# Shale Frac Sequential 

# Flowback Analyses and Reuse

Implications EPA Technical Workshop, March 30, 2011

Matt Blauch Superior Well Services

# The Ideal Engineered Reuse

Solution Should Be...

• Able to Reduce Environmental Risk • Effective for Fracturing • Practical & Economic • Able to Provide 

# microbiological Control • Non-Damaging to Production

# What is needed for reuse? Sequential Flowback Analyses Multiple Ion Trend Iron Trend

2500 bbls 5000 bbls 14000 bbls

# Flowback and Frac Waters Data Set • 235 Frac Water Sources • 524 Flowback Samples • 25 Sequential Flowback StudiesR2 = 0.9954

0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000
0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 Chloride (mg/L) TDS (mg/L) 

## Chloride Content vs Total Dissolved Solids

In Marcellus Formation0

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 Constituent (mg/L) Flowback (bbls) Barium Sulfate 

## Barium & Sulfate Trend In Marcellus Formation

# Distribution of Marcellus Sequential Flowback Studies Susquehanna Potter Jefferson Armstrong Allegheny Butler Westmoreland

Fayette Washington0

25,000 50,000 75,000 100,000 125,000 150,000
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L) Flowback (bbls) Susquehanna Jefferson Armstrong Fayette 

## TDS Content vs. Marcellus Flowback0

5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 Total Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3) Flowback (bbls) Susquehanna Jefferson Armstrong Fayette 

## Hardness vs Marcellus Flowback Volume by Region0

200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 Barium (mg/L) Flowback (bbls) Susquehanna Jefferson Armstrong Fayette 

## Barium Content vs Marcellus Flowback0

10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 100,000

-100.0 -80.0 -60.0 -40.0 -20.0 0.0 20.0 Calcium Content (mg/L) GPS (Longitude) 

## Calcium Content of Flowback @ 7,500bbl
East West

# Marcellus Well Sites – Load Recovery(%)

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00%

417 418 419 421 422 423 425 426 427 428 219 225 287 304 340 352 Percent Fluid Recovery ( bbls ) Project Number (well site)0

25,000 50,000 75,000 100,000 125,000 150,000
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L) Flowback (bbls) Susquehanna Jefferson Armstrong Fayette Texas(1) Texas(2)



## TDS Content Haynesville vs Marcellus Flowback

# What is needed for reuse?

Geochemical Controls • Sophisticated Geochemical Scale Modeling Simulator • Specific to Downhole Conditions DownHole SAT Rx INJECTION WATER CHEMISTRY INPUT

# Geologic Hypotheses for Flowback Chemistry

Marcellus Paleogeography
Ref: SPE 125740, Blauch, et.al. 2009 Figure after Lash, 2009

# Deep Basinal Hypersaline Fluids

Oriskany Waters Across Pennsylvania Ref: SPE 125740, Blauch, et.al. 2009

# Hypothesis Testing – Drilled

Cuttings Analysis

# Hypothesis Testing –

Core Analysis Cation Bulk Core Salt Scraping Ba 1% 2% Ca 40% 42% Fe 46% 5% K 4% 7% Mg 6% 3% Na 2% 40% Sr 1% 1% Total 100% 100%

Ref: SPE 125740, Blauch, et.al. 2009

# Hypothesis Testing Diagnostic Tool –

Piper Analysis

Ref: SPE 125740, Blauch, et.al. 2009

# Conclusions • Shale Frac Sequential Flowback Analysis have become important to HVHR fracturing in the Marcellus shale • Variations in flowback geochemistry are observed both spatially and volumetrically • Understanding the origin of dissolved salts is important to future water reuse and water management strategies 

## • Predictive analysis tools such as Piper analysis and geochemical simulation play an important role in water reuse and treatment design • Functional performance testing of flowback water for reuse is recommended

# Acknowledgements • Thanks to:
– USEPA for the opportunity to present – Superior Well Services and Nabors – Kroff Well Services • Paul Rey, Dave Grottenthaler 

# – Session chair, Tom Hayes