State environmental regulators are preparing to take another critical step toward allowing treated oilfield wastewater to be spread on Texas farmland, a proposal that supporters say could help the state’s water supply needs and critics warn could expose communities and agricultural land to contaminants if not treated properly.
As the state faces an impending water supply crisis and state leaders explore different ways to expand the supply, they are looking at the billions of gallons of toxic wastewater produced every year from oil and gas operations.
Recommended Videos
Lawmakers have invested millions of dollars in studying the wastewater generated during oil and gas extraction and learning how to clean it. They’ve directed the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the state’s environmental regulator, to lead the charge in setting water quality guidelines to make reusing produced water possible.
The agency has written proposed rules for how produced water will be regulated. Critics say those rules are not specific enough to make water containing a highly toxic mix of chemicals safe to spray on farmland.
Julie Range, a policy manager with the watchdog organization Commission Shift, said the idea of finding other uses for the wastewater is appealing in principle, particularly in a drought-prone state facing growing water demands, “but the devil’s in the details.”
“There’s just a huge soup of things in this water that makes it tricky to clean, to get rid of all of this messy stuff,” Range said. “You have to go through a lot of different treatment steps, and how clean you get this water will be determined by this rule.”
“TCEQ staff are currently developing a regulatory framework for treated produced water” land application permits, said Laura Lopez, a TCEQ spokesperson.
Each site where the water is to be used will require its own permit with its own evaluations, which may include limits on pollutants before water is released and monitoring and reporting requirements “as necessary to ensure protection of human health and the environment,” she said.
The TCEQ is scheduled to hold a virtual and in-person public hearing on June 15 at 10 a.m., where Texans can comment on the plan. TCEQ staff members will be available to discuss the proposal 30 minutes prior to the hearing. Texans can submit comments online until 11:59 p.m. on June 16.
Here’s what you need to know:
What is produced water and why is it a problem?
Produced water returns to the surface during oil and gas extraction and hydraulic fracturing. It contains a complex mix of contaminants that can include salts, heavy metals, naturally occurring radioactive materials and chemicals added during drilling. Scientists say the exact composition can vary dramatically from one well to another depending on geology and the chemicals used in production.
Because of those contaminants, produced water requires extensive treatment before it can safely be reused.
The oil and gas industry generates enormous quantities of produced water. Researchers estimate that operators produce roughly 20 million barrels of wastewater every day in Texas. Managing that waste stream has become one of the industry’s most persistent environmental and economic challenges.
For decades, the primary solution was underground injection. Operators pumped wastewater into disposal wells, often into geological formations above producing zones. But as wastewater volumes increased, scientists linked large-scale injection to earthquakes in parts of Texas.
In response, operators increasingly shifted disposal practices, including injecting wastewater into deeper formations. But new challenges emerged. In some areas, abandoned or improperly plugged wells began leaking produced water back to the surface or triggering blowouts, which have been linked to wastewater injection.
Why is the state trying to reuse produced water?
Industry groups say that Texas cannot afford to ignore a potential new water source as prolonged and severe drought, population growth and industrial demand strain existing supplies.
Texas communities face severe water shortages “that threaten families, jobs and economic growth” and should evaluate every available source of supply, said Tulsi Oberbeck, Texas Oil & Gas Association’s vice president of government and regulatory affairs.
“The science supporting beneficial reuse of produced water is well-established,” Oberbeck said.
That effort gained momentum during the last legislative session, when lawmakers approved legislation transferring authority over land application permits for treated produced water from the Railroad Commission of Texas, which regulates oil and gas development, to the TCEQ. Experts say the agency now has the responsibility to implement it wisely.
“We’re working toward a solution,” said Dan Mueller, an engineer and produced water consultant who represents the Environmental Defense Fund on the Texas Produced Water Consortium. “Just don’t get ahead of the science and move it too quickly to where you end up creating more problems than you solve.”
What’s the proposed rule?
The proposed rules would determine how clean this water will need to be before it can be applied to agricultural land, used for industrial cooling or other uses.
Under the proposal, facilities that apply produced water would be regulated through an existing wastewater permitting framework and need to follow the same standards as traditionally used for municipal and industrial wastewater facilities. The rules require testing — the kind used for municipal sewage — for salts, nitrate, E. coli, and other bacteria. Applicants would also have to demonstrate through a self-reported technical report that their projects protect groundwater resources and drinking water supplies.
The rules do not prescribe specific treatment technologies and testing for radionuclides, PFAS or “forever chemicals,” heavy metals or other contaminants commonly found in oilfield wastewater.
The agency is proposing that treated produced water cannot be used within 100 feet of streams, rivers and lakes, 150 feet of private water wells and 500 feet of public water wells, potable water storage tanks and surface water treatment plants.
Environmentalists argue the proposed requirements should set up water quality standards specifically for produced water rather than relying largely on existing rules designed for municipal sewage and other industrial wastewater streams.
“That’s probably the biggest red flag… TCEQ took a shortcut,” said Evgenia Spears, a water program coordinator at the environmental organization Sierra Club. “It just cannot fall under the existing program. It has to have specific water quality standards for produced water.”
Michael Lozano, who leads government affairs for the Permian Basin Petroleum Association, said opponents are overlooking advances in treatment technology and the expertise of regulators and scientists studying produced water.
“Produced water is treated to the purpose of its use and is tested for a significant number of constituents to ensure safety and that it is appropriate for its final purpose,” Lozano said.
Oberbeck with TXOGA said TCEQ’s rulemaking process, combined with the agency’s long history of “safe” wastewater regulation, provides a “science-backed permitting framework” for evaluating projects while protecting public health and the environment.
Mueller, the produced water expert, said that questions about how clean the water must be before it is applied to land will likely not be addressed until permits are requested.
Who is studying whether produced water is safe for land application?
The state is supporting research into produced water treatment. The Texas Produced Water Consortium at Texas Tech University and its partners are operating three pilot projects in West Texas to test treatment technologies and evaluate how treated produced water performs under real-world conditions.
One project is testing desalinated produced water on cotton, sorghum, native grasses and guayule, a desert shrub used to produce natural rubber. Researchers are comparing plots irrigated with treated produced water against plots irrigated with local groundwater and plots receiving only rainfall.
Shane Walker, the consortium’s director, said in the first year, plants irrigated with treated produced water grew as well as those irrigated with local groundwater. Results from a water quality analysis showed that the treatment system used to clean the produced water removed more than 99% of salts, organic pollutants and radioactive contaminants from the water.
Researchers are repeating testing this year and monitoring for contamination in soils and plant tissues.
Two additional pilot projects, starting this summer, are examining its use for agricultural irrigation and rangeland restoration while monitoring wildlife impacts, particularly on quail. Results are still months and potentially years away.
But whether treatment technology can reliably remove all the harmful contaminants in produced water remains a subject of intense debate.
Zacariah Hildenbrand, a chemist and a partner at Medusa Analytical, said the state is suffering from paralysis by over-analysis.
“We have the data to support this can be done safely,” he said. “Why it hasn’t happened is just because you have people that are hesitant to change, and I think nobody wants to be associated with a massive mistake.”
Disclosure: The Environmental Defense Fund, Permian Basin Petroleum Association, Texas Oil & Gas Association and Texas Tech University have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.