Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Expected wastewater volumes associated with unconventional oil and gas exploitation in South Africa and the management thereof

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Unconventional oil and gas (UOG) exploitation may generate large volumes of wastewater, with dire environmental consequences if not properly managed. We systematically reviewed literature, reports, and fracking databases to determine possible volumes of wastewater that may be generated during UOG extraction. We then determined ranges of expected UOG extraction wastewater volumes for different UOG production scenarios in South Africa. Based on the results, we discuss associated wastewater management implications for South Africa, where UOG exploitation is planned in the future. The recommendations emanating from this article are equally important for other countries already extracting UOG resources, or that plan to do so in the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahmadun F, Alireza P, Luqman CA, Dayang RAB, Sayed SM, Zurina ZA (2009) Review of technologies for oil and gas produced water treatment. J Hazard Mater 170:530–551

    Google Scholar 

  • Alzahrani S, Mohammad AW (2014) Challenges and trends in membrane technology implementation for produced water treatment: a review. J Water Process Eng 4:107–133

    Google Scholar 

  • Andreasson S (2018) The bubble that got away? Prospects for shale development in South Africa. Extract Ind Soc 5:453–460

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson D, Schenk R, Matebesi Z, Badenhorst K, Umejesi I, Pretorius L (2016) Impacts on social fabric. In: Scholes R, Lochner P, Schreiner G, Snyman-Van der Walt L, de Jager M (eds) Shale gas development in the Central Karoo: a scientific assessment of the opportunities and risks. Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, Pretoria

    Google Scholar 

  • Bai B, Goodwin S, Carlson K (2013) Modeling of frac flowback and produced water volume from Wattenberg oil and gas field. J Pet Sci Eng 108:383–392

    Google Scholar 

  • Balashov VN, Engelder T, Gu X, Fantle MS, Brantley SL (2015) A model describing flowback chemistry changes with time after Marcellus Shale hydraulic fracturing. AAPG Bull 99(1):143–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbot E, Vidic NS, Gregory KB, Vidic RD (2013) Spatial and temporal correlation of water quality parameters of produced waters from Devonian-age shale following hydraulic fracturing. Environ Sci Technol 47(6):2562–2569

    Google Scholar 

  • Broderick J, Anderson K, Wood R, Gilbert P, Sharmina M (2011) Shale gas: an updated assessment of environmental and climate change impacts. A report commissioned by The Co-operative and undertaken by researchers at the Tyndall Centre, University of Manchester, available at: http://www.tyndall.ac.uk/shalegasreport

  • Broomfield M (2012) Support to the identification of potential risks for the environment and human health arising from hydrocarbons operations involving hydraulic fracturing in Europe. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/energy/pdf/fracking%20study.pdf

  • Burns M, Atkinson D, Barker O, Davis C, Day L, Dunlop A, Esterhuyse S, Hobbs P, McLachlan I, Neethling H, Rossouw N, Todd S, Snyman-Van der Walt L, Van Huyssteen E, Adams S, de Jager M, Mowzer Z, Scholes R (2016) Scenarios and activities. In: Scholes R, Lochner P, Schreiner G, Snyman-Van der Walt L, de Jager M (eds) Shale gas development in the Central Karoo: a scientific assessment of the opportunities and risks. CSIR/IU/021MH/EXP/2016/003/A, ISBN 978-0-7988-5631-7. CSIR, Pretoria

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark CE, Veil JA (2009) Produced water volumes and management practices in the United States Rep. Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark CE, Horner RM, Harto CB (2013) Life cycle water consumption for shale gas and conventional natural gas. Environ Sci Technol 47(20):11,829–11,836

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies R, Foulger G, Bindley A, Styles P (2013) Induced seismicity and hydraulic fracturing for the recovery of hydrocarbons. Mar Pet Geol 45:171–185

    Google Scholar 

  • De Kock MO, Beukes NJ, Adeniyi EO, Cole D, Gotz AE, Geel C, Ossa FG (2017) Deflating the shale gas potential of South Africa’s Main Karoo basin. S Afr J Sci 113(9–10):1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) (2012) National waste management strategy. GN 344 Government Gazette 35306 of 4 May 2012

  • Department of Science and Technology (DST) (2013) South African waste sector. 2012. An analysis of the formal private and public waste sectors in South Africa. Department of Science and Technology, Pretoria

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) (2007) Best Practice Guideline No. H4: Water Treatment. Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Pretoria

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS) (2014) Green Drop Progress report. Department of Water and Sanitation, Pretoria

    Google Scholar 

  • DiGiulio DC, Wilkin RT, Miller C, Oberley G (2011) Draft: Investigation of groundwater contamination near Pavillion, Wyoming, US. Environmental Protection Agency, Oklahoma

