P020212-1

3

rd Water Management 

for Shale Plays 

The Briefing

Assessing Specific Shale Plays

Utica Play

Stephen Hughes, P.E.

October 29-31, 2012

Pittsburgh, PA
Presentation Agenda

 Overview of the Marcellus and Utica Shale Plays

 Impact of Evolving Regulations on Water Management

 Flowback/Produced Water Treatment, Recycle and

 Disposal Options

 Future Produced Water Generation and Treatment & 

Disposal Developments

2
Marcellus Play Footprint

3
Marcellus Play Wet Gas/Dry Gas Map

4
Marcellus Shale Play Facts 

 Natural gas reserves estimated to be 

 267 to 534 trillion cu. ft. source: IHS Corp.

 Covers 95,000 sq. miles and parts of six states (PA, 

WV, OH, NY, MD and VA) source: USGS

 Over 10,000 sq. miles are currently under lease in PA 

and WV source: Intek, Inc.

 Well production began ramping significantly in 2008 

and 171 drilling rigs active in PA and WV in May 2012 

 source: Energy Economist

 Marcellus natural gas production in PA and WV 

generated $4.7 billion in 2011 source: ShaleBlog.com

5
Marcellus Shale Play Facts (cont.)

 Pennsylvania is self-sufficient 

in natural gas (net exporter)

 Projected 2020 output levels (17 

billion cubic feet per day) could 

make the Marcellus the largest 

producing gas field in the U.S.

 Marcellus could produce a 

quarter of U.S. natural gas by 

2020

6
Utica Play Footprint

7
Utica Play Dry Gas/Wet Gas/Oil Map

source: ODNR

8
Utica Play Facts

 Geologic formation located below the Marcellus Play

(8,000 to 10,000 ft vs 5,000 to 7,000 ft) source: USGS

 Recoverable Reserves

- 38 trillion cu. ft. of natural gas

- 940 billion barrels (bbl) of oil

- 208 million bbl of Natural Gas Liquids (NGLs) 

source: USGS

 Utica’s NGLs and oil have attracted rigs from dry gas 

areas to take advantage of higher commodity prices

9
Marcellus and Utica Wells Permitted & Drilled

10

January 2008 to June 2012

State Marcellus/Utica

Permits Issued

Marcellus/Utica

Wells Drilled

Pennsylvania 10,994 5,532

West Virginia 3,289 937

Ohio 295 144

sources: Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (http://www.dep.state.pa.us/); West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection 

(http://www.dep.wv.gov/); Ohio Department of Natural Resources (http://www.ohiodnr.com/)
Impact of Regulations on Water Management

2008

 Marcellus natural gas well development began to 

rapidly expand in PA

 Flowback/produced water is disposed of at brine 

treatment facilities and publicly owned treatment 

works (POTWs)

 In Fall 2008, Monongahela River in SW PA exhibited 

high TDS conc. that impacted drinking water supplies

- A study concluded that treated flowback/produced 

water only contributed 7% of TDS loadings 

 source: Marcellus Shale Coalition

11
Impact of Regulations on Water Management

2009

 Mon River incident raised concerns about the 

potential impact increased well development 

operations would have on river water quality 

 PADEP began limiting flowback/produced water 

POTWs could accept to 1% of total plant throughput 

 In response E&Ps began:

- Blending flowback/produced water with fresh water 

 and reusing it in hydraulic fracturing operations

- Using brine injection wells in eastern OH

12
Impact of Regulations on Water Management

2010

 PADEP authorized a new 500 mg/L TDS limit on 

effluent discharges from new or existing facilities 

treating Marcellus wastewaters

 This regulation resulted in:

 - Increased flowback/produced water recycling

 - Increased use of OH brine disposal wells

13
Impact of Regulations on Water Management

2011

 PADEP asked E&Ps to stop taking flowback/produced 

water to existing treatment facilities due to elevated 

bromide concentrations in Allegheny River 

 Seismic activity in eastern OH attributed to brine 

injection well activity resulted in concerns about the 

reliability of this disposal option 

 These events resulted in ramping up of :

 - E&Ps recycling efforts (~80 to 90%)

 - Planning and permitting of treatment facilities capable 

of TDS removal

14
Flowback/Produced Water Volume per Well

Flowback Water per Well

 Typically 95,000 to 170,000 bbl (4 to 7 million gal) used 

in a single well hydraulic fracturing operation

 Flowback water is typically 15 to 20% of frac water used

Produced Water per Well

 After a year of operation, wells typically generate 

 4 to 10 bbl/day (168 to 420 gal/day) of produced water

15
Flowback & Produced Water Recycling

 Flowback/Produced Water recycled is estimated to be 

~80-90% of total generated in Marcellus Play in 2012

 Therefore ~10-20% of flowback/produced water requires 

disposal via injection wells and/or TDS removal treatment

 Challenges in achieving 100% recycle

 - After multiple recycles constituents in frac water 

continue to increase (potentially impacting water 

quality)

- Interruptions in well development operations and 

limited storage capacity require disposal of 

flowback/produced water that normally is recycled

16
Treatment/Disposal Options

Treatment/disposal options currently used/planned in 

Marcellus/Utica Plays

Option 1 – Offsite Primary Treatment & Reuse

Option 2 – Well Site Primary Treatment & Reuse

Option 3 – Brine Injection Well Disposal

Option 4 – Offsite TDS Removal and Reuse

Option 5 – Well Site TDS Removal and Reuse

 

