Comparison of the Hydraulic Fracturing Water Cycle in China and North America: A Critical Review

Abstract

There is considerable debate about the sustainability of the hydraulic fracturing (HF) water cycle in North America. Recently, this debate has expanded to China, where HF activities continue to grow. Here, we provide a critical review of the HF water cycle in China, including water withdrawal practices and flowback and produced water (FPW) management and their environmental impacts, with a comprehensive comparison to the U.S. and Canada (North America). Water stress in arid regions, as well as water management challenges, FPW contamination of aquatic and soil systems, and induced seismicity are all impacts of the HF water cycle in China, the U.S., and Canada. In light of experience gained in North America, standardized practices for analyzing and reporting FPW chemistry and microbiology in China are needed to inform its efficient and safe treatment, discharge and reuse, and identification of potential contaminants. Additionally, conducting ecotoxicological studies is an essential next step to fully reveal the impacts of accidental FPW releases into aquatic and soil ecosystems in China. From a policy perspective, the development of China's unconventional resources lags behind North America's in terms of overall regulation, especially with regard to water withdrawal, FPW management, and routine monitoring. Our study suggests that common environmental risks exist within the world's two largest HF regions, and practices used in North America may help prevent or mitigate adverse effects in China.

Analysis of Regulatory Framework for Produced Water Management and Reuse in Major Oil- and Gas-Producing Regions in the United States

“…Because of the complex chemistry characteristics of PW [2][3][4], the primary disposal option for PW in the U.S. and Canada is deep well injection [5][6][7]. Other reuse or disposal methods include using PW for HF, EOR, well drilling, evaporation ponds or seepage pits within the O&G field, transferring PW offsite for disposal, and discharge or reuse after proper treatment [3,[8][9][10]. The non-injection methods are especially used in areas that lack deep injection wells (e.g., Pennsylvania in the U.S., Europe, and China) due to geological structure or regulations.…”

“…Although numerous studies focused on the evaluation of reusing treated PW, the regulations for PW reuse from government agencies around the world are very limited [9]. Common water regulations or guidelines are focused on water applications, such as the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) drinking water standards and guidelines for irrigation [30], and the European Union water quality directive for ground water (80/68/EEC).…”

“…The experiences learned from the case studies can be used by other states in the U.S. or countries and regions for establishing PW management and reuse programs. For example, in China, the study of the impact of the HF water cycle on the environment is in the early stage, and the research for solutions and regulations to achieve more sustainable unconventional O&G development has just emerged [9,32].…”

Foam Stabilization Mechanism of a Novel Non-cross-linked Foam Fracturing Fluid

“…Hydraulic fracturing is the key stimulation technology that creates fractures in the low-permeable reservoirs to improve the yield of oil and gas . The fracturing fluid transports the proppant during hydraulic fracturing to obtain the artificial fracture diversion channel .…”

“…However, the residue contents generated by guar gum water-based fracturing may cause damage to low-permeability reservoirs and are difficult to be eliminated . The application of the water-based fracturing fluid may also cause environmental problems, such as the consumption of large amounts of water and the pollution of surface water and groundwater. ,, …”