Capacitive deionization*

► Gas hydrates

Alternative Desalination

► Evaporation*

► Wind aided intensified evap.

► Subsurface drip dispersal► Constructed wetlands

Disposal & Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD)

Alternative Treatment

++ novel technology * established for produced water

22

Technologies Assessed (cont.)Commercial Processes with Membranes► Pressure driven

● CDM● Veolia OPUS● VSEP● Eco-Sphere● Sal-Proc and ROSP

► Electrically driven● EWP

Other Commercial Processes► Thermal

● 212 Resources● Aquatech● Aqua-Pure● AltelaRain● STW/GE

► Ion exchange:● EMIT● Catalyx/RGBL● Drake● Eco Tech

23

Tech Assessment Deliverable

24

Tech Assessment Deliverable (cont.)

25

Framework for Technology Selection

Presence of Dispersed Oil?

No

YesOil Removal

Drinking Water

Surface Discharge

Aquifer Recharge

Agri. Irrigation

Livestock Watering

Bin 1<2 g/L

Bin 22 – 5 g/L

Bin 35 – 20 g/L

Bin 420 – 40 g/L

Bin 5> 40 g/L

Treatment Processes

Sub-Bins

26

An Integrated Framework for Treatment and Management of Produced Water ► Task 6 - Field Validation of Viable Treatment

Processes for Produced Water• Pilot-scale treatment trains will be designed, assembled and

tested at representative production sites for field-scale validation

• Data will be analyzed to determine the effectiveness, robustness, and ease of operation of treatment strategies

• Preliminary cost estimates for the design of full-scale facilities will be developed providing an economic framework for decision analysis

27

An Integrated Framework for Treatment and Management of Produced Water ► Task 7 - Assessment of Management Options

• Explore through cost/benefit analyses and life-cycle assessments the multiple conditions that have to be fulfilled in order to establish beneficial use from a regulatory, political, environmental, economic, and legal standpoint

• Develop a structured decision process that identifies, evaluates, and, where possible, quantifies the regulatory requirements, benefits, risks and costs of each management option (“Draft Integrated Decision Framework”)

• Conduct a series of Stakeholder workshops to solicit key information, refine and confirm the decision framework, establish evaluation criteria, share treatment technology research results, and develop incentive-based beneficial use approaches

28

An Integrated Framework for Treatment and Management of Produced Water

29

An Integrated Framework for Treatment and Management of Produced Water ► Task 8 - Development and Validation of Guidelines

• Develop guidelines for management of produced water leading to beneficial use of produced water as a practical, adaptable and robust tool for CBM and gas shale operators

• Guidelines will incorporate the Integrated Decision Frameworkto provide CBM and gas shale operators with a technically sound, objective basis for identifying and quantifying the benefits and costs of various management options

• Approach will also promote clear communication of the cost-benefit analysis to the industry, regulatory, environmental, and public stakeholders

• Case studies (2) will be selected to illustrate application of the Integrated Decision Framework and provide practical information on “lessons learned”

30

Summary

An Integrated Framework for Treatment and Management of Produced Water

► Water quality surveys underway (Raton, San Juan, Powder, Piceance, Green River)

► Review of well established and emerging treatment processes complete

► Draft of Integrated Framework is developed► Website design underway► Treatment processes at lab-scale are currently tested► Initial field testing scheduled for May/June 2009► Meeting with Stakeholders and Industry Advisory

Committees scheduled for August 2009 and spring 2010

31

Dr. Jörg DrewesAssociate Professor and Director

Advanced Water Technology Center (AQWATEC)Environmental Science and Engineering

E-mail: jdrewes@mines.edu