# FracWater Treatment for Recycling: Options and Alternatives; Their Benefits and Limitations

26 th Annual International Conference on Soils, Sediments, Water and Energy Conference University of Massachusetts Amherst Mass.

# Typical Horizontal Shale Well

# Typical Shale Well Casing

# Marcellus Shale Gas Development Waste Waters

• freshwater encountered during drilling

– Nominal Volumes



### • water/clay mixture used as drilling mud during the drilling process

– 50,000 to 100,000 Gallons Per Well



### • highly mineralized water held deep underground

– Varies



### • return fluids from fracking

– mixture of water, sand and chemicals

– 200,000 to 1,000,000 Gallons Per Well



### • fluids that occur with the gas during production (Production Water)

– Varies (~~500 to 5,000 Gallons Per Week Per Well)

# Focus of This Presentation 10,000 Foot View

• Primary Focus

– Treatment and Recycling of return fluids from fracking

– mixture of water, sand and chemicals

– Referred to as FlowBack Water or Waste FracWater * * dependent upon company and “colloquial” perception



## • Parallel

– “Pit Water”

– Water remaining after separation of water/clay mixture used as drilling mud during the drilling process

# Contaminants of Interest in FlowBack Water

• Total Dissolved Solids

– Discharge Limitations & Down Hole Saturation

• Sodium Chloride

- Discharge Limitations & Down Hole Saturation

• Barium Chloride

– HSE Hazard; Down Hole Precipitation

• Strontium Chloride

– HSE Hazard; Down Hole Precipitation

• Calcium Chloride

- Down Hole Precipitation

• Manganese

- Down Hole Precipitation

• Iron

- Down Hole Precipitation

• Sulfates

- Down Hole Precipitation

• VOC’s

– HSE Hazard; Fracking Chemical Interference

• Bacteria

– Storage and Reuse Issues

• Fracing Chemistry

# Treatment and Recycling “Drivers”

• New Pa. Point Discharge Regulations

– Strict TDS Limitations Focused on Shale Drilling Waste Water Treatment (500 mg/l maximum)



## • Logistics

– Fracking Operations Require 600 to 1200 tankers per well



## • Economics

– Trucking Costs for Hauling Fresh and Waste Water



## • Public relations

– Trucking Cumulative Impacts; Water Shed Stresses; Community Perceptions

# Most Common FlowBack Water Treatment Technologies *



## • Evaporation

• Precipitation of Metals and Anions

• Ozonation for Metals, VOC and Bacteria Removal

• Carbon Absorption for VOC Removal

• Ultraviolet Radiation for Bacteria Removal

• Flocculation and Filtration

• Sedimentation

• Deep Well Injection

* May also be utilized with Pit Water

# FlowBack Water Treatment Logistical Options *

• Municipal Waste Water Treatment Plants

– Special Permits

– Sedimentation Precipitation, Oxidation and Dilution

• Brick and Mortar Plants

– Sedimentation

– Evaporation

– Metals Precipitation

– Carbon Absorption

• Mobile Processors

– Evaporation

– Metals Precipitation

– Ozonation or Carbon absorption

• Semi Permanent Systems (Serves Single Company “Five” Mile Radius of Operations)

– Evaporation

– Metals Precipitation

– Ozonation or Carbon absorption
* May also be utilized with Pit Water

# Logistical Options

Benefits and Limitations

# Municipal Wastewater Plants

Benefits

• Existing Infrastructure and Permitting Compliance Controls

• Financial Benefit to Communities

• May be Ideal for Long Term Processing associated with Production Waters (Limited Volumes) 

