TY - JOUR
T1 - Oil and gas produced water for cattle, crops, and surface water discharge
T2 - Evaluation of chemistry, toxicity and economics
AU - Wiltse, Marin E.
AU - Ballenger, Brooke
AU - Stewart, Connor B.
AU - Blewett, Tamzin A.
AU - Wadler, Claire
AU - Roth, Holly K.
AU - Coupannec, Maelle
AU - Malik, Huma Tariq
AU - Xu, Pei
AU - Tarazona, Yeinner
AU - Zhang, Yanyan
AU - Sudowe, Ralf
AU - Rosenblum, James S.
AU - Quinn, Jason C.
AU - Borch, Thomas
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2025/8/15
Y1 - 2025/8/15
N2 - Oil and gas produced water (PW), may help alleviate regional water scarcity affecting agriculture, but is often rich in salts and organic compounds that constrain agricultural applications. The specific objective is to assess the reuse potential of conventional PW through a comprehensive assessment of chemistry, toxicity, and economics by investigating PW from 18 conventionally drilled wells from sandstone formations in the Colorado Denver-Julesburg Basin. Ammonium, total dissolved solids, boron, sodium, and chloride were all close to recommended guidelines for livestock and crop irrigation and surface water discharge. Diesel and gasoline range organics and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons were detected in low concentrations in evaporation ponds compared to oil water separators, suggesting volatilization or degradation of organic compounds. Radium levels were generally low, but select samples exceeded the regulatory 5 pCi/g threshold, categorizing them as Non-Exempt TENORM (Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material) waste. EC50 with Daphnia magna (D. magna) showed little to no toxicity for PW sampled in evaporation ponds in contrast to EC50 values of 12 % at the oil water separator, indicating that volatile organics controlled toxicity. However, the Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor (AhR) bioassay illustrated toxicity not captured by the EC50 test. After chemical and toxicological analyses, it is clear that treatment is required, which informed our techno-economic assessment (TEA). Current PW volumes result in a treatment cost of $5.38/m3 ($1.42/barrel) by nanofiltration, but a scenario with increased volumes will result in a lower cost of $3.83/m³ ($0.60/barrel). Our chemical, toxicological, and economic assessment indicates that the PW in this study has potential to be discharged to surface water or reused for cattle and crop irrigation.
AB - Oil and gas produced water (PW), may help alleviate regional water scarcity affecting agriculture, but is often rich in salts and organic compounds that constrain agricultural applications. The specific objective is to assess the reuse potential of conventional PW through a comprehensive assessment of chemistry, toxicity, and economics by investigating PW from 18 conventionally drilled wells from sandstone formations in the Colorado Denver-Julesburg Basin. Ammonium, total dissolved solids, boron, sodium, and chloride were all close to recommended guidelines for livestock and crop irrigation and surface water discharge. Diesel and gasoline range organics and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons were detected in low concentrations in evaporation ponds compared to oil water separators, suggesting volatilization or degradation of organic compounds. Radium levels were generally low, but select samples exceeded the regulatory 5 pCi/g threshold, categorizing them as Non-Exempt TENORM (Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material) waste. EC50 with Daphnia magna (D. magna) showed little to no toxicity for PW sampled in evaporation ponds in contrast to EC50 values of 12 % at the oil water separator, indicating that volatile organics controlled toxicity. However, the Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor (AhR) bioassay illustrated toxicity not captured by the EC50 test. After chemical and toxicological analyses, it is clear that treatment is required, which informed our techno-economic assessment (TEA). Current PW volumes result in a treatment cost of $5.38/m3 ($1.42/barrel) by nanofiltration, but a scenario with increased volumes will result in a lower cost of $3.83/m³ ($0.60/barrel). Our chemical, toxicological, and economic assessment indicates that the PW in this study has potential to be discharged to surface water or reused for cattle and crop irrigation.
KW - Conventional produced water
KW - Economics
KW - Guidelines
KW - Regulations
KW - Reuse
KW - Toxicity
KW - Water treatment
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105004821092
U2 - 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2025.138581
DO - 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2025.138581
M3 - Article
C2 - 40359753
AN - SCOPUS:105004821092
SN - 0304-3894
VL - 494
JO - Journal of Hazardous Materials
JF - Journal of Hazardous Materials
M1 - 138581
ER -