Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

External utilization of oil and gas produced water: Why is the industry hesitant to full-scale implementation?

  • Review
  • Published:
Environment, Development and Sustainability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Over the last decade, there have been significant advancements in the different aspects of produced water (PW) management and disposal. These methods include internal application, surface discharge, subsurface discharge, and beneficial reuse (or external uses). While the petroleum industry is focused on using PW internally, the call for other external applications reverberates in agricultural, chemical, and manufacturing industries. Recently, beneficial reuse has gained momentum as a two-way solution for reusing treated PW instead. It promises to alleviate the use of freshwater, tackle drought, and reduce the amount of PW waste disposed of at the end of the process. Despite those mentioned earlier, the petroleum industry prefers using PW internally or discharging it into the subsurface. There seems to be a missing link between all the previously proposed recommendations about beneficial reuse and the actual execution of the external reuse of PW by the major stakeholders. This work provides a holistic account of the state of knowledge by incorporating the oil and gas perspectives and the challenges responsible for the gap in implementing external uses of PW as proposed as a solution to PW management. Based on life cycle assessment and life cycle cost methods, the challenges related to beneficial reuse are highlighted, and the reason for the hesitancy of the petroleum industry to venture into external solutions is presented. This work proposes progressive recommendations that provide insight into achieving long-term environmental sustainability by exploring external uses of PW and harnessing its merit.

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
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets generated during this study are available as supplementary material.

Notes

  1. TDS—total dissolved solids, TSS—total suspended solids, BOD— biochemical oxygen demand, COD—chemical oxygen demand, DO—dissolved oxygen, LC50—lethal concentration.

  2. BTEX—benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes, NPD—naphthalene, phenanthrene, and dibenzothiophene, PAH—polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, WEA—whole effluent assessment and WET—whole effluent toxicity, EIF—environmental impact factor (predicted environmental concentration/no effect concentration), cations—Na+, K+, Ca2+, Mg2+, Ba2+, Sr2+, and Fe2+, anions—Cl−, SO42−, CO32−, HCO3, Br−, I−, NH4−, NO32−, and NO2−3, heavy metals—cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, iron, mercury, nickel, silver, and zinc, NORMS—naturally occurring radioactive materials such as 226radium, 228radium, and barium sulfate.

References

  • Abdella, D. L. (1994). Reverse osmosis desalination. Marine Technology and SNAME News, 31, 195–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72873-1_6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agi, A., Junin, R., Alqatta, A. Y. M., Gbadamosi, A., Yahya, A., & Abbas, A. (2018). Ultrasonic assisted ultrafiltration process for emulsification of oil field produced water treatment. Ultrasonics Sonochemistry, 51, 214–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2018.10.023

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • AlQattan, J., Kim, Y., Kerdi, S., Qamar, A., & Ghaffour, N. (2021). Hole-type spacers for more stable shale gas-produced water treatment by forward osmosis. Membranes (basel), 11, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes11010034

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, S. (2015). An environmental perspective on risk management and water. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 67, 20–22. https://doi.org/10.2118/1115-0020-jpt

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arfelli, F., Ciacci, L., Vassura, I., & Passarini, F. (2022). Nexus analysis and life cycle assessment of regional water supply systems: A case study from Italy. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 185, 106446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arscott, R. L. (1989). new directions in environmental protection in oil and gas operations. Journal of Petroleum Technology. https://doi.org/10.2118/17569-PA

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Awad, H., Gar, A. M., & El-Etriby, H. K. (2019). Environmental and cost life cycle assessment of different alternatives for improvement of wastewater treatment plants in developing countries. Science of the Total Environment, 660, 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.386

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, E. A., Poynor, T. E., Newhart, K. B., Regnery, J., Coday, B. D., & Cath, T. Y. (2017). Produced water treatment using forward osmosis membranes: Evaluation of extended-time performance and fouling. Journal of Membrane Science, 525, 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2016.10.032

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brondani, M., De Oliveira, J. S., Mayer, F. D., & Hoffmann, R. (2020). Life cycle assessment of distillation columns manufacturing. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 22, 5925–5945. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-019-00459-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, H., Li, T., Liu, B., Vidic, R. D., Elimelech, M., & Crittenden, J. C. (2019). Potential and implemented membrane-based technologies for the treatment and reuse of flowback and produced water from shale gas and oil plays: A review. Desalination, 455, 34–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2019.01.001

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chiavico M., Cova C.A., Buffagni M., Pavanel E., Pedulla M., & Florio M. (2020). Comparative analysis of alternative solutions for produced water. In SPE International Conference and Exhibition on Health, Safety, Environment, and Sustainability.

