power across texas 2015 energy innovation challenge texas tech energy innovation challenge team ebru...

POWER ACROSS TEXAS 2015 ENERGY INNOVATION CHALLENGE

Texas Tech Energy Innovation Challenge TeamEbru Unal

James UrbanRitesh Sevanthi

Soraya Honarparvar

Waste to Wealth: Reducing the Water Footprint of the Oil and Gas Industry

CHALLENGE

• Water Stress• Water Use• Social Responsibility• Economics

Existing Supply Limited Demand

CURRENT WATER LIFE CYCLE

Estimated Total Cost$4.30/bbl

ESTIMATES OF VOLUME

• Rig counts of 2014 and 2015,used to postulate amount of water available from fracturing in 2015 -2021

• 40 billion gallons will be disposed in the Permian basin in the years 2015-2020. Currently only 5% is reused

RATIONALE FOR MULTIPLE USE APPROACH

• Bacterial Growth

• Oil and gas residue

• Cation Interference

• Scale formation

ClO2 Disinfection

ClO2 oxidation and induced gas

flotation

API Separators and induced gas

flotation unit

Is it going to be an issue?

CHALLENGES IN REUSE

SUGGESTED TREATMENT & COST

To ensure every drop of water is efficiently used

Chad Knutson and Seyed A. Dastgheib (PI). “Reuse of Produced Water from CO2 Enhanced Oil Recovery, Coal-Bed Methane, and Mine Pool Water by Coal-Based Power Plants”; (July 2012)

Cost $ /bblCost per frac

job FPW $

0.56 36440.630.00 104.000.07 4647.500.01 450.450.01 1300.000.66 42942.58

ClO2 DisinfectionTotal Treatment Cost

Treatment

Storage Tank O&M CostsAPI SeparatorGas Floatation

Oxidation Tank Air + ClO2

Reuse in Hydraulic Fracturing


Approach:e-NRTL a concentrated brine solution model under development

Scale formation

Sulfate Scaling

Carbonate Scaling

Barium sulfate (BaSO4)

Strontium Sulfate (SrSO4)

Strontium Carbonate (SrCO3)

Barium Carbonate (BaCO3)

Calcium carbonate (CaCO3)

REUSE IN HYDRAULIC FRACTURING

BaSO4 SrSO4 BaCO3 SrCO3 CaCO30

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

Saturation Indices of flowback pro-duced water for hydraulic fracturing

at 77 ˚F and 14.6 psi

Components

Sat

ura

tion

In

dex


0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

Solubility Indices of diluted flowback produced water at 150 ˚F and 10,000

psi

Components

Sol

ub

ility

In

dex

Modeling results for reusing in hydraulic fracturingThe expected solutions are marginally scaling at the temperature and pressure of the formation but easily managed with anti-scalants


Cost estimation

• Fresh water

Typical cost $0.85/bbl

• Treated produced water

Treatment cost for reuse $0.66/bbl

Elimination of disposal cost


Legal & public perception

Groundwater Rights: Mineral owner has “Reasonable Use” of surface estate

{which includes groundwater}• On-lease operations is reasonable

• Off lease use is unreasonable

Alternatives: • Lease agreement or

• Rule adoption as reasonable use by Railroad Commission

House Bill 40


Used in Cooling Towers for Power Generation


REUSE IN POWER PLANTS

Feasibility of reuse in power plants

Data from California Energy Commission

2D Graph 1

Major Ions in Solution

Na K Ca Mg HCO3 Cl SO4

Con

cent

ratio

n (m

g/L)

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

2X Sea WaterPermian Basin


0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

Saturation Indices of flowback & pro-duced water used for power plant at 77

˚F and 14.6 psi

Components

Sat

ura

tion

In

dex

BaSO4 SrSO4 BaCO3 SrCO3 CaCO3-0.2

-1.66533453693773E-16

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

Solubility Indices of Diluted flowback & produced water at 212 ˚F and 14.6

psi

ComponentsSo

lubi

lity

Indi

ces

Modeling results for reusing in power plant

The expected solutions are marginally scaling at the temperature and pressure of the cooling water system but easily managed with anti-scalants