    Google Scholar 

  • Elbel J, Britt L (2000) Fracture treatment design. In: Economides MJ, Nolte KG (eds) Reservoir stimulation. John Wiley, West Sussex

    Google Scholar 

  • Esterhuyse S, Avenant M, Watson M, Redelinghuys N, Kijko A, Glazewski J, Plit LA, Kemp M, Smit A, Sokolic F, Vos AT (2014) Development of an interactive vulnerability map and monitoring framework to assess the potential environmental impact of unconventional oil and gas extraction by means of hydraulic fracturing. Water Research Commission Report (2149/1)

  • Esterhuyse S, Avenant M, Redelinghuys N, Kijko A, Glazewski J, Plit L, Kemp M, Smit A, Vos TA, Williamson R (2016a) A review of biophysical and socio-economic effects of unconventional oil and gas extraction—implications for South Africa. J Environ Manag 184:419–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.09.065

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esterhuyse S, Redelinghuys N, Kemp M (2016b) Unconventional oil and gas extraction in South Africa: water linkages within the population–environment–development nexus and its policy implications. Water Int 41(3):409–425

    Google Scholar 

  • Estrada JM, Bhamidimarri R (2016) A review of the issues and treatment options for wastewater from shale gas extraction by hydraulic fracturing. Fuel 182:292–303

    Google Scholar 

  • Fakir S, Davies E (2016) The economics of shale gas fracking in the Karoo: what can the American experience teach us. In: Glazewski J, Esterhuyse S (eds) Proposed hydraulic fracturing in the Karoo: critical legal and environmental perspectives (chapter 8). JUTA, Cape Town, pp 164–175

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrar KJ, Michanowicz DR, Christen CL, Mulcahy N, Malone SL, Sharma RK (2013) Assessment of effluent contaminants from three facilities discharging Marcellus Shale wastewater to surface waters in Pennsylvania. Environ Sci Technol 47(7):3472–3481

    Google Scholar 

  • Finkel ML, Hays J (2013) The implications of unconventional drilling for natural gas: a global public health concern. Public Health 127(10):889–893

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallegos TJ, Varela BA (2015) Trends in hydraulic fracturing distributions and treatment fluids, additives, proppants, and water volumes applied to wells drilled in the United States from 1947 through 2010—data analysis and comparison to the literature: US Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2014–5131, 15p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20145131

  • Gallegos TJ, Varela BA, Haines SS, Engle MA (2015) Hydraulic fracturing water use variability in the United States and potential environmental implications. Water Resour Res 51:5839–5845. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant L, Chrisholm A (2014) Shale gas and water: an independent review of shale gas exploration and exploitation in the UK with a particular focus on the implications for the water environment. The Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM). Available at: http://www.ciwem.org/shalegas

  • Gregory KB, Vidic RD, Dzombak DA (2011) Water management challenges associated with the production of shale gas by hydraulic fracturing. Elements 7(3):181–186

    Google Scholar 

  • Grout CG, Grimshaw TW (2012) Fact-based regulation for environmental protection in shale gas development. Energy Institute, University of Texas, Austin

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammer R, VanBriesen J (2012) In fracking’s wake: new rules are needed to protect our health and environment from contaminated waste water. NRDC Document, May 2012 D:12-05-A. NRDC, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Holditch SA (2007) Hydraulic fracturing. In: Clegg JD (ed) Petroleum engineering handbook. Production operations engineering, vol. IV, chap. 8. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Richardson, pp 323–366

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes JD (2013) Drill, baby, drill: can unconventional fuels usher in a new era of energy abundance? Post Carbon Institute. Available at: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid=CBEB674C4034A9C12700DCA95B8564D2?doi=10.1.1.397.8698&rep=rep1&type=pdf

  • Jackson RB, Vengosh A, Carey JW, Davies RJ, Darrah TH, O'Sullivan F, Petron G (2014) The environmental costs and benefits of fracking. Annu Rev Environ Resour 39:327–367

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahrilas GA, Blotevogel J, Stewart PS, Borch T (2015) Biocides in hydraulic fracturing fluids: a critical review of their usage, mobility, degradation, and toxicity. Environ Sci Technol 49(1):16–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Kargbo DM, Wilhelm RG, Campbell DJ (2010) Natural gas plays in the Marcellus Shale: challenges and potential opportunities. Environ Sci Technol 44:5679–5684

    Google Scholar 

  • Kausley SB, Malhotra CP, Pandit AB (2017) Treatment and reuse of shale gas wastewater: electrocoagulation system for enhanced removal of organic contamination and scale causing divalent cations. J Water Proc Eng 16:149–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Keranen KM, Savage HM, Abers GA, Cochran ES (2013) Potentially induced earthquakes in Oklahoma, USA: links between wastewater injection and the 2011 Mw 5.7 earthquake sequence. Geology 41(6):699–702

