Produced Water Management:Integrating Recovery, Treatment,
Reuse and DisposalSteve Randtke1, Ted Peltier1, Karen Shafer-Peltier2,
Reza Barati3, Belinda Sturm1, Orion Dollar1,Stan Thompson3, and Abdullah Ibrahim1
1. Department of Civil, Environmental & Architectural Engineering2. Tertiary Oil Recovery Program (TORP)
3. Department of Chemical & Petroleum Engineering
9th Annual KWEA-KsAWWA Joint ConferenceWichita, KansasAugust 29, 2017
What is Produced Water?
• Flowback water– Injected fracturing fluid
returning to the wellhead– Occurs primarily in the
first few weeks • Formation water
– Water from hydrocarbon-bearing formations, or injected for enhanced recovery purposes
– Composition depends on formation chemistry
– Returns throughout production
2
Produced Water Research Program
• NSF-Sponsored Program at KU and West Virginia University
• Goal: Develop management strategies to reduce the impact of oil and gas production on existing water resources and to increase use and reuse of produced water
• Specific Research Objectives1. Treatment of produced water and formation brines to
encourage beneficial use and reuse2. Minimization of freshwater use in oil and gas production3. Assessment of impacts of produced water on aquatic
ecosystems
3
Produced Water Volumes
• Over 20 billion barrels (3.3 billion m3) generated in U.S. in 2012
• KS is 5th largest generator– 1.1 billion barrels (~ 45 billion gallons)
in 2012
• KS volumes stable from 2007-2012– Oil production increased by ~ 20%
• KS wells average ~20 barrels of water per barrel of oil– National average ~ 10 bbl/bbl 0
12345678
Bill
ions
of b
arre
ls
Produced Water Production in Top 5
States, 2012
Data from Veil (2015) and Clark & Veil (2009)
4
Produced Water Volume Compared to Water Use in Kansas in 2012*
In 2012, produced water volume ~2.5% of Kansas water use
Highest water use is for irrigation, primarily from groundwater sources
(*Water use data from KS Dept. of Agriculture and USGS) 1 100 10000
Irrigation
Public Water Supply
Industry
Livestock
Produced Water
Billions of Gallons
5
Oil and Gas Wells in KS (left) and Average Annual Rainfall (below)
•Much of KS has limited water availability
•Produced water reuse could help extend existing resources
6
Produced Water Disposal in Kansas• In Kansas, ~ 2/3 of KS
disposed of by deep-well injection; ~ 1/3 reused by oil & gas producers• Deep-well injection has been
linked to increased seismic activity (induced seismicity)• Area-based restrictions on
deep well injection since 2015• Incentives exist for increased
water reuse and recovery, and for reducing volumes sent to disposal.
Source: Virginia Tech Seismological Observatory
7
8
PRODUCED WATER CHARACTERISTICS
9
Inorganic Constituents
Constituent ( in mg/l)
Barnett (TX) Haynesville (AK, LA, TX)
Marcellus (NY, PA WV)
WesternU. S.
TDS 40,000-185,000 40,000-250,000 45,000-185,000 1,000-400,000
Chloride 25,000-110,000 20,000-150,000 25,000-105,000 ND-250,000
Sodium 10,000-47,000 15,000-55,000 10,000-45,000 ND-150,000
Calcium 2,200-20,000 3,100-34,000 5,000-25,000 ND-74,000
Strontium 350-3,000 100-3,000 500-3,000 ND-6,250
Magnesium 200-3,000 300-5,200 500-3,000 ND
Barium 30-500 100-2,200 50-6,000 ND-850
Iron 22-100 80-350 20-200 ND
Sulfate 15-200 100-400 10-400 ND-15,000
10
Organic Constituents
• Produced Water from Oil Production– Dispersed and dissolved oil– COD up to 1,200 mg/l– Phenolic and aromatic compounds– Polar compounds– Volatile fatty acids
• Produced Water from Gas Production– Can also contain BTEX compounds and other volatiles
11
Examples of Produced Waters Across Kansas
Oakley mg/LTDS 125,000Sodium 45,900Magnesium 512Calcium 1980Strontium 56.0Barium 0.1Chloride 73,900Bicarbonate 133Sulfate 2680
Plainville mg/LTDS 30,600Sodium 11,000Magnesium 46.0Calcium 43.0Strontium 38.0Barium 0.1Chloride 14,000Bicarbonate 4,703Sulfate 696
Vinland mg/LTDS 31,400Sodium 9,030Magnesium 265Calcium 618Strontium 81.3Barium 434Chloride 10,400Bicarbonate 15.5Sulfate bdl
Reno County mg/LTDS 138,000Sodium 39,300Magnesium 2,340Calcium 8,740Strontium 2,220Barium 27.1Chloride 85,000Bicarbonate 55.0Sulfate 43.0
Trego County mg/LTDS 49,100Sodium 33,800Magnesium 2,700Calcium 5,600Strontium naBarium 0Chloride 39,400Bicarbonate 570Sulfate 2,060
•na=not analyzed, bdl=below detection limit
Liberal mg/LTDS 92,700Sodium 29,900Magnesium 1,220Calcium 5,280Strontium 173Barium 0.378Chloride 53,500Bicarbonate 177Sulfate 1,460
Trembley mg/LTDS 128,000Sodium 48,000Magnesium 2,000Calcium 6,900Strontium 2,220Barium bdlChloride naBicarbonate naSulfate 9,000
12
Reuse Barriers: Salinity and Sodicity
• High salinities affect water and nutrient uptake and reduce crop yield.– Non-saline water (TDS < 500 mg/L) safe for all plants– Water with TDS = 500 – 4,000 mg/L may be safe for
more salt-tolerant plants
• Water high in sodium and deficient in other cations, i.e., having a high sodium adsorption ratio (SAR), can cause soils to swell and plug, reducing water infiltration rates.
