North Texans for Natural Gas Special Report: Waterstudy

NATURAL GAS DEVELOPMENTS A V E S T E X A S W A T E R

A N O R T H T E X A N S F O R N AT U R A L G A S S P E C I A L R E P O R T

K E Y FA C T S

Increased natural gas-fired electricity generation in Texas can save 25 to 50 times more water than what’s used during production, including water used for hydraulic fracturing or “fracking.”

Water used in energy development amounts to a little more than one percent of all water used in Texas. Water used for fracking specifically amounts to only about 0.5 percent

Water use for energy development in Texas is expected to decline significantly -- more than 16 billion gallons per year -- in the coming decades.

Natural gas production has been an economic boon for Texas. This is especially true in North Texas, which is home to the Barnett

Shale, one of the largest producing natural gas fields in the world. According to a study released in 2014 by the Perryman Group,

the Barnett Shale has helped support more than one million Texas jobs since 2001, generating $120 billion in total economic

impact over the same period, and $11.2 billion in tax revenue for local governments.

Burning natural gas produces water. Through 2013, natural gas produced from the Barnett Shale has generated the equivalent of 40 years’ worth of residential water for the City of Denton.

The fact that energy production is a key part of the Texas economy is nothing new. But natural gas development in Texas has

another important benefit that is often overlooked: it helps conserve precious water resources.

This report examines how increased use of Texas-produced natural gas helps save water; how water used in the energy

development process compares to other uses in Texas; and how natural gas development itself produces water.

N AT U R A L G A S D E V E LO P M E N T S AV E S T E X A S WAT E R A N O R T H T E X A N S F O R N AT U R A L G A S S P E C I A L R E P O R T

P O W E R G E N E R AT I O N

N AT U R A L G A S I S G R O W I N G I N I M P O R TA N C E A S A S O U R C E O F E L E C T R I C I T Y I N T E X A S , A N D I T

I S A C R I T I C A L PA R T O F T H E S TAT E ’ S G E N E R AT I O N P O R T F O L I O. T H I S H A S P R O V I D E D C H E A P E R

E N E R G Y B I L L S A N D E N V I R O N M E N TA L B E N E F I T S , I N C LU D I N G LO W E R A I R E M I S S I O N S . I N

A D D I T I O N T O T H E S E B E N E F I T S , I T A L S O U S E S L E S S WAT E R T H A N OT H E R C O M M O N S O U R C E S .

Scientists and environmentalists have long recognized the water-related benefits of natural gas. Writing about the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency proposal called the “Clean Power Plan” (CPP), Kate Zerrenner of the Environmental Defense

Fund (EDF) observed an important and sometimes overlooked benefit to moving toward lower-carbon fuels, such as natural gas:

Switching to more natural gas is another way Texas can meet the CPP requirements while cleaning our air and reducing our water consumption.“ ”

A 2013 study by researchers at the University of Texas at Austin (UT), published in the journal Environmental Research Letters,

quantified these water savings. Based on an analysis of water use data from national and state regulatory bodies, the UT

researchers concluded that water savings linked to natural gas are significant:

Moreover, the study concludes that by shifting its power

generation mix toward more natural gas, Texas could reduce

its freshwater consumption by 53 billion gallons per year. As

EDF’s Zerrenner has noted, this is 60 percent of the entire

water footprint of coal generation in the state.

Since the 1990s, the primary type of power plant built in Texas has been the natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) plant with cooling towers, which uses fuel and cooling water more e�ciently than older steam turbine technologies. About a third of Texas power plants are NGCC. NGCC plants consume about a third as much water as coal steam turbine (CST) plants.

“”

The bottom line is that boosting natural gas production and using more natural gas in power generation makes our electric grid more drought resilient. –Dr. Bridget Scanlon, Jackson School of Geosciences, Bureau of Economic Geology, University of Texas at Austin

WATER SAVINGS FROM FUEL SHIFT

“Natural gas is also an important component of Texas’ water-saving future. The boom in shale gas fracking, which started in Texas and spread to Pennsylvania and other states, has cut the price of natural gas about 75 percent in the last five years. At current prices, electricity generation from natural gas is much cheaper than coal. Construction of coal-fired power plants has stopped in favor of gas plants, and old coal plants are being converted to gas or shut down across the country…

Fracking is playing a much bigger role in pushing out coal than new regulations. There is a great water advantage in moving from coal to gas, too, as natural gas is typically about twice as e�cient and so needs just half the water for cooling. When gas replaces coal in power generation, it not only cuts water use but also eliminates coal’s emission of mercury, sulfur dioxide and particulates, and it reduces nitrogen oxide emissions by 90 percent. Carbon dioxide emissions are also cut by 50 percent.

“

”


W H AT A B O U T F R A C K I N G ?