    Google Scholar 

  • Kijko AN, Kahle B, Smit A, Esterhuyse S, Glazewski J (2016) Hydraulic fracturing, wastewater pumping and seismicity. In: Glazewski J, Esterhuyse S (eds) Proposed hydraulic fracturing in the Karoo: critical legal and environmental perspectives (chapter 13). JUTA, Cape Town, pp 264–277

    Google Scholar 

  • Kondash AJ, Vengosh A (2015) Water footprint of hydraulic fracturing. Environ Sci Technol Lett 2(10):276–280

    Google Scholar 

  • Kondash AJ, Albright E, Vengosh A (2016) Quantity of flowback and produced waters from unconventional oil and gas exploration. Sci Total Environ 574:314–321

    Google Scholar 

  • Koppelman B, Walker A, Woods E (2012) Shale gas extraction in the UK: a review of hydraulic fracturing. The Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering, Plymouth

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauer NE, Harkness JS, Vengosh A (2016) Brine spills associated with unconventional oil development in North Dakota. Environ Sci Technol 50(10):5389–5397

    Google Scholar 

  • Lutz BD, Lewis AN, Doyle MW (2013) Generation, transport, and disposal of wastewater associated with Marcellus Shale gas development. Water Resour Res 49:647–656

    Google Scholar 

  • Mantell ME (2011) Produced water reuse and recycling challenges and opportunities across Major Shale Plays. Paper Presented at EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study Technical Workshop #4 Water Resources Management, March 29–30

  • Maule AL, Makey CM, Benson EB, Burrows IJ, Scammell MK (2013) Disclosure of hydraulic fracturing fluid chemical additives: analysis of regulations. New Solut 23(1):167–187

    Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin MC, Borch T, Blotevogel J (2016) Spills of hydraulic fracturing chemicals on agricultural topsoil: biodegradation, sorption, and co-contaminant interactions. Environ Sci Technol 50(11):6071–6078

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohammad J, Mohammad J, Siavash A (2014) Reservoir evaluation in undersaturated oil reservoirs using modern production data analysis; a simulation study. Sci Int 26(3):1089–1094

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohan AM, Hartsock A, Bibby KJ, Hammack RW, Vidic RD, Gregory KB (2013) Microbial community changes in hydraulic fracturing fluids and produced water from shale gas extraction. Environ Sci Technol 47(22):13141–13150

    Google Scholar 

  • Municipal Demarcation Board (MDB) (2011) State municipal capacity assessment 2010/2011. National trends in municipal capacity. Final National Report on trends in municipal capacity for the 2010/2011 municipal financial year, September 2012. Available at: http://led.co.za/sites/default/files/cabinet/orgnameraw/document/2012/state_of_municipal_capacity_assessment_2010_11_national_trends_report.pdf

  • Murray KE (2013) State-scale perspective on water use and production associated with oil and gas operations, Oklahoma, US. Environ Sci Technol 47:4918–4925

    Google Scholar 

  • New York State Department of Environmental conservation (NYSDEC) (2015) Final supplemental generic environmental impact statement on the oil, gas and solution mining regulatory program: regulatory program for horizontal drilling and high-volume hydraulic fracturing to develop the Marcellus Shale and other low-permeability gas reservoirs

  • Nicot JP, Scanlon BR (2012) Water use for shale-gas production in Texas, US. Environ Sci Technol 46(6):3580–3586

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicot JP, Scanlon BR, Reedy RC, Costley RA (2014) Source and fate of hydraulic fracturing water in the Barnett shale: a historical perspective. Environ Sci Technol 48(20):2464–2471

    Google Scholar 

  • Oelofse S, Schoonraad J, Baldwin D (2016) Impacts on waste planning and management. In: Scholes R, Lochner P, Schreiner G, Snyman-Van der Walt L, de Jager M (eds) Shale gas development in the Central Karoo: a scientific assessment of the opportunities and risks. CSIR/IU/021MH/EXP/2016/003/A, ISBN 978–0–7988-5631-7. CSIR, Pretoria. Available at http://seasgd.csir.co.za/scientific-assessment-chapters/

  • Rahm BG, Riha SJ (2012) Toward strategic management of shale gas development: regional, collective impacts on water resources. Environ Sci Pol 17:12–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahm BG, Bates JT, Bertoia LR, Galford AE, Yoxtheimer DA, Riha SJ (2013) Wastewater management and Marcellus Shale gas development: trends, drivers, and planning implications. J Environ Manag 120:105–113

    Google Scholar 

  • Republic of South Africa (RSA) (2015) Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (Act 28 of 2002): regulations for petroleum exploration and production. Government Gazette 38855, Regulation 466 of 3 June 2015

  • Ridlington E, Norman K, Richardson R (2016) Fracking by the numbers: the damage to our water, land and climate from a decade of dirty drilling. Environment America Research & Policy Center, April 2016

