skip to main content
DOE PAGES title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Comparison of chemical-use between hydraulic fracturing, acidizing, and routine oil and gas development

Abstract

The potential hazards and risks associated with well-stimulation in unconventional oil and gas development (hydraulic fracturing, acid fracturing, and matrix acidizing) have been investigated and evaluated and federal and state regulations requiring chemical disclosure for well-stimulation have been implemented as part of an overall risk management strategy for unconventional oil and gas development. Similar evaluations for chemicals used in other routine oil and gas development activities, such as maintenance acidizing, gravel packing, and well drilling, have not been previously conducted, in part due to a lack of reliable information concerning on-field chemical-use. In this study, we compare chemical-use between routine activities and the more closely regulated well-stimulation activities using data collected by the South Coast Air Quality Monitoring District (SCAQMD), which mandates the reporting of both unconventional and routine on-field chemical-use for parts of Southern California. Analysis of this data shows that there is significant overlap in chemical-use between so-called unconventional activities and routine activities conducted for well maintenance, well-completion, or rework. A comparison within the SCAQMD shows a significant overlap between both types and amounts of chemicals used for well-stimulation treatments included under State mandatory-disclosure regulations and routine treatments that are not included under State regulations. A comparison betweenmore » SCAQMD chemical-use for routine treatments and state-wide chemical-use for hydraulic fracturing also showed close similarity in chemical-use between activities covered under chemical disclosure requirements (e.g. hydraulic fracturing) and many other oil and gas field activities. The results of this study indicate regulations and risk assessments focused exclusively on chemicals used in well-stimulation activities may underestimate potential hazard or risk from overall oil field chemical-use.« less

Authors:
ORCiD logo; ; ; ;
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Lawrence Berkeley National Lab. (LBNL), Berkeley, CA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Science (SC)
OSTI Identifier:
1352113
Alternate Identifier(s):
OSTI ID: 1379786
Grant/Contract Number:  
IA0000018; AC02-05CH1123; AC02-05CH11231
Resource Type:
Published Article
Journal Name:
PLoS ONE
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Name: PLoS ONE Journal Volume: 12 Journal Issue: 4; Journal ID: ISSN 1932-6203
Publisher:
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
02 PETROLEUM; 37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY

Citation Formats

Stringfellow, William T., Camarillo, Mary Kay, Domen, Jeremy K., Shonkoff, Seth B. C., and Senko, ed., John M. Comparison of chemical-use between hydraulic fracturing, acidizing, and routine oil and gas development. United States: N. p., 2017. Web. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0175344.
Stringfellow, William T., Camarillo, Mary Kay, Domen, Jeremy K., Shonkoff, Seth B. C., & Senko, ed., John M. Comparison of chemical-use between hydraulic fracturing, acidizing, and routine oil and gas development. United States. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0175344.
Stringfellow, William T., Camarillo, Mary Kay, Domen, Jeremy K., Shonkoff, Seth B. C., and Senko, ed., John M. Wed . "Comparison of chemical-use between hydraulic fracturing, acidizing, and routine oil and gas development". United States. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0175344.
@article{osti_1352113,
title = {Comparison of chemical-use between hydraulic fracturing, acidizing, and routine oil and gas development},
author = {Stringfellow, William T. and Camarillo, Mary Kay and Domen, Jeremy K. and Shonkoff, Seth B. C. and Senko, ed., John M.},
abstractNote = {The potential hazards and risks associated with well-stimulation in unconventional oil and gas development (hydraulic fracturing, acid fracturing, and matrix acidizing) have been investigated and evaluated and federal and state regulations requiring chemical disclosure for well-stimulation have been implemented as part of an overall risk management strategy for unconventional oil and gas development. Similar evaluations for chemicals used in other routine oil and gas development activities, such as maintenance acidizing, gravel packing, and well drilling, have not been previously conducted, in part due to a lack of reliable information concerning on-field chemical-use. In this study, we compare chemical-use between routine activities and the more closely regulated well-stimulation activities using data collected by the South Coast Air Quality Monitoring District (SCAQMD), which mandates the reporting of both unconventional and routine on-field chemical-use for parts of Southern California. Analysis of this data shows that there is significant overlap in chemical-use between so-called unconventional activities and routine activities conducted for well maintenance, well-completion, or rework. A comparison within the SCAQMD shows a significant overlap between both types and amounts of chemicals used for well-stimulation treatments included under State mandatory-disclosure regulations and routine treatments that are not included under State regulations. A comparison between SCAQMD chemical-use for routine treatments and state-wide chemical-use for hydraulic fracturing also showed close similarity in chemical-use between activities covered under chemical disclosure requirements (e.g. hydraulic fracturing) and many other oil and gas field activities. The results of this study indicate regulations and risk assessments focused exclusively on chemicals used in well-stimulation activities may underestimate potential hazard or risk from overall oil field chemical-use.},
doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0175344},
journal = {PLoS ONE},
number = 4,
volume = 12,
place = {United States},
year = {2017},
month = {4}
}

Journal Article:
Free Publicly Available Full Text
Publisher's Version of Record
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175344

Save / Share:

Works referenced in this record:

Physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of compounds used in hydraulic fracturing
journal, June 2014


Recovery rates, enhanced oil recovery and technological limits
journal, January 2014

  • Muggeridge, Ann; Cockin, Andrew; Webb, Kevin
  • Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, Vol. 372, Issue 2006
  • DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2012.0320

Chemical Treatments and Usage in Offshore Oil and Gas Production Systems
journal, May 1992

  • Hudgins, C. M.
  • Journal of Petroleum Technology, Vol. 44, Issue 05
  • DOI: 10.2118/22477-PA

Desalination and Reuse of High-Salinity Shale Gas Produced Water: Drivers, Technologies, and Future Directions
journal, August 2013

  • Shaffer, Devin L.; Arias Chavez, Laura H.; Ben-Sasson, Moshe
  • Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 47, Issue 17
  • DOI: 10.1021/es401966e

Chemical Use in North Sea Oil and Gas E&P
journal, January 1994

  • Hudgins, Charles M.
  • Journal of Petroleum Technology, Vol. 46, Issue 01
  • DOI: 10.2118/24106-PA

Physical-chemical evaluation of hydraulic fracturing chemicals in the context of produced water treatment
journal, December 2016

  • Camarillo, Mary Kay; Domen, Jeremy K.; Stringfellow, William T.
  • Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 183
  • DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.08.065

Identifying chemicals of concern in hydraulic fracturing fluids used for oil production
journal, January 2017


A Critical Review of the Risks to Water Resources from Unconventional Shale Gas Development and Hydraulic Fracturing in the United States
journal, March 2014

  • Vengosh, Avner; Jackson, Robert B.; Warner, Nathaniel
  • Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 48, Issue 15
  • DOI: 10.1021/es405118y

Toxicity of acidization fluids used in California oil exploration
journal, February 2016

  • Abdullah, Khadeeja; Malloy, Timothy; Stenstrom, Michael K.
  • Toxicological & Environmental Chemistry, Vol. 99, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.1080/02772248.2016.1160285

Water resource impacts during unconventional shale gas development: The Pennsylvania experience
journal, June 2014

  • Brantley, Susan L.; Yoxtheimer, Dave; Arjmand, Sina
  • International Journal of Coal Geology, Vol. 126
  • DOI: 10.1016/j.coal.2013.12.017

Biocides in Hydraulic Fracturing Fluids: A Critical Review of Their Usage, Mobility, Degradation, and Toxicity
journal, December 2014

  • Kahrilas, Genevieve A.; Blotevogel, Jens; Stewart, Philip S.
  • Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 49, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.1021/es503724k