 17
1 - Offsite Primary Treatment and Reuse 

18
1 - Offsite Primary Treatment & Reuse 

 Option 1 is a fix-based treatment facility located in 

general vicinity of well field (typically within 20 miles) 

 Level of treatment varies depending on 

flowback/produced water quality, fresh water quality, 

required frac water quality and the proportion of each 

in frac water blend

 None of the treatment processes remove or reduce 

TDS concentrations in flowback/produced water

 Typical Treatment Capacity Range –

5,000 bbl/day (210,000 gal/day) to 

30,000 bbl/day (1.3 million gal/day) 

19
1 - Offsite Primary Treatment & Reuse 

Treatment Levels

Low-Level – Insoluble organics and suspended solids 

removal using sedimentation, clarification, and/or 

filtration

Mid-Level – Low-level treatment plus the addition of 

chemical reagents to form heavy metals precipitates and

may also remove dissolved hydrocarbons

High-Level – Mid-level treatment plus the addition of 

chemical reagents to react with barium & strontium to 

form sulfate-based precipitates

20
2 - Well Site Primary Treatment & Reuse

21
2 - Well Site Primary Treatment & Reuse

 Treatment Levels – Basically the same as Option 1

 Typical Mobile treatment system capacity range –

3,600 bbl/day (150,000 gal/day) to 

12,000 bbl/day (500,000 gal/day) w/ multiple units

 Since this treatment option takes place at the well site, 

there are no flowback/produced water transportation 

costs except trucking residual waste (dewatered 

treatment sludge) to disposal (landfills)

22
3 - Brine Injection Well Disposal

23
3 - Brine Injection Well Disposal

 Currently there are only 5 permitted Class II UIC 

disposal wells in operation in PA

 Approximately 70 permitted disposal wells in WV and 

180 in OH, mostly in eastern part of the state

 Typical injection well flowrates –

500 bbl/day (21,000 gal/day) to 

1,200 bbl/day (50,400 gal/day)

 More stringent OH and WV regulations addressing 

injection wells have recently been promulgated

24
4 - Offsite TDS Removal and Reuse

25
4 - Offsite TDS Removal and Reuse

E&Ps are increasing considering TDS removal 

treatment because of

 More stringent TDS discharge limits

 Potential concerns regarding limited injection wells 

capacity

 Increased quantities of produced water that can’t all 

be recycled as frac water

26
4 - Offsite TDS Removal and Reuse

TDS removal process generates

 Distillate for well reuse or industrial applications

 Brine concentrate - disposed of (injection wells) or 

further treated for landfilling or beneficial reuse

Brine concentrate treatment

 Typically uses a crystallizer to form salt cake that is 

landfilled or further treated to generate beneficial 

reuse products

27
28

5 – Well Site TDS Removal and Reuse
5 - Well Site TDS Removal and Reuse

 Mobile TDS removal systems have recently been 

marketed in the Marcellus Play in response to the 

concerns listed in Option 4

 Reported throughput flowrates - 

 1,030 to 1,710 bbl/day (43,200 to 72,000 gal/day)

29
Offsite vs Well Site Treatment Comparisons 

Offsite Fixed-Based Treatment Advantages

 $/bbl costs are typically lower due to higher volume 

operational efficiencies

 Greater volumes of water can be treated/recycled in a 

shorter period of time

Mobile Well Site Treatment Advantage

 Minimal water transportation costs incurred 

Hybrid Treatment Option (offers both large fixed-based 

facility advantages and well site location) 

 Large modular treatment facility that is located within 

the well fields (can relocated to new well fields)

 Pipeline network used to transport water

 

30
PA Flowback/Produced Water - 2011 to 2020

Source: Considine et al., 2011. The Pennsylvania Marcellus Natural Gas Industry: Status, Economic Impacts and Future Potential. 

Estimated flowback water – 1 million gallons per well; estimated produced water – 300 gallons per well per day

2011 wells drilled revised from marcellus monitorTM (http://www.marcellusmonitor.com/) 31
Flowback/Produced Water Volume Projections

 Pennsylvania

2011 2020

million

bbl 

million

gal

million

bbl 

million

gal

 Flowback

 Water 48.0 1,968 59.5 2,500

 Produced

 Water 13.3 560 71.3 3,000

 Total 61.3 2,528 131 5,500

32
Future Produced Water Generation

 Annual produced water quantities are projected to 

increase almost six-fold from 2011 (13.3 million bbl) to 

2020 (71.3 million bbl) in the Marcellus Play in PA alone

 As development of the Utica Play in OH, PA and WV 

ramps up, significant additional produced water 

quantities will be generated

 This will result in increasing volumes of excess 

produced water that can’t be reused in well 

development operations

33
Future Treatment & Disposal Developments

As a result of the future produced water volume 

projections –

 Increase in disposal well permit applications is 

occurring in OH and WV

 Several disposal well siting studies are currently 

underway in PA

 Numerous TDS removal treatment facilities are 

currently in the planning and/or permitting stages

 Some of the new facilities will be designed with 

processes to generate beneficial reuse byproducts

34