  • Rubinstein JL, Mahani AB (2015) Myths and facts on wastewater injection, hydraulic fracturing, enhanced oil recovery, and induced seismicity. Seismol Res Lett 86:1060–1067

    Google Scholar 

  • Scanlon BR, Reedy RC, Nicot JP (2014a) Comparison of water use for hydraulic fracturing for shale oil and gas versus conventional oil. Environ Sci Technol 48:12386–12393

    Google Scholar 

  • Scanlon BR, Reedy RC, Nicot JP (2014b) Will water scarcity in semiarid regions limit hydraulic fracturing of shale plays? Environ Res Lett 9(12):124011. https://doi.org/10.1021/es502506v

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholes R, Lochner P, Schreiner G, Snyman-Van der Walt L, de Jager M (eds) (2016) Shale gas development in the Central Karoo: a scientific assessment of the opportunities and risks. CSIR/IU/021MH/EXP/2016/003/A, ISBN 978-0-7988-5631-7. CSIR, Pretoria

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaffer DL, Arias Chavez LH, Ben-Sasson M, Castrilloín SRV, Yip NY, Elimelech M (2013) Desalination and reuse of high-salinity shale gas produced water: drivers, technologies, and future directions. Environ Sci Technol 47:9569–9583

    Google Scholar 

  • Soeder DJ, Kappel WM (2009) Water resources and natural gas production from the Marcellus Shale, fact sheet 2009–3032, 6 pp., US Geol Surv, Baltimore

  • Stepan DJ, Shockey RE, Kurz BA, Kalenze NS, Cowan RM, Ziman JJ, Harju JA (2010) Bakken Water Opportunities Assessment—Phase 1. University of North Dakota. Available at: https://undeerc.org/Water/pdf/FracWaterPhaseIreport.pdf. Accessed 10 Dec 2017

  • United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) (2015) Assessment of the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing for oil and gas on drinking water resources (external review draft). US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC EPA/600/R-15/047

    Google Scholar 

  • Valko PP (2009) Assigning value to stimulation in the Barnett Shale: a simultaneous analysis of 7000 plus production histories and well completion records. Paper Presented at SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference, The Woodlands, TX

  • Van Baalen S (2014) Investigating capacity self-assessment as a catalyst for improved municipal service delivery. Thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Masters of Engineering Management in the Faculty of Engineering at Stellenbosch University, February 2014

  • Veil JA (2010) Options for management of produced water. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 74(12):A1078–A1078

    Google Scholar 

  • Veil JA (2015) Produced water volumes and management practices in 2012. Report Prepared for the Groundwater Protection Council

  • Vengosh A, Jackson RB, Warner NR, Darrah TH, Kondash AJ (2014) A critical review of the risks to water resources from unconventional shale gas development and hydraulic fracturing in the United States. Environ Sci Technol 48:8334–8348

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang F, Zhang S (2014) Production analysis of multi-stage hydraulically fractured horizontal wells in tight gas reservoirs. J Geogr Geol 6(4):58–67

    Google Scholar 

  • Warner NR, Christie CA, Jackson RB, Vengosh A (2013) Impacts of shale gas wastewater disposal on water quality in Western Pennsylvania. Environ Sci Technol 47:11849–11857. https://doi.org/10.1021/es402165b

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weible CM, Heikkila T, Carter DP (2017) An institutional and opinion analysis of Colorado’s hydraulic fracturing disclosure policy. J Environ Policy Plan 19(2):115–134

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoxtheimer D (2010) Water treatment solutions for Marcellus natural gas development. In: Proceedings of Legislative Information Session, 29 August, 2010, Pennsylvania State University

  • Zhang X, Sun AY, Duncan IJ, Vesselinov VV (2017) Two-stage fracturing wastewater management in shale gas development. Ind Eng Chem Res 56:1570–1579. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs/iecr.6b03971

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ziemkiewicz PF, Quaranta JD, Darnell A, Wise R (2014) Exposure pathways related to shale gas development and procedures for reducing environmental and public risk. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 16:77–84

    Google Scholar 

  • Zou C, Zhao Q, Dong D, Yang Z, Qiu Z, Liang F, Wang N, Huang Y, Duan A, Zhang Q, Hu Z (2017) Geological characteristics, main challenges and future prospect of shale gas. J Nat Gas Geosci 2(5–6):273–288

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the South African Department of Science and Technology under the Iphakade project, publication number 233.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Environmental Management, Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa

    R. Williamson & S. Esterhuyse

Authors
  1. R. Williamson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Esterhuyse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Esterhuyse.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Williamson, R., Esterhuyse, S. Expected wastewater volumes associated with unconventional oil and gas exploitation in South Africa and the management thereof. Bull Eng Geol Environ 79, 711–728 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-019-01579-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-019-01579-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation