The tradeoff between water and carbon footprints of Barnett Shale gas

Absar, Syeda Mariya; Boulay, Anne-Marie; Campa, Maria F.; Preston, Benjamin L.; Taylor, Adam

doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.140

Title: The tradeoff between water and carbon footprints of Barnett Shale gas

Journal Article · Fri Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2018 · Journal of Cleaner Production

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.140· OSTI ID:1863286

Absar, Syeda Mariya ^[1]; Boulay, Anne-Marie ^[2]; Campa, Maria F. ^[3];

^[4]; Taylor, Adam ^[5]

Eastern Research Group, Inc. (United States)
Univ. de Sherbrooke, QC (Canada). Interdisciplinary Research Laboratory in Life Cycle Assessment and Circular Economy (LIRIDE); Polytechnique Montreal, QC (Canada). International Reference Center for Life Cycle of Products, Processes and Services (CIRAIG)
Oak Ridge National Lab. (ORNL), Oak Ridge, TN (United States); Univ. of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN (United States)
RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA (United States)
Univ. of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN (United States)

Shale gas production is a water and energy-intensive process that has expanded rapidly in the United States in recent years. This study compared the life cycle water consumption and greenhouse gas emissions from hydraulic fracturing in the Barnett region of Texas, located in one of the most drought prone regions of the United States. Four wastewater treatment scenarios were compared for produced water management in the Barnett region. For each scenario, the cradle-to-gate life cycle global warming potential and water scarcity footprint was estimated per mega joule of gas produced. Overall, the results show a trade-off between water and carbon impacts, because energy is required for treatment of water. A reduction of 49 percent in total water consumed or a 28 percent reduction in the water scarcity footprint in the shale gas production process can be achieved at a cost of a 38 percent increase in global warming potential, if the wastewater management shifted from business as usual to complete desalination and reuse of produced water. The results are discussed in the context of wastewater management options available in Texas.

View Accepted Manuscript (DOE)

View Accepted Manuscript (Publisher)

Cite

Export

Save

Research Organization:: Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), Oak Ridge, TN (United States)

Sponsoring Organization:: USDOE

Grant/Contract Number:: AC05-00OR22725

OSTI ID:: 1863286

Alternate ID(s):: OSTI ID: 1582756

Journal Information:: Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 197, Issue 1; ISSN 0959-6526

Publisher:: ElsevierCopyright Statement

Country of Publication:: United States

Language:: English

Citation Metrics:

Cited by: 15 works

Citation information provided by
Web of Science

References (15)

Shale-to-well energy use and air pollutant emissions of shale gas production in China Chang, Yuan; Huang, Runze; Ries, Robert J. Applied Energy, Vol. 125 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.03.039	journal	July 2014
Methane and the greenhouse-gas footprint of natural gas from shale formations: A letter Howarth, Robert W.; Santoro, Renee; Ingraffea, Anthony Climatic Change, Vol. 106, Issue 4 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0061-5	journal	April 2011
Source and Fate of Hydraulic Fracturing Water in the Barnett Shale: A Historical Perspective Nicot, Jean-Philippe; Scanlon, Bridget R.; Reedy, Robert C. Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 48, Issue 4 https://doi.org/10.1021/es404050r	journal	February 2014
Life Cycle Assessment of Shale Gas in the UK Tagliaferri, C.; Lettieri, P.; Chapman, C. Energy Procedia, Vol. 75 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2015.07.685	journal	August 2015
A guide to life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from electric supply technologies Weisser, Daniel Energy, Vol. 32, Issue 9 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2007.01.008	journal	September 2007
Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of Marcellus shale gas Jiang, Mohan; Michael Griffin, W.; Hendrickson, Chris Environmental Research Letters, Vol. 6, Issue 3 https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/6/3/034014	journal	July 2011
Water Use for Shale-Gas Production in Texas, U.S. Nicot, Jean-Philippe; Scanlon, Bridget R. Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 46, Issue 6 https://doi.org/10.1021/es204602t	journal	March 2012
Projecting Water Withdrawal and Supply for Future Decades in the U.S. under Climate Change Scenarios Roy, Sujoy B.; Chen, Limin; Girvetz, Evan H. Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 46, Issue 5 https://doi.org/10.1021/es2030774	journal	February 2012
Life Cycle Water Consumption and Wastewater Generation Impacts of a Marcellus Shale Gas Well Jiang, Mohan; Hendrickson, Chris T.; VanBriesen, Jeanne M. Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 48, Issue 3 https://doi.org/10.1021/es4047654	journal	January 2014
Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Freshwater Consumption of Marcellus Shale Gas Laurenzi, Ian J.; Jersey, Gilbert R. Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 47, Issue 9 https://doi.org/10.1021/es305162w	journal	April 2013
Can switching fuels save water? A life cycle quantification of freshwater consumption for Texas coal- and natural gas-fired electricity Grubert, Emily A.; Beach, Fred C.; Webber, Michael E. Environmental Research Letters, Vol. 7, Issue 4 https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/045801	journal	October 2012
Water Footprinting: How to Address Water Use in Life Cycle Assessment? Berger, Markus; Finkbeiner, Matthias Sustainability, Vol. 2, Issue 4 https://doi.org/10.3390/su2040919	journal	April 2010
TRACI 2.0: the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts 2.0 Bare, Jane Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, Vol. 13, Issue 5 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-010-0338-9	journal	January 2011
Desalination of shale gas produced water: A rigorous design approach for zero-liquid discharge evaporation systems Onishi, Viviani C.; Carrero-Parreño, Alba; Reyes-Labarta, Juan A. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 140 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.012	journal	January 2017
The greenhouse impact of unconventional gas for electricity generation Hultman, Nathan; Rebois, Dylan; Scholten, Michael Environmental Research Letters, Vol. 6, Issue 4 https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/6/4/044008	journal	October 2011

Cited By (1)

Unconventional Oil and Gas Energy Systems: An Unidentified Hotspot of Antimicrobial Resistance? Campa, Maria Fernanda; Wolfe, Amy K.; Techtmann, Stephen M. Frontiers in Microbiology, Vol. 10 https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2019.02392	journal	October 2019

Similar Records

Assessment of Brine Management for Geologic Carbon Sequestration

Technical Report · Thu Jun 13 00:00:00 EDT 2013 · OSTI ID:1863286

Breunig, Hanna M.; Birkholzer, Jens T.; Borgia, Andrea; +3 more

ESTIMATING WATER FOOTPRINT AND MANAGING BIOREFINERY WASTEWATER IN THE PRODUCTION OF BIO-BASED RENEWABLE DIESEL BLENDSTOCK

Technical Report · Thu Dec 01 00:00:00 EST 2016 · OSTI ID:1863286

Wu, May M.; Sawyer, Bernard M

Case Study: Integrate Nuclear Water Desalination - Regional Potable Water in Arizona

Technical Report · Sun Sep 01 00:00:00 EDT 2019 · OSTI ID:1863286

Epiney, Aaron S.; Richards, James D.; Hansen, Jason K.; +4 more

Related Subjects

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
shale gas
hydraulic fracturing
life cycle assessment
Barnett shale
Texas
water scarcity footprint
inventory water consumption
carbon footprint
greenhouse gas emissions
global warming potential

Title: The tradeoff between water and carbon footprints of Barnett Shale gas

Citation Formats

References (15)

Cited By (1)

Similar Records

Related Subjects