• Reduction in Fresh Water Consumption 40 -80%• Minimal increase in O&M• Airborne particulate issues• Legal issues mirror the ones faced by reuse in

hydraulic fracturing

Data from California Energy Commission

Cost increase & challenges of reuse in power plants

Increased equipment costs


Used in Solar Ponds


SALT GRADIENT SOLAR PONDS

Capturing solar energy and storing thermal energy

Applications:

• Electricity generation

• Industrial process heating

• Aquaculture

• Desalination


• Upper Convective Zone

• Non-Convective Zone

• Lower Convective Zone

Increasing salinity and temperature gradient UCZ

NCZLCZ

Salt diffusion and heat diffusion



(Bozkurt et.al., 2015)

UCZ NCZ LCZ

Density of the zones (kg/m3) 1000-1020 1030-1150 1170-1200

Salinity (%) 3.03 11.31 22.58

Calculated criteria of the flowback and produced water

Density of the zones (kg/m3) 1021.49- 1110.48

Salinity (%) 3.07- 14.85


January

Febru

ary

Marc

hApril

May

JuneJuly

August

Septem

ber

Octo

ber

November

Decem

ber0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40Solar radiation

Cairo Riyadh Texas Permian Basin

Rad

iati

on (

MJ/

m2/

day

)

(https://eosweb.larc.nasa.gov/sse/)


• 70 kW power generation in El Paso • 15 kW power generation in Australia


• Salt costs: $69,375

• Electricity generation costs: $36,792

(Newel, 1990)(Consumer Price Index Inflation Calculator-Bureau of Labor Statistics)

Salt Savings from Produced Water


Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Regulatory and Permitting Process

Texas Interconnection power grid North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT)

Public Perception Concerns Environmental, Health, Economic, and Social Public opinion research and public input


Used for Anti-Icing


ANTI-ICING OF ROADWAYS

Creating a chemical layer ahead of the event to: Prevent freeze bond Prevent frost or black ice formation Increase needed response time

Anti-icing chemicals Liquids (Sodium Chloride & Magnesium Chloride)

Data from University Transportation Research Center

Typical oil-field brine


Cost Reduction by using Flow-back & Produced Water ~50%

Data from Iowa Department of Transportation

Cost reduction



Public Concerns: Vehicle Damage Effects of runoff Roadway Deterioration


PROPOSED WATER CYCLE

Questions


Water use & Disposal Estimates

Data from USGS

Availability of flowback and produced water in Permian Basin

High flowback and produced water level Total Dissolved Solid (TDS) of flowback and Produced water is

100,000 mg/l

Ba+2 Ca+2 K+ Mg+2 Na+ Sr+2 Cl- CO3-2 HCO3- SO4-2

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

93.544226.89

686.36 1348.31

30220.17

329.54

59927.98

670.83 555.31 1816.26

Average Concentration of flowback and produced water over 22 counties in Permian basin

Ions

Con

cen

trat

ion

(m

g/l)



Environmental concern of large water withdrawal for Hydraulic fracturing

Local water shortage

Change in groundwater and surface water quality and quantity

Aquifer compaction

Aquifer depletion

Increasing bacterial growth

DO we really need fresh water for hydraulic

fracturing?

Thermodynamic Modeling Aspen 8.4 simulator e-NRTL thermodynamic model with updated parameters


Fracturing a single well with fresh water

100000 bbl0.85 $/bbl

85000 $2 hrs

90 $180 $

3500 gal1200 trucks

65000 bbl780 trucks

1 hrs70200 $

0.85 $/ bbl55250 $

426450 $4.2645 $/bblCost of water

Water required for a single frack job Cost of fresh water

Cost of fresh water for a frac job Time for hauling the water

Cost of Hauling the water in a truckCost of hauling water for a frac

Capacity of each truckNo of trucks required

Total cost of water

Flowback water 65% in a yearNo of trucks required to haul FPW

Time to haul FPWCost to Haul FPW

Water dispossal/ injection cost 1st partyCost of disposal/ injection

Oil and Gas Water Management; “Shale Play Water Management”; (January/ February 2014)

power across texas 2015 energy innovation challenge texas tech energy innovation challenge team ebru...

Documents

reuse slide

hydraulic fracturing

bbl slide

reuse of produced water

hydraulic fracturing

power generation power

challenge water stress

gas industry slide