• Livestock cannot tolerate excessive salt levels.
13
Reuse Barriers: Specific Elements
• Boron – universally safe under 0.5 mg/L, some plants can tolerate up to 15 mg/L – Little information on
current concentrations
• Chloride – universally safe under 70 mg/L, tolerances up to 350 mg/L
Constituent Permanent irrigation MCL (mg/L)
< 20 years irrigation MCL (mg/L)
Aluminum 5 20Arsenic 0.1 2
Beryllium 0.1 0.5Cadmium 0.01 0.05Chromium 0.1 1
Cobalt 0.05 5Copper 0.2 5Fluoride 1 15
Iron 5 20Lithium 2.5 N/A
Manganese 0.2 10Molybdenum 0.01 0.05
Nickel 0.2 2Lead 5 10
Selenium 0.02 0.02Vanadium 0.1 1
Zinc 2 10
•Trace Element Maximum Contaminant Levels assuming good irrigation practices (Lazarova & Bahri, 2004)
14
Reuse Barriers: Additional Concerns
• Radioactivity (e.g., Ra+2)• Scale formation in pipes, treatment systems, wells,
producing formations, storage tanks, membranes, …– Carbonate and sulfate scales, those associated with
Ca+2, Mg+2, and especially Sr+2, Ba+2, and Ra+2
– Iron and manganese oxides– Sulfides
• Corrosivity (CO2, H2S, salinity)• Other constituents (e.g., Ba+2 and Sr+2), esp. those
related to current or future MCLs or water quality standards
15
Two KS Produced Waters Being Studied
All concentrations in mg/l.
Douglas County Reno County
Temperature 18.6 33.8pH 6.6 6.2TDS 31,000 128,000Sodium 9000 48,000Calcium 600 6,900Magnesium 260 2,000Strontium 80 2,400Barium 430 bdlIron 3.1 bdlManganese 0.4 bdlSulfate bdl ~9,000Total C 165 185Organic C 45 15
16
PRODUCED WATER TREATMENT
17
PW Treatment: General Strategy
Initial TSS and oil separation occurs at the well site
Minimal treatment for direct reuse, to prevent scaling or clogging
Salinity reduction required for secondary uses
Removal of particulate matter,oil droplets
TDS reduction/Desalination
Removal of solubleorganics
Removal of NORMs, scale-causing components
PRODUCED WATER
Secondary reuse (‘clean’ water)
Direct industry reuse (reusable water)
18
Treatment to Remove Scale-Forming Cations
• Conventional Treatment Methods– Sodium sulfate addition– Lime and/or sodium carbonate addition (softening)
• Polymer Addition / Polyelectrolyte complex formation– Objective is to form metal-polymer complexes that
can be removed by settling, coagulation and settling, ultrafiltration, centrifugation, or other means
– Polymer recovery/reuse may be necessary to make this economically feasible
• Better if selective for Ba+2, Sr+2, and Ra+2
19
Douglas County: Sulfate Addition
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.080
25
50
75
100
Am
ount
rem
oved
(per
cent
tota
l)
Na2SO4 added (mmoles)
MgCaSrBa
Douglas County
(Holding time ~ 5 hours to reach maximum removal.)