  • Cooper, C. M., McCall, J., & Stokes, S. C. (2021). Oil and gas produced water reuse: Opportunities, treatment needs, and challenges. ACS ES&T Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsestengg.1c00248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costa, D. O., Vale, H. S. M., & Batista, R. O. (2019). Chemical characteristics of soil irrigated with produced water treatment and underground water. DYNA, 86, 143–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cruver, J. E. (1972). Reverse-osmosis treatment of water and waste water. Marine Technology and SNAME News, 9, 216–222. https://doi.org/10.5957/mt1.1972.9.2.216

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Curran, M. (1996). Environmental life cycle assessment. McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahm K., & Chapman M. (2014). Produced water treatment primer: Case studies of treatment applications. US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Technical Service. pp 1–70.

  • Danforth, C., Chiu, W. A., Rusyn, I., Schultz, K., Bolden, A., Kwiatkowski, C., & Craft, E. (2020). An integrative method for identification and prioritization of constituents of concern in produced water from onshore oil and gas extraction. Environment International, 134, 105280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2019.105280

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Daskiran, F., Gulhan, H., Guven, H., Ozgun, H., & Ersahin, M. E. (2022). Comparative evaluation of different operation scenarios for a full-scale wastewater treatment plant: Modeling coupled with life cycle assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 341, 130864.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dhillon, B. S. (2017). Life cycle costing for engineers. CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donnelly, J. (2012). Industry must earn its license to operate. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 64, 68–71. https://doi.org/10.2118/1112-0068-jpt

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dórea, H. S., Bispo, J. R. L., & Aragão, K. A. S. (2007). Analysis of BTEX, PAHs, and metals in the oilfield produced water in the State of Sergipe, Brazil. Microchemical Journal, 85, 234–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2006.06.002

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dudek, M., Vik, E. A., Aanesen, S. V., & Øye, G. (2020). Colloid chemistry and experimental techniques for understanding fundamental behavior of produced water in oil and gas production. Advances in Colloid and Interface Science, 276, 102105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2020.102105

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Eyitayo S.I., Watson M.C., & Kolawole O. (2022a) Produced water treatment and utilization: Challenges and future direction. In: SPE Western regional meeting. pp 1–34.

  • Eyitayo, S. I., Watson, M. C., Kolawole, O., Xu, P., Bruant, R., & Henthrone, L. (2022b). Produced water treatment: Review of technological advancement in hydrocarbon recovery processes, well stimulation, and permanent disposal wells. SPE Production & Operations. https://doi.org/10.2118/212275-pa

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fajardo, T., Pinilla, P., Bojacá, V., Pinilla, R., Ortiz, J., & Acevedo, P. (2016). Life cycle assessment to identify environmental improvements in an aerobic waste water treatment plant. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 49, 493–498. https://doi.org/10.3303/CET1649083

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fakhru’l-Razi, A., Pendashteh, A., & Abdullah, L. C. (2009). Review of technologies for oil and gas produced water treatment. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 170, 530–551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.05.044

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Farnand, B. A., & Krug, T. A. (1989). Oil removal from oilfield-produced water by cross flow ultrafiltration. Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology, 28, 18–24. https://doi.org/10.2118/89-06-01

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Feder, J. (2020). Saltwater disposal optimization, drives water midstream sector. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 72, 31–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira, A. C. D., Oliveira, S., & Benassi, R. F. (2021). Comparison of alternative wastewater treatment plants using life cycle assessment (lca). Springer International Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Folio E., Ogunsola O., Melchert E., & Frye E. (2018). Produced water treatment R&d: Developing advanced, cost-effective treatment technologies. In SPE/AAPG/SEG Unconventional Resources Technology Conference. URTC 2018 1–8. https://doi.org/10.15530/urtec-20182886718

  • Furuholt E. (1995). Environmental effects of discharge and reinjection of Produced water. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas. pp 1–8.