# Limitations

• Cumulative Trucking Impacts

• Limited Number

• New Pa. Regulations Severely Limit Capacity

• Limited Capability for Treatment of Elevated Concentrations of Metals

# Brick and Mortar Plants

Benefits

• High Throughput Capacity

• Stationary Environmental Control Infrastructure

• Ideal for Long Term Processing associated with Production Waters

• Options for Treatment for Recycle and For Discharge 

## Limitations

• Cumulative Trucking Impacts

• Community Perceptions

– Large Accumulation of Input and Waste Products



### • Limited Number

• High Infrastructure Costs Built into Pricing Structure

• New Pa. Regulations Present Challenges for Discharge Options

# Mobile Processors

Benefits

• Mitigates Cumulative Trucking Impacts

• No High Infrastructure Costs Built into Pricing Structure

• Ideal for Onsite Treatment and Recycling

• Typically Modular Format Accommodates Varying Flow Requirements

• Permitting Managed On Well By Well Basis 

## Limitations

• Well Site Footprint Requirements May Limit Available Space to Meet High Flow Rates

• Distributed Management and Control of Treatment Operations

• Requires Portable Environmental Control Infrastructure

• Frequent Mobilization Costs

# Semi Permanent Systems

Benefits

• Reduces Cumulative Trucking Impacts

• Modest Infrastructure Costs Built into Pricing Structure

• Ideal for Short Haul Treatment and Recycling

• No Long Term Environmental Legacy Issues Associated with Permanent Plant

• Eliminates Frequent Mobilization Costs

• Captive Cost Control and Environmental Management 

## Limitations

• Requires Semi Portable Environmental Control Infrastructure

• Community Perceptions

– Large Accumulation of Input and Waste Products

• Periodic Relocation of Significant Operations

# Treatment Technologies

Benefits and Limitations

# Function of Most Common FlowBack Water Treatment Technologies *

• Evaporation

– Total Dissolved Solids Reduction/Removal

– Sodium Chloride Reduction/Removal

• Precipitation w/ Separation

– Removal of Metals:

• Barium Chloride; Strontium Chloride; Calcium Chloride; Sulfates

• Ozonation

– Oxidation of Contaminants

• VOC’s; Bacteria; Manganese; Iron;

–

• Carbon Absorption

– VOC Reduction

• UV

– Bacteria Removal

• Sedimentation

– Suspended Solids

• Recirculation Loops * May also be utilized with Pit Water

# Evaporation

Benefits

• Provides Pure Water for Recycling or for Return to Environment

• Suitable for All Logistical Options

• Well Understood Technology and Well Developed Equipment Supply Chain 

# Limitations

• Cumulative Impacts Associated with Fossil Fuel Fired Evaporation

• Community Perceptions

– Plumes

– What's in It



### • Residual Solids May Require Hazardous Waste Disposal Due To Elevated Levels of Metals

# Precipitation w/ Separation

Benefits

• Provides Clear Brine w/o Metals Which is Suitable for Recycling

• Suitable for All Logistical Options

• Treatment Cost Competitive with Other Options

• Modestly Priced and Readily Available Raw Materials

• Potential for Controlled Precipitation to Provide “Products” from the residual Solid Waste 

## Limitations

• Not Suitable for Treating Water for Return to Environment

• Community Perceptions

– What Chemicals Are Used

• Some Suppliers Require Significant Footprint on Well Site

• Some Suppliers Utilize Haz Mats as Raw Materials

• Residual Solids May Require Hazardous Waste Disposal Due To Presence of Haz Mats.

# Ozonation

Benefits

• Eliminates Problematic Trace Metals

– Iron and Manganese

• Eliminates Bacteria from Frackwater Ponds

• Destroys VOCs (up to 0.5% concentration)

– Eliminates Organic Interferences with Fracking Chemicals

– Eliminates HSE Issues



### • Minimal Treatment Cost 

## Limitations

• Requires Co Processing with other Technologies for Control of Elevated Levels of Metals

• Limited Source of Service Suppliers (Licensed, Patented Technology) (AO3)

# Carbon Absorption and UV

Benefits

• Eliminates VOCs

– Eliminates Organic Interferences with Fracking Chemicals

– Eliminates HSE Issues



## • Simple Implementation Method 

# Limitations

• Requires Co Processing with other Technologies for Control of Metals

• May Result in Considerable Regeneration/ Replacement Costs with High VOC Upset Condition