Critics have frequently alleged that hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) requires significant quantities of water, putting precious local

resources at risk. While it is true that fracking can require several million gallons of water, that quantity is dwarfed by the amount

of water saved by using more natural gas in Texas.

The UT researchers calculated that the use of natural gas to generate electricity saves Texas a net 33 gallons of water for every

gallon used statewide in the fracking process.

The UT team further estimated that moving to natural gas-generated electricity saves 25 to 50 times more water than the amount of water used in the fracking process.

Water savings are not the only benefits from shifting power generation toward natural gas. As Paul Faeth, director of energy, water and climate at the Institute for Public Research at the Center for Naval Analyses (CNA), has written:

F O R E V E R Y G A L LO N O F WAT E R U S E D TO P R O D U C E N AT U R A L G A S

T H R O U G H H Y D R A U L I C F R A C T U R I N G T E X A S S AV E D 3 3 G A L LO N S O F WAT E R B Y G E N E R AT I N G E L E C T R I C I T Y W I T H T H AT

N AT U R A L G A S I N S T E A D O F C O A L ( I N 2 0 1 1 )

WAT E R U S E I N P E R S P E C T I V E


While the increased and rapid adoption of natural gas as an electricity generation source is good news in terms of water savings,

the question remains: is natural gas development still a major consumer of water at a time when conservation is critical?

Any economic development – be it renewable energy production or home building – requires water, and natural gas development

is no exception. The amount that any given industrial process consumes may sound like a lot, but he only way to fully assess the

“water footprint” of any source of demand is to put all uses in proper perspective.

In fact, the data show that most other industries – and even some household applications – use much more water than does the

energy industry, which includes but is certainly not limited to natural gas production.

Dr. Scott W. Tinker, director of the Bureau of Economic Geology at the University of Texas, has shown that irrigation is by far the

largest water consumer in Texas, with energy development (a subset of “mining”) being the least intensive user. The following

chart was developed from his data.

Beyond this, residential lawns consume 18 times more water than fracking, according to UT professor Rusty Todd.

WATER USE IN DENTONFor a specific illustration at the local level, let’s look at the numbers in Denton County. The City of Denton made headlines when

it passed an illegal ban on fracking (which was later repealed by the City Council), the culmination of a campaign that used water

consumption as a talking point.

WAT E R U S E D I N E N E R G Y D E V E LO P M E N T A M O U N T S T O A L I T T L E M O R E T H A N O N E P E R C E N T O F

A L L WAT E R U S E D I N T E X A S . WAT E R U S E D F O R F R A C K I N G S P E C I F I C A L LY A M O U N T S T O O N LY

A B O U T 0 . 5 P E R C E N T. T H I S I S S I M I L A R T O T H E R E S T O F T H E C O U N T R Y, W H E R E F R A C K I N G

A C C O U N T S F O R A B O U T 0 . 3 P E R C E N T O F T OTA L U. S . F R E S H WAT E R C O N S U M P T I O N .

AV E R A G E S TAT E L E V E L WAT E R U S E

( A L L C AT E G O R I E S ) I N 2 0 0 1 -2 0 1 0

WAT E R U S A G E – D E N T O N C O U N T Y, T E X . 2 0 0 5 -2 0 1 3 ( T H E M O S T R E C E N T Y E A R

F O R W H I C H D ATA A R E AVA I L A B L E ) ; A L L F I G U R E S

A R E I N A C R E-F E E T


Misleading statements on the Frack Free Denton (FFD) website led readers to conclude that water used in fracking is lost

forever. FFD also leveraged its “water use” talking point on social media.

Natural gas is also an important component of Texas’ water-saving future. The boom in shale gas fracking, which started in Texas and spread to Pennsylvania and other states, has cut the price of natural gas about 75 percent in the last five years. At current prices, electricity generation from natural gas is much cheaper than coal. Construction of coal-fired power plants has stopped in favor of gas plants, and old coal plants are being converted to gas or shut down across the country…

Fracking is playing a much bigger role in pushing out coal than new regulations. There is a great water advantage in moving from coal to gas, too, as natural gas is typically about twice as e�cient and so needs just half the water for cooling. When gas replaces coal in power generation, it not only cuts water use but also eliminates coal’s emission of mercury, sulfur dioxide and particulates, and it reduces nitrogen oxide emissions by 90 percent. Carbon dioxide emissions are also cut by 50 percent.

“

”

As the historical data show Denton County’s municipal water use was more than 56 times higher than water used for energy

development between the years 2005-2012. In 2012 in particular, the numbers are the starkest: municipal uses accounted for 90

percent more water consumption than mining. Irrigation accounted for more than double the water used in oil and gas operations

in Denton County.