  • Guerra K., Dahm K., & Dundorf S. (2011). Oil and gas produced water management and beneficial use in the Western United States. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Managing Water in West 129.

  • Holgate, M., Consultant, I., & Mentzer, E. (1994). Realizing the benefits of environmental risk management continuous improvement through goal-oriented regulation. SPE Advanced Technology Series. https://doi.org/10.2118/27610-PA

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., Jiang, W., & Xu, X. (2022). Toxicological characterization of produced water from the Permian Basin. Science of the Total Environment, 815, 152943. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.152943

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Huynh, N. D., Thuy, B. T. T., & Diem, B. H. (2002). Study on the main environmental pollutants in produced water discharged from petroleum exploration and production activities at white tiger and dragon fields. ISPE International Conference on Health, Safety and Environment in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. https://doi.org/10.2118/74001-ms

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Igunnu, E. T., & Chen, G. Z. (2014). Produced water treatment technologies. International Jounal of Low-Carbon Technologies, 9, 157–177. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlct/cts049

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jang H., Ahn Y., & Tae S. (2022) Proposal of major environmental impact categories of. pp 1–18.

  • Jepsen, K. L., Bram, M. V., Hansen, L., Yang, Z., & Lauridsen, S. M. Ø. (2019). Online backwash optimization of membrane filtration for produced water treatment. Membranes (basel), 9, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes9060068

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, W., Lin, L., & Xu, X. (2021a). A critical review of analytical methods for comprehensive characterization of produced water. Water (Switzerland), 13, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13020183

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, W., Pokharel, B., Pei, X., & Lin, L. (2021b). Analysis and prediction of produced water quantity and quality in the Permian Basin using machine learning techniques. Science of the Total Environment, 801, 149693. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.149693

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, W., Xu, X., Hall, R., Pei, X., & Lin, L. (2022). Characterization of produced water and surrounding surface water in the Permian Basin, the United States. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 430, 128409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.128409

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Khalilpour, R. (2014). Produced water management: An example of a regulatory gap. Society of Petroleum Engineers - SPE Oilfield Water Management Conference and Exhibition. https://doi.org/10.2118/171000-ms

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehtoranta, S., Vilpas, R., & Mattila, T. J. (2014). Comparison of carbon footprints and eutrophication impacts of rural on-site wastewater treatment plants in Finland. Journal of Cleaner Production, 65, 439–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.08.024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mancini, E. R., & Stilwell, C. T. (1992). Biotoxicity characterization of a produced-water discharge in Wyoming. Journal of Petroleum Technology. https://doi.org/10.2118/20615-PA

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McManus, K., Ertel, D., & Bogdan, J. (2015). A sustainable choice for water treatment/recycling when injection is not an option or water supply is limited. SPE Produced Water Handling & Management Symposium, 2015, 141–151. https://doi.org/10.2118/174534-ms

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meneses, A. C., Weber, O. B., Crisóstomo, L. A., & Andrade, D. J. (2017). Biological soil attributes in oilseed crops irrigated with oilfield produced water in the semi-arid region. Revista Ciência Agronômica, 48, 231–241. https://doi.org/10.5935/1806-6690.20170027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morera, S., Santana, M. V. E., Comas, J., Rigola, M., & Corominas, L. (2020). Evaluation of different practices to estimate construction inventories for life cycle assessment of small to medium wastewater treatment plants. Journal of Cleaner Production, 245, 118768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118768

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Neff, Jerry M., Lee, Kenneth, & DeBlois EM (2011) Produced water: Overview of composition fates and effects.

  • O’Rourke, D., & Connolly, S. (2003). Just oil? The distribution of environmental and social impacts of oil production and consumption. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 28, 587–617. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.28.050302.105617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raghuvanshi, S., Bhakar, V., Sowmya, C., & Sangwan, K. S. (2017). Waste water treatment plant life cycle assessment: Treatment process to reuse of water. Procedia CIRP, 61, 761–766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.11.170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reclamation US of interior Bureau (2003) Technical guidelines for water quality. pp 1–41.