20
Reno County: Sulfate Addition
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.080
25
50
75
100A
mou
nt re
mov
ed (p
erce
ent t
otal
)
Na2SO4 added (mmoles)
MgCaSr
Reno County
Minimal Sr+2 removal in absence of Ba+2
21
Douglas County: Carbonate Addition
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.00
20
40
60
80
100A
mou
nt re
mov
ed (%
tota
l)
0.2M Na2CO3 added to 7 mL brine (mL)
MgCaSrBa
Douglas County
(Adjusted pH to >11 before carbonate addition; removal very rapid)
22
Reno County: Carbonate Addition
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.00
20
40
60
80
100
Am
ount
rem
oved
(per
cent
tota
l)
0.2M Na2CO3 added to 7 mL brine (mL)
MgCaSr
Reno County
(pH adjusted to >11 before carbonate addition)
23
Polyelectrolytes used as “scale inhibitors”
24
Ba+2 Removal vs Polymer Type/Concentration
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
PAA 100kDPAA 250kDPSS 70kDPSS 200kDPSSM(1:1) 20kDPSSM(3:1) 20kDPVS 4-6kDTotal Present
Bariu
m R
emov
ed (µ
mol
es)
Polymer Concentration (percent weight)
25
Sr+2 Removal vs Polymer Type/Concentration
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0S
tront
ium
Rem
oved
(µm
oles
)
Polymer Concentration (percent weight)
PAA 100kD PAA 250kDPSS 70kD PSS 200kD PSSM(1:1) 20kD PSSM(3:1) 20kDPVS 4-6kD Total Present
26
Best case for Sr+2: Combining pH with UF
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
PSSM(1:1) PSSM(1:1) w/3kD UF PSSM(3:1) PSSM(3:1) w/3kD UF
Stro
ntiu
m (%
rem
oved
)
pH
27
AEROBIC GRANULAR SLUDGE FORMATION IN HYPERSALINE SYNTHETIC PRODUCED WATER
•Inoculated with halophilic
microorganisms (Sporosarcina
halophile)
•Inoculated with a mixed culture
of combined irregular aerobic
granules and flocs
28
Aerobic Granule Size & Integrity
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5
Ave
rage
siz
e, m
m
NaCl content, %
Halophile
Mixed
29
Halophilic Microorganisms: Image Analysis*
Granule formation Granule maturation Degranulation
NaCl, % 1% 4% 7.5%Avg. Dia., mm 0.24 ± 0.08 1.12 ± 0.18 0.9 ± 0.57
SVI, mL/g 62 ± 27 12 ± 5 22 ± 0.6
VSS/SS 0.76 0.82 0.8
* Ibrahim et al., WEFTEC 2017
30
Desalination
• Reverse Osmosis (RO), Multi-stage Flash (MSF) distillation and Multi-Effect Distillation (MED) account for 94% of global desalination capacity
• Energy requirements rise quickly as inlet feeds become more saline
• At TDS 150,000-250,000 mg/L evaporative crystallizers can treat brines with zero-liquid discharge (ZLD) or near-ZLD
Treatment Type
EnergyCost
(kWh/m3)
Treatable TDS Limit (mg/L)
RO 3.5-6.0 ~70,000
MSF 10-28 ~150,000
MED 7-25 ~150,000
Brine Concentrator 18-26 N/A
Brine Crystallizer 52-66 N/A
Brine Concentrator/Crystallizer
70-92 ~250,000
31
High Salinity Treatment Options*
Type of Treatment
Pre-Treatments
Treatable TDS Range (mg/L)
% Water Recovery Notes
Evaporative Concentration
De-oiling;antiscalants and
acids if heat transfer fouling
occurs
< 100,000 98
• Very high product water quality;
• Steam produced can be used in Steam-Assisted
Gravity Drainage (SAGD) enhanced oil recovery
methods
CrystallizationSuspended solids
and organic matter removal
No limit (successfullyemployed at
310,000)
0
• Feed brine is completely evaporated
• Potential for commercial recovery of solid salts
• Waste heat from natural gas compressors can drive
separation* RPSEA Project 07122-12, 2009
32
Emerging Desalination Methods
• Multiple approaches being developed to reduce energy use and costs, or increase range of treatable waters. – Phase change-based separations (gas hydrate freeze-melting,
supercritical desalination, humidification-dehumidification),– Advanced membrane processes (forward osmosis, membrane
distillation)– Voltage-driven processes (electrodialysis, microbial desalination cells)
• Electrodialysis (ED) and membrane distillation (MD) systems have already been tested on a pilot-scale.
• Freeze-melting and supercritical desalination have the potential to significantly reduce energy requirements.