But as the historical data below show, concerns about gas industry water usage in Denton County were (and still are) misplaced:

L E S S WAT E R U S E I N T H E F U T U R E

The good news is that, even though energy production is a comparatively

small water user, water consumption from energy development is also

expected to decline significantly in the coming decades.

According to a 2013 University of Texas study, not only will Texas save

more water as additional natural gas plants come online, but the water

used for that same power generation will also decline precipitously.

In his 2012 update on water used by mining related industries, Dr. Tinker

of UT projects that water used for hydraulic fracturing, after a peak in

several years, will steadily decline at least until 2060, from almost

125,000 acre-feet per year to less than 50,000 acre-feet per year.

Fresh water consumption – that is, water not returned to the water cycle

after it is withdrawn – will hold steady at its current level of approximate-

ly 70,000 acre-feet per year for several years and then significantly

decline.


S TAT E W I D E , E X A M I N I N G T H E C U R R E N T T O P T E N G A S

P R O D U C I N G C O U N T I E S , W E S E E T H AT M U N I C I PA L WAT E R U S E I N 2 0 1 3 WA S M O R E T H A N 1 0 T I M E S

T H AT O F O I L , N AT U R A L G A S , A N D OT H E R

M I N I N G -R E L AT E D O P E R AT I O N S :

[I]rrigation is the biggest user of water in Texas, accounting for 61 percent. Municipal use follows with 27 percent, then manufac-turing at 6 percent, steam electric power at 3 percent and livestock at 2 percent. The last 1 percent is made up of oil and gas and other mining activities. -Barnett Shale Energy Education Council

In its 2012 State Water Plan, the Texas Water Development Board provided statewide perspective and projections, which

indicated that “mining” would account for only 1.3 percent of water demand in Texas by 2060.

And while municipal water use is projected to rise steadily, overall “mining” use -- which includes more than just oil and gas

development -- is expected to hold steady as the lowest-demand industry.


S TAT E-L E V E L P R O J E C T I O N S T O 2 0 6 0 O F H F WAT E R U S E A N D

F R E S H-WAT E R C O N S U M P T I O N A N D C O M PA R I S O N T O E A R L I E R

WAT E R P R O J E C T I O N S .

S TAT E-L E V E L P R O J E C T I O N S T O 2 0 6 0 O F O I L A N D G A S I N D U S T R Y

WAT E R U S E A N D F R E S H-WAT E R C O N S U M P T I O N

C R E AT I N G WAT E R W I T H N AT U R A L G A S

IN ADDITION TO ITS WATER SAVINGS, NATURAL GAS GENERATES WATER VAPOR WHEN IT IS BURNED, HELPING TO OFFSET THE AMOUNT OF WATER USED DURING UPSTREAM PRODUCTION. NATURAL GAS FROM THE BARNET T SHALE, THROUGH 2013 , GENERATED ENOUGH WATER TO SUPPLY THE CIT Y OF DENTON WITH ITS RESIDENTIAL WATER NEEDS FOR 40 YEARS.

The data show that the use of natural gas development saves Texas significant amounts of water. But there is another important and often overlooked element in the story of natural gas development and the water cycle: using natural gas also creates water.

This fact may sound surprising, but it’s actually basic chemistry. Natural gas is largely methane (CH4), each molecule of which consists of one carbon atom and four hydrogen atoms. When methane burns, the chemical reaction results in the release of carbon dioxide (CO2) and water vapor (H2O).


2 O2 CO22 H2O

IS THIS WATER CREATION A S IGNIFICANT BENEFIT FOR TEXANS AND OTHERS IN THE REGION? HOW MUCH WATER IS REALLY CREATED TO HELP MIT IGATE PERIODS OF DROUGHT?

Here is the process as described by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE):

Expressed in cubic feet, methane produces about two cubic feet of water vapor (steam) for every cubic foot of gas, assuming full

combustion

Chemists at Elmhurst College note other benefits as well:


When one molecule of methane is burned, it produces two molecules of water vapor. When moles are converted to pound/mole, we find that every pound of methane fuel combusted produces 2.25 lb. of water vapor, which is about 12% of the total exhaust by weight.

“ ”

“Chemically, this combustion process consists of a reaction between methane and oxygen in the air. When this reaction takes place, the result is carbon dioxide (CO2), water (H2O), and a great deal of energy…

Natural gas is the cleanest burning fossil fuel...Since natural gas is mostly methane, the combustion of natural gas releases fewer byproducts than other fossil fuels.

“

”WAT E R W E N E E D

Natural gas produced from the Barnett Shale (through mid-2013) put as much water back into the water cycle as all of Denton’s

residents have used in more than 40 years. We can estimate a benefit of this scale by examining natural gas production figures

from the Barnett Shale.*

To appreciate this benefit, it is necessary to do some calculations and to translate cubic feet (which is how natural gas production is

described) into gallons and acre-feet (as we are most comfortable discussing water).

In 2013, the Barnett Shale made history by surpassing 14 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) or natural gas production. Assuming 100 percent

combustion, the burning of this fuel created 28 Tcf of water vapor (steam). Or, to put it more clearly, the combustion of this

natural gas returned 28 Tcf of steam back to the water cycle. Dr. Tinker from UT has made assumptions about gas prices and he

estimates that cumulative Barnett Shale production through 2050 will reach 45.1 Tcf. This means that in 35 years the Barnett

may return 90.2 Tcf of water back to the water cycle.

NATURAL GAS PL ANTS SUPPLY “PEAKING POWER” TO HELP KEEP NON-WATER-INTENSIVE RENEWABLES – PARTICUL ARLY WIND – VIABLE WHEN THEIR INHERENT L IMITATIONS PREVENT THEM FROM MEETING MARKET DEMAND.

In layman’s terms, the 14 Tcf of gas produced by the Barnett Shale through mid-2013 produced the equivalent of more than 155

billion gallons of water, or 476,426 acre-feet.

Let’s further contextualize by looking at what this water creation could mean for a single mid-sized Texas municipality — Denton,

which recently repealed its ban on fracking.

Denton is a city of about 120,000 residents. According to the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB), each Texas resident

uses an average of 86 gallons of water per day. Assuming Denton residents are typical Texans, we can estimate that the entire city

uses about 10,586,514 gallons, or 32.5 acre-feet, of water per day. This translates into 11,863 acre-feet per year. Natural gas

production in the Barnett Shale, through mid-2013, produced 462,426 acre-feet of water. Thus, as noted above, natural gas

produced from the Barnett Shale (through mid-2013) put as much water back into the water cycle as all of Denton’s residents have

used in more than 40 years. This is only a rough estimate, but it illustrates the scale on which natural gas development “gives back”

to the water cycle. The choice of Denton as an example was made because it attempted to ban fracking, but of course the

numbers could be applied to a municipality of any size. (Dallas, for example, is roughly 10 times the size of Denton, so Barnett

Shale natural gas production has created four years’ worth of water for all of its residents.)

Looking into the future, the picture is even more impressive.

The 90.2 Tcf of steam that could be created through 2050, using estimates from Dr. Tinker, is equivalent to 500 billion gallons of

water, or 1.5 million acre-feet. That is the equivalent of 126 years of household water consumption for all the citizens of Denton,

assuming steady population and consistent water use.

The creation of billions of gallons of much-needed water is an important complement to the economic and environmental benefits

of natural gas. Developing and using a fuel that helps put water back into the water cycle is a critical tool to help Texas and its

neighbors mitigate periods of drought.

C O M P L E M E N T I N G R E N E WA B L E S

Researchers at UT have also observed an ancillary water-saving benefit linked to the use of natural gas: its ability to act as a

“backstop” for renewables, in particular the steadily increasing use of wind-based electricity generation in Texas.


According to the UT study:


Natural gas, now ~50% of power generation in Texas, enhances drought resilience by increasing the flexibility of power plant generators, including gas combustion turbines to complement increasing wind generation and combined cycle generators with ~30% of cooling water requirements of traditional steam turbine plants. These reductions in water use are projected to continue to 2030 with increased use of natural gas and renewables.

“”

Texas leads the nation in installed wind generation capacity, which provides 96 percent of renewable generation in the state.

However -- as is the case with solar power -- wind output is neither consistent nor controllable, and it is not always matched to

electricity market demand. Natural gas, which can be brought online almost instantly, is therefore a vital complement to this

renewable platform.

C O N C LU S I O N

While abundant and inexpensive natural gas is a game changer for Texas’ economy and for the U.S. march toward energy indepen-dence, natural gas also has a positive role to play in making our state more drought resilient.

This report has demonstrated that Texas natural gas helps save significant amounts of water, which is especially important in times of drought. While natural gas development does use water, the amount used pales in comparison to the water savings that natural gas-generated power provides.

Natural gas, which currently generates about one-third of Texas’ energy, will only become more important in the future, as the state’s population continues to grow and the need for a�ordable, reliable power increases.

In other words, when the wind doesn’t blow, natural gas generators insure that electricity is available when needed. Given the low

cost of natural gas, this means the state can achieve an important blend of consumer energy savings and reduced air emissions.


*It is beyond the scope of this report to complete a definitive analysis of all gas yield curves in Texas. However, static relative water

use in the state’s energy-producing basins can be found here:

S E E M O R E AT: N O R T H T E X A N S F O R N AT U R A LG A S .C O M

North Texans for Natural Gas Special Report: Waterstudy

Documents

Transcript of North Texans for Natural Gas Special Report: Waterstudy