  • Risch, E., Jaumaux, L., Maeseele, C., & Choubert, J. M. (2022). Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of two advanced treatment steps for wastewater micropollutants: How to determine whole-system environmental benefits? Science of the Total Environment, 805, 150300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150300

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rittenhouse, G. F., Robort, B., Grabowski, R. J., & Bernard, J. L. (1968). Minor element in oilfield water. Chemical Geology. https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2541(69)90045-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez, C., Sánchez, R., Rebolledo, N., Schneider, N., Serrano, J., & Leiva, E. (2021). Life cycle assessment of greywater treatment systems for water-reuse management in rural areas. Science of the Total Environment. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez-Garcia, G., Frison, N., Vázquez-Padín, J. R., Hospido, A., Garrido, J. M., Fatone, F., Bolzonella, D., Moreira, M. T., & Feijoo, G. (2014). Life cycle assessment of nutrient removal technologies for the treatment of anaerobic digestion supernatant and its integration in a wastewater treatment plant. Science of the Total Environment, 490, 871–879. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.05.077

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Roex, E. W. M., Henriquez, L. R., & Horn, M. (2012). The added value of whole effluent assessment for produced water discharges in the offshore industry. Society of Petroleum Engineers - International Conference on Health, Safety and Environment in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Perth, Aust, 2, 1568–1571. https://doi.org/10.2118/157153-ms

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowbottom, R., Grinneiser, P., & Cobb, J. A. (2014). Facility water cycle management in diverse conditions. SPE International Conference on Industrial Environment, Safety and Health Held Long Beach, Calif, 1, 555–562. https://doi.org/10.2118/168384-ms

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabie R., & Fernanld A. (2016). The feasibility of utilizing produced water to improve drinking water supply in Southeastern New Mexico. New Mexico Water Resources Research Institute. 253.

  • Scanlon, B. R., Ikonnikova, S., Yang, Q., & Reedy, R. C. (2020). Will water issues constrain oil and gas production in the United States? Environmental Science and Technology, 54, 3510–3519. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b06390

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sedlacko, E. M., John, C. E., & Heuberger, A. L. (2019). Potential for BFR of Oil and gas-derived produced water in agriculture: Physiological and morphological responses in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum). Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 38, 1756–1769. https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.4449

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shammouh, D., Chakraborti, P., & Farhart, J. (2016). Utilization of wastewater stream for heavy oil recovery. Society of Petroleum Engineers - SPE Heavy Oil Conference and Exhibition, 2016, 6–8. https://doi.org/10.2118/184098-ms

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson, M. T. (1992). Components of produced water. A compilation of industry studies. Journal of Petroleum Technology. https://doi.org/10.2118/23313-pa

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, G. E. J., Jakle, A. C., & Martin, F. D. (2015). Reuse of oil and gas produced water in south-eastern New Mexico: Resource assessment, treatment processes, and policy. Water International, 40, 809–823. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060.2015.1096126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talang, R. P. N., Sirivithayapakorn, S., & Polruang, S. (2020). Environmental impacts and cost-effectiveness of Thailand’s centralized municipal wastewater treatment plants with different nutrient removal processes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 256, 120433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120433

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tibbetts, P. J. C., Buchanan, I. T., Gawel, L. J., & Large, R. (1992). A comprehensive determination of produced water composition. Produced Water. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-2902-6_9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tong, K., Zhang, Y., & Liu, G. (2013). Treatment of heavy oil wastewater by a conventional activated sludge process coupled with an immobilized biological filter. International Biodeterioration and Biodegradation, 84, 65–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibiod.2013.06.002

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Torres, L., Yadav, O. P., & Khan, E. (2015). A review on risk assessment techniques for hydraulic fracturing water and produced water management implemented in onshore unconventional oil and gas production. Science of the Total Environment, 539, 478–493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.09.030

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tukker A., Charter M., Ehrenfeld J., Huppes G., Lifset R., & Bruijn, T. (2007). Handbook on life cycle assessment.

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 530-SW-87–005C (1973). Exploration, development, and production of crude oil and natural gas, field sampling, and analysis.

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. F register-44FR22075 (1979). Effluent Limitations guidelines represent the degree of effluent reduction attainable by the application of the best practicable control technology.

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 530-SW-87-005 (1987a). Exploration, development and production crude oil and natural gas, sampling report. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2, 1–23.

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 530-SW-87–005C- vol1 (1987b). Exploration, development and production crude oil and natural gas, sampling report.

