FracWater Treatment for Recycling:

Options and Alternatives;

Their Benefits and Limitations

26th 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 $5.50 

Residual 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