Food, Fracking, and Freshwater: The Potential for Markets and Cross-Sectoral Investments to Enable Water Conservation

Abstract

Hydraulic fracturing-the injection of pressurized fluid, often water, to increase recovery of oil or gas-has become increasingly popular in combination with horizontal drilling. Hydraulic fracturing improves production from a well, but requires a significant amount of water to do so and could put pressure on existing water resources, especially in water-stressed areas. To supply water needs, some water rights holders sell or lease their water resources to oil and gas producers in an informal water market. These transactions enable the opportunity for cross-sectoral investments, by which the energy sector either directly or indirectly provides the capital for water efficiency improvements in the agricultural sector as a mechanism to increase water availability for other purposes, including oil and gas production. In this analysis, we employ an original water and cost model to evaluate the water market in Texas and the potential for cross-sectoral collaboration on water efficiency improvements through a case study of the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas. We find that, if irrigation efficiency management practices were fully implemented, between 420 and 800 million m 3 of water could be spared per year over a ten year period, potentially enabling freshwater use in oil and gas production for up to 26,000 wells, while maintaining agricultural productivity and possibly improving water flows to the ecosystem.

Multilayer geospatial analysis of water availability for shale resources development in Mexico

“…Even though HF is considered a water-intensive activity, when compared with other high-water users, such as irrigation, it has been relatively small in Texas [21,28]. Nevertheless, HF has been the major waterintensive user in some counties in Texas [17].…”

“…The main contribution of this study is to develop a methodology to identify the spatial location and volume of water available in the aquifers and watersheds that overlay the five shale basins in Mexico. Furthermore, this letter describes data, methods, and results used to identify the potential EUR energy that could be extracted over the [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30] year lifetime of HF wells supplied with available surface and groundwater. This research intends to serve as a starting point analysis for the development of strategies for managing new HF demands in the context of constrained water resources.…”

“…Due to the high water demand that HF could cause at a local level [21], different strategies should be analyzed to increase water availability and decrease water stress in the regions where shale resources are located. These strategies could include (1) shifting to less water intensive power plant technologies, (2) shifting to more efficient irrigation technologies, (3) using brackish groundwater as a source of water for HF, and/or (4) recycling and reusing wastewater (e.g.…”

The Water‐Energy Nexus of Hydraulic Fracturing: A Global Hydrologic Analysis for Shale Oil and Gas Extraction

“…This limited understanding of the potential impacts of shale development on the local water balance thus prevents the implementation of a sustainable water management plan in places where shale extraction is possible. There is therefore a pressing need for a quantitative assessment and mapping of where shale resource mining could lead to an inadequate management of local water resources and intensify the competition for water between food and energy production (Chiarelli et al, 2018;Cook & Webber, 2016;D'Odorico et al, 2017;Habib et al, 2018;Rosa et al, 2017;Rulli et al, 2016).…”

Exceptional Drought and Unconventional Energy Production

“…In the Permian Basin in Texas, water costs typically make up 10% of the capital budget for a well [5]. The average purchase price of water for mining in Texas, which does not reflect transportation or disposal costs, rose rapidly during the hydraulic fracturing boom, from $0.10 per cubic meter in 1987-2008 to $3.90 per cubic meter in 2009-2014 [6]. This price increase likely reflected both increased demand and decreased supply.…”