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. F register-58FRI2504 (1993). Effluent Limitations guidelines representing the degree of effluent reduction attainable by the application of the best available technology economically achievable (BAT). 58, 12451–12512.

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. F register-40CFR P. (1999). Effluent limitations guidelines and new source performance standards for synthetic-based and other non-aqueous drilling fluids in the oil and gas extraction point source category. Federal Register, 64, 5488–5554. https://doi.org/10.1016/0196-335x(80)90058-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2002). Enforcement and Compliance Assurance: Environmental results through smart enforcement (2002). Fiscal year 2002 enforcement and compliance assurance accomplishments report., Washington, DC.

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, DCN CWT00036 (2012). Site Visit Report Eureka Resources, LLC Marcellus Shale Gas Operations.

  • United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. (2017). Appendix B to Part 20--Annual Limits on Intake (ALIs) and Derived Air Concentrations (DACs) of Radionuclides for Occupational Exposure; Effluent Concentrations; Concentrations for Release to Sewerage. In: 56 FR 23409. https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part020/part020-appb.html

  • Utvik, T. I. R., & Hasle, J. R. (2002). Recent Knowledge about produced water composition and the contribution from different chemical to risk of harmful environmental effects. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 54, 67–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vasiliu, C. C., Pierce, D., & Bertrand, K. (2012). Challenging wastewater treatment. Society of Petroleum Engineers. https://doi.org/10.2118/157615-MS

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veil, J. (2015). US produced water volumes and management practices in 2012; Report prepared for the Groundwater Protection Council. Groundwater Protection Council 119.

  • Vigon, B. W., Tolle, D. A., Cornaby, B. W., Latham, H. C., Harrison, C. L., Boguski, R. G., & Sellers, J. D. (2008). Life cycle assessment. Lewis Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warner, N. R., Christie, C. A., Jackson, R. B., & Vengosh, A. (2013). Impacts of shale gas wastewater disposal on water quality in Western Pennsylvania. Environmental Science and Technology, 47, 11849–11857. https://doi.org/10.1021/es402165b

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, A. (2018). Advanced electrochemical system desalts produced water, saves polymer. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 70, 72–74. https://doi.org/10.2118/1218-0072-jpt

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, B. (2022). The produced water conundrum grows across unconventionals. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 7, 38–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, S., Lin, P., An, X., Hu, Y., Wang, Z., Zhong, L., & Niu, Q. (2017). High-performance forward osmosis membranes used for treating high-salinity oil-bearing wastewater. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, 56, 12385–12394. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.7b02917

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yisheng, H. U., MacKay, E., Vazquez, O., & Ishkov, O. (2018). Streamline simulation of barium sulfate precipitation occurring within the reservoir coupled with analyses of observed produced-water-chemistry data to aid scale management. SPE Production & Operations, 33, 85–101. https://doi.org/10.2118/174235-pa

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, T. (2021). Now accepting permit applications for wastewater discharge from oil and gas facilities. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, 2021, 6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zang, Y., Li, Y., Wang, C., Zhang, W., & Xiong, W. (2015). Towards more accurate life cycle assessment of biological wastewater treatment plants: A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 107, 676–692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.05.060

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bob L. Herd Department of Petroleum Engineering, Texas Tech University, 807 Boston Avenue, Lubbock, TX, 79409, USA

    Stella I. Eyitayo & Marshall C. Watson

  2. John A. Reif, Jr. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, NJ, 07102, USA

    Oladoyin Kolawole

  3. Department of Civil Engineering, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM, 88003, USA

    Pei Xu

  4. B3 Insight, Denver, CO, 80202, USA

    Robert Bruant

  5. Water Standard, Houston, TX, 77027, USA

    Lisa Henthorne

Authors
  1. Stella I. Eyitayo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marshall C. Watson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Oladoyin Kolawole
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Pei Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Robert Bruant
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Lisa Henthorne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stella I. Eyitayo.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

456 The authors declare no competing financial interests directly or indirectly related to the work submitted for publication.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Eyitayo, S.I., Watson, M.C., Kolawole, O. et al. External utilization of oil and gas produced water: Why is the industry hesitant to full-scale implementation?. Environ Dev Sustain 26, 89–108 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-022-02746-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-022-02746-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation