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

Abstract

Mexico's government enacted an energy reform in 2013 that aims to foster competitiveness and private investment throughout the energy sector value chain. As part of this reform, it is expected that extraction of oil and gas via hydraulic fracturing will increase in five shale basins (e.g. Burgos, Sabinas, Tampico, Tuxpan, and Veracruz). Because hydraulic fracturing is a waterintensive activity, it is relevant to assess the potential water availability for this activity in Mexico. This research aims to quantify the water availability for hydraulic fracturing in Mexico and identify its spatial distribution along the five shale basins. The methodology consisted of a multilayer geospatial analysis that overlays the water availability in the watersheds and aquifers with the different types of shale resources areas (e.g. oil and associated gas, wet gas and condensate, and dry gas) in the five shale basins. The aquifers and watersheds in Mexico are classified in four zones depending on average annual water availability. Three scenarios were examined based on different impact level on watersheds and aquifers from hydraulic fracturing. For the most conservative scenario analyzed, the results showed that the water available could be used to extract between 8.15 and 70.42 Quadrillion British thermal units (Quads) of energy in the typical 20-30 year lifetime of the hydraulic fracturing wells that could be supplied with the annual water availability overlaying the shale areas, with an average across estimates of around 18.05 Quads. However, geographic variation in water availability could represent a challenge for extracting the shale reserves. Most of the water available is located closer to the Gulf of Mexico, but the areas with the larger recoverable shale reserves coincide with less water availability in Northern Mexico. New water management techniques (such as recycling and re-use), more efficient fracturing methods, shifts in usage patterns, or other water sources need to be identified to allocate water for hydraulic fracturing without affecting current users (e.g. municipal, irrigation, industrial, and environmental flows).

Chemical engineering solution for carbon neutrality in cement industry: Tailor a pathway from inevitable CO2 emission into syngas

“…Compared with those carbonate hydrogenation, the proposed CaDRM strategy can be a more efficient way to change CO2 emissions into syngas production due to the fully atomic utilization efficiency of CH4 [29][30][31] . More significantly, in comparing with H2 source, CH4 possesses more advantages such as the abundancy in nature (nature gas), mature industrial applications, and most importantly being cost-effective 32,33 . Inspired by our previous study of integrated CO2 capture and conversion which explicitly identified the synergistic promotion of the carbonate reduction by CH4 for the regeneration 34 , we highly anticipate the CaDRM strategy can bring a disruptive technological revolution for achieving net-zero in the CO2 emission-intensive cement industry.…”

Impacts of hydraulic fracturing on surface and groundwater water resources: A case study from Louisiana, USA.

“…For example, most previous studies that analyze the costs associated with unconventional fuel production do not address the costs (real or hidden) of accounting for the water availability required to perform fracking operations (e.g., [10], [11], [12]). Although some studies have related water-stressed regions with fracking activities [6], [13], [14], [15], only a few studies [16], [17], [18], attempted to quantify the potential impact of water used for fracking on the local and regional water resources. A recent national-scale assessment on water use for hydraulic fracturing in the US [20] calls for further studies that examine regional-scale energy and water sustainability challenges.…”

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

“…Previous studies have quantified water stress resulting from water withdrawals for hydraulic fracturing in some shale deposits in the United States, Argentina, China, and Mexico (e.g., Freyman, ; Galdeano et al, ; Guo et al, ; Mauter et al, ; Scanlon et al, ). In response to the need for a global‐scale analysis of the hydrologic impacts of shale extraction, the World Resources Institute estimated that 39% of global shale deposits lie within surface water‐stressed regions (Reig et al, ).…”