# Ultraviolet Radiation

Benefits

• Eliminates Bacteria from Frackwater Ponds

• Destroys Some VOCs

• Minimal Treatment Cost 

# Limitations

• Requires Co Processing with other Technologies for Control of Metals

• Sensitive to Particulate Matter

• High Levels of Bacteria Require Excessive treatment

# Deep Well Injection

Benefits

• One Way Disposal with Minimal Environmental Impact when Properly Applied

• Historical Most Common Treatment Method

• Very Cost Effective with Mitigation of Transportation Issues 

# Limitations

• Minimal Proximate Locations

– Cumulative Transportation Impacts

– Research Toward Development of Pa. Sites in Progress



### • Community Perception

– Legacy Issues; NIMBY; Perceived Potential for Eruption from Cross Contamination of Proximate Old Wells

# Recirculation Loops

Benefits

• Optimizes Recycling

• Minimizes Trucking

• Very Cost Effective with Mitigation of Transportation Issues 

# Limitations

• Environmental Exposure to Potential System Failures

• Recovered Volumes will soon exceed equilibrium with new wells’ requirements, leading to treatment of excess

# Challenges to Treatment

# Range of Contaminants and Contamination

Contaminant Concentration in PPM

• Total Dissolved Solids

- 38,500 => 238,000

• Sodium

- 10,700 => 65,100

• Chloride

- 26,400 => 148,000

• Barium

- 21 => 13,900

• Strontium

- 345 => 4,830

• Calcium

- 1,440 => 23,500

• Manganese

- 135 => 1,550

• Iron

- 21 => 180

• Sulfates

- 2.4 => 106

• VOC’s

- 35.3 => 1156 (=> 0.5%)

• Bacteria

-

Source Sampling and Analysis of Water Streams Associated with the Development of Marcellus Shale Gas Final Report Prepared for Marcellus Shale Coalition Prepared By Thomas Hayes, Principal Investigator Gas Technology Institute December 31, 2009

# Range of Site Requirements

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

$2.00 $2.50 $3.00 $3.50 $4.00 $4.50 $5.00 $5.50Residual Ba++ & Sr++ in

Approximate Fee Per Barrel ( Not Including Ozonation) Typical Cost Versus Residual Barium/Strontium (Site Specific) w/ Softening

Cost Versus Residual Barium/Strontium

- @ 4200 PPM Cost Versus Residual Barium/Strontium

- @ 2000 PPM Cost Versus Residual Barium/Strontium

- @ 11000 PPM

# Competing Reactions and Residual Contaminants

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000

Barium
Strontium Sulfate Residual Contaminants

# Alternative Methods to Control Residual Contaminants

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

Residual Barium

Residual SO4

Residual Strontium

# In A Perfect World

1. Recirculation/Recycling Loops Where Environmentally Suitable 2. Mobile or Semi Permanent Precipitation / Separation Processing of FlowBack Water for Recycling of the Water to Subsequent Fracs w/ Ozonation when Required 3. Production of Saleable Byproducts from the Residual Precipitated Solids 4. Production of Precipitation Raw Materials from Coal Mining Waste Waters (AMD) 5. Evaporation of a Final FlowBack Concentrate in a Mobile Evaporator or at a Brick and Mortar Plant for Recycling or for Discharge 6. Pretreatment of the FlowBack Concentrate Prior to Evaporation for Removal of Metals to Accommodate Reuse of the Residual Solids or Allow for Non Hazardous Disposal of the Solids 7. Deep Well Injection of Concentrated Residual Solids / Sludge from the Evaporation Process if Not Usable 8. Management of Long Term Production Waters in Brick and Mortar Treatment Plants

# Thank You
Frank Miller President

- Lake Country FracWater Specialists, LLC 12 Mitchell Creek Rd., Tioga, Pa. Phone

– 585

- 734

- 7474 Fcmiller@FracWaterRecyclers.com http://fracwaterrecyclers.com