1887

Abstract

Summary

The rapid development of shale gas throughout US shale gas plays such as the Barnett, Marcellus, Fayetteville and Haynesville has led to water management concerns.

There is a very limited potential for underground injection of fluids, as underground injection is considered to be consumptively lost from the hydrological cycle. Multiple withdrawals of water could decrease the ground water considerably. Waste water treatment by means of management of flow back water in sewage treatment plants also does not cater to the need of desalination and chlorination issues. In case of shale gas exploration where around 6 million gallons of fresh water is used per well, India might face severe water challenges. Shale’s have been explored as source rocks in 8 basins in India. In cases like Jaisalmer Basin, Rajasthan, it would nearly become impossible to meet such water demands. There is thus a need to recycle the water used and this paper would look into the matter that how flow back water could be managed giving niche solutions for India having extremely high temperature conditions compared to the US. Membrane based solutions which would significantly reduce the water footprint would be taken into consideration.

© EAGE Publications BV
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.20142264
2014-09-21
2026-02-15

  • From This Site

    /content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.20142264
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Sunshine, W.L.
    2012. Waste water Byproducts of Shale Gas Drilling. New York Times Company.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. The Artemis Project. 2011. Building Momentum for Advanced Water Treatment Solutions: The Marcellus Effect, p.8, 10.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. New York State Water Resources Institute
    New York State Water Resources Institute. 2009. Waste management of cuttings, drilling fluids, hydrofrac water and produced water.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Arthur, J.D., Bohm, B. and Cornue, D.
    2009. Environmental Considerations of Modern Shale Gas Development. Paper SPE 122931 presented at the SPE Annual Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana, 4–7 October.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Dow Liquid Separations
    Dow Liquid Separations. 1995. FILMTEC Membrane Elements: Technical Manual, FilmTec Corp., Minneapolis, MIN.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Shale Gas in India: Look Before You Leap, http://www.teriin.org/policybrief/docs/Shale_gas.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  7. U.S Energy Information Administration
    U.S Energy Information Administration. 2011. World Shale Gas Resources: An Initial Assessment of 14 Regions Outside the United States, 5April2011.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. DiGiulioD.C., WilkinT.C., MillerC. and OberleyG.
    2011. United States Environmental Protection Agency: Investigation of Ground Water Contamination near Pavillion, Wyoming, 8thDecember.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Aithal, K.R.
    Centre for Environmental Law Education Research & Advocacy. The National Law School of India University.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas
    Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas. Draft Policy for the Exploration and Exploitation of Shale Oil & Gas in India, p. 11.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Central Government Water Board: Ground Water Profiles
    Central Government Water Board: Ground Water Profiles, Designed, Developed & Maintained by National Data Center, CGWB, Faridabad in association with NIC, New Delhi.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Kher, S.
    Rapid Uplift- geology, evolution and a changing planet: India Basin Wise Shale Gas Estimates.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. World Bank Report. 2010. Pragmatic action possible for addressing overexploitation of groundwater in India, New Delhi, 5thMarch2010.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Gregory, K.B., Vldlc, R.D. and Dzombak, D.A.
    2011. Water management challenges associated with the production of shale gas by hydraulic fracturing, June.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Stuart, M.E.
    2001. British Geological Survey, National Environment Research Council.: Potential groundwater impact from exploitation of shale gas in the UK Ground water Science Programme, Open Report OR/12/001.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Dow Liquid Separations
    Dow Liquid Separations. 1995. FILMTEC Membrane Elements: Technical Manual, FilmTec Corp., Minneapolis, MIN.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Garcia, R.S.
    1996. Commercially Available Low-level Radioactive and Mixed Waste Treatment Technologies, Rep. DOE/LLW-240, Department of Energy, Washington, DC.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Dores, R., Hussain, A., Katebah, M and Adham, S.
    2012. Using Advanced Water Treatment Technologies to Treat Produced Water from the Petroleum Industry. Paper SPE 157108 presented at International Production and Operations Conference & Exhibition, Doha, Qatar, 14–16 May.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Membrane Filtration
    Membrane Filtration. Crossflow vs Dead End Flow, http://www.membranafiltration.com
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Water treatment solutions Lenntech. Membrane Technology, http://www.lenntech.com/membrane-technology.htm
     [Google Scholar]
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.20142264
Loading
Challenges Associated with Shale Gas Development in Asia
Conference Proceedings 2014, 1 (2014); https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.20142264
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.20142264
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.20142264
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error