Addressing Frac Water Demand
From the Perspective of
Non/Fresh Surface Water Permits
Application Strategy, Logistics, Limitations
Jeremy Hogg, White Water Management
Let’s work together to reduce the use!
Application Strategy
• Quantify Utility
• Amalgamate Projects
• Contextualize Permit Requirements
Quantify Utility
• The basic utility measurement is the unit ratio
of water demand to oil/gas extracted
– As a minimum approximation, consider the
number of wells and anticipated fracs per well
• A given source will always also bear on
contingent utilities
– Consider all contingent utilities, e.g.: relation to
dust, traffic, emissions, ground disturbance,
shoreline integrity
Quantify Utility: the Water Table
• The utility is ultimately adjusted with
reference to the water table
– Borrow pits are prioritized because they do not
contribute directly to the water table
– Non-fresh water is prioritized because
• A) it does not contribute to the water table, or
• B) it contributes to the water table poorly
Non-Fresh Water Priority
• A) does not contribute to the water table
– High contamination
• Disposed of – e.g., flowback
• Held – e.g., tailings ponds
• B) contributes poorly to the water table
– Low water quality, controlled pollutant
• Treated sewage (e.g., town)
• Industrial effluent (e.g., pulp mill)
• Natural watercourse, proximally downstream of
pollutant discharge
Amalgamate and Contextualize
Case Study
Cequence Engery, Simonette River Sub-basin
“Our aim in including a wider scope of activity in our application
is to contextualize our overall water use effect in the given area,
create an opportunity for additional relevant limitations…, and to
facilitate water tracking around a central plan.”
Strategic points of diversion cover the water needs of an area for
an extended period of time
Satisfying multiple projects with one permit, representing a
contextual water management plan
Reveals total operational water demand compared to total
environmental stress (POD 0)
POD 0: Net Effects
Conceptualization by sub-basin rather
than by project edifies:
• Sum Environmental Stress
– Total water demand on the sub-basin
for a given period from one company
– The ratio of a sum instantaneous water
diversion rate to discharge rate of the
sub-basin
• Water dependant operations planning
• Water Tracking
Sum % of discharge rate diverted
Each point of diversion may be compliant while the sub-basin exceeds
regulatory standards
Operational Planning Advantages
• Uncover risks to operational intentions well in
advance
• Gain resilience against shifting order and
timing of projects
• Plan within confines of sub-basin limitations
Logistics
• Relate Frac Rate, Water Demand, Storage,
Environmental Limitation, and Operational
Cost
• High Utility Sourcing from the Point of View
Permit Applications
– The Hydrological Cycle and Water Banking
– Borrow Pits
– Non-Fresh Surface Water
Dynamics of Water Demand and Cost
Example1
Example2
Water Quantity Demand:
60,000m3
Water Per Frac:
1,500m3
Onsite Initial Storage:
5,000m3
Water Quantity Demand:
60,000m3
Water Per Frac:
1,500m3
Onsite Initial Storage:
5,000m3
Supply Rate (Environment):
4.0m3/m
Supply Rate (Environment):
2.0m3/m
Therefore:
Days Fracking:
Therefore:
Days Fracking:
9.54
Cost = (cost of all services onsite)(9.54)
19.10
Cost = (cost of all services onsite)(19.10)
Working with the Hydrological Cycle
Water Banking and Borrow Pits
During run-off season (May-June), fill storage
(borrow pits) to use as late as fall-winter
Permit the watercourse (e.g., Blindman River)
and the borrow pit with the same application
package
Describe the long term plan of the water
diverted, banked, and later used when
environmental discharge rates are lessor
Utilizing Non-Fresh Surface Water
Case Study
Industry Partner and a Local Community
Access to 200,000+m3 of treated
waste water per year
Advantages
• No cap on the supply rate
• Available during environmental low discharge
seasons
• Stands as a reliable back up for other plans
• Centralized
• Employs water that would otherwise be
discharged as a controlled pollutant
• Includes the public in a water management plan
Limitations (Environmental and Social)
• Risk Management
– Weather: Year to Year and Week to Week
– Water Competition
– Foreseeable Increase in Magnitude of Demand
• Responsible Business
– Due Proof of Stewardship re Shared Resources
– Obligation to Pursue Rational Alternatives
Risk Management
• Weather
– Environmental supply rates during a project may change
– Droughts will occur - our last being 2001-2002
[Khandekar, M., Canadian Prairie Drought: A climatological Assessment, 2004]
• Water Competition
– Oil Co.s may impact the same source at the same time
• As can other sectors, such as agriculture
• Increasing Demand
– Progression toward many wells on one pad-site
concentrates demand, both in time and place
– Industry growth predicts town growth, exacerbating
demand near municipalities
Responsible Business
• Stewardship of Shared Resources
– The public is always a tacit stakeholder in every
project
– The effects of water management travel downstream,
effecting non-local areas
• Pursuing Alternatives to Fresh Surface Water
– The public eye sees
•
•
A) fresh water is not required to frac
B) there is an abundance of non-fresh water available
Therefore, it is rational for the public to question our water
management strategies