33
Novel Treatment Technologies (WVU)
• Production of alkaline catholyte in a microbial capacitance deionization cell (MCDC)– Electrochemical production of an alkaline solution,
which is used to precipitate scale-forming cations• Bioelectrochemical Removal of Organics and TDS
Using MCDCs– Using biodegradable organics (in produced water) to
drive biochemical reactions, thereby removing organics while also powering an electrochemical deionization process
34
RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT
35
Salinity Exchange for High Salinity Produced Water
High TDS Produced Water
Low Salinity Water FloodingORTreatment and Recovery
“Salinity Exchange”- Dispose High TDS Water- Produce Low TDS Water- Pressure Management
36
Oil-Producing Formations with TDS < 40,000 mg/l
Marked region has production from both ‘high-salinity’ (>100,000 mg/l TDS)and ‘low-salinity’ formations
•Examine chemistry of produced waters and formation materials for exchange suitability
37
Douglas Co. and Reno Co. Mixing Results in PhreeqC
-2.5
-2.0
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
SI p
redi
cted
by
PHRE
EQC
Ratio of Reno County to Douglas County water
Aragonite (CaCO3)
Barite (BaSO4)
Calcite (CaCO3)
Celestite (SrSO4)
Dolomite (CaMg(CO3)2)
38
New & Improved Fracking Fluids
• Energized fluids, including supercritical CO2 foams stabilized with polyelectrolyte complex nanoparticles (PECNPs)– Reduced freshwater use– Better suspension of proppants– Improved oil recovery
• Using Produced Water to Prepare Fracking Fluids– Optimized formulations and salinity levels– Stabilization with PECNPs– Benefits include increased O&G production and
reduced demand on freshwater supplies
39
Ongoing and Future Directions
• Kansas Water Office project to demonstrate treatment of high salinity produced water– Treated effluent to flow into a farm pond
• Improved treatment processes– Optimize and improve processes, including those
described above, to enhance performance and reduce cost– Investigate other processes to reduce scale-formation– Investigate processes for boron removal
• Depleted reservoirs to store produced or treated water• Water rights – implications for reuse & recovery• Matching treated-water quality to desired uses• New courses and certificate programs
40
Concluding Remarks
• Produced water is a potential water resource for the state of KS• Salinity has the biggest impact on the feasibility of treatment
for reuse.– Treatment costs are much higher above the “RO threshold.”– Pre-treatment will generally be needed to avoid / minimize
membrane fouling.• Removal or control of scale-forming ions is likely to be needed
for some (perhaps many) reuse applications and associated treatment technologies. Depending on water quality:– Sulfate addition can selectively remove Ba+2, but is less
effective for Sr+2 removal; lime/soda softening is expected to be generally effective, but non-selective.
– Removal by polymer addition needs further development.
41
Concluding Remarks (Cont’d)
• New or improved treatment technologies are needed to extract freshwater from produced water and to treat produced water for various reuse applications.
• Note that the economics of produced water management differ greatly from those of municipal water management.
• Salinity exchange can help to manage the least treatable waters.– More knowledge is needed about the chemistry of mixing
formation brines.• Oil and gas reservoirs can potentially be managed in a manner
that enhances freshwater production, facilitates various reuse applications, reduces disposal via deep well injection, and supports efforts to control induced seismicity.
42
Acknowledgements
• Produced Water Research GroupKansas University* West Virginia UniversityCollaboratorsEdward PeltierStephen RandtkeKaren PeltierReza BaratiBelinda SturmJyun-Syung Tsau
StaffRay Carter Jr.Mark Ballard
Post-Doctoral ResearchersMing Chen, Karla Leslie,Masoumeh Veisi, Sheng-Xue Xie
CollaboratorsPaul ZiemkiewiczLian-Shin LinJoseph DonovanHarry FinkleaJ. Todd PettyShawn Grushecky
StaffJennifer Hause
Post-Doctoral ResearchersEric Merriam
*All contributed to the work described herein.
43
Acknowledgements (Cont’d)
• Research Partners & Collaborators– Kansas Water Office– Kansas Geological Survey– Kansas Biological Survey
• Graduate & Undergraduate Student Researchers– Eric Albertson* Andrew Hummel Negar Nazari– Rudhra Anandan Abdullah Ibrahim* Marshall Rutter– Orion Dollar* Francis Kinney* Stan Thompson*– Hooman Hosseini Colton Kenner* Jennifer Warren
*Contributors to this presentation; all other have contributed to the work described herein and/or are contributing to on-going work.
44
Acknowledgements (Cont’d)
• Special thanks to those doing the dirty work
45
Acknowledgements (Cont’d)
• Funding Sources– National Science Foundation, EPSCoR Research
Infrastructure Improvement Program: Track-2, Focused EPSCoR Collaboration Award(OIA-1632892)
– KU Strategic Initiative Grant– Tertiary Oil Recovery Program – KU Dept. of Civil, Environmental & Architectural Engrg.– Others in progress …
46
Top Related