Turning Proven Reserves of “Potential Production” numbers on their heads is the purpose of this blog as the NEXUS of water and energy head in the direction of a collision course?
Allen Gilmer posted on his LinkedIn this graphic for crude oil. This lavish attitude of endless oil clashes with the “keep it in the ground” campaigns and probably does NOT account for the stress in the water supply/availability NEXUS for energy production because a 2-14 Colorado State research project entitled
“U.S. Perspective on the Water-Energy-Food Nexus
Colorado Water Institute Information Series No. 116″
has section 8.1. …“Lack of scientific data, information, and literature
The main data gaps in the water sector relate to groundwater and recycled water. There is an absence of enough data about actual groundwater use, which has led to inaccurate energy requirement data for groundwater extractions . In addition, the end uses and volumes of recycled water are not well documented nationally, and there is no inventory of water recycling plants and their capacity . Among all states, California and Florida are the only ones that publish reports on their reclaimed water use. The U.S. Geological Survey’s 1995 report is the last comprehensive survey of reclaimed water reuse .
In comparison with data availability on water resources per se, the lack of data about the effects of the energy sector on water resources is more substantial. Some of the main gaps in data availability include :
- Te long term effects of coal mining, especially on groundwater, are not yet fully understood; • There is not enough per-reviewed literature analyzing effects of natural gas extraction on water and environment;
- There is little understanding about the impacts of new technologies and the exploration of new energy deposits;
- The majority of documents evaluating the impacts of oil and natural gas extraction and processing are now outdated due to the development of unconventional oil and natural gas sources and rapid change in technologies;
- Uranium mining, especially in-situ leaching, has not received enough academic attention
- There is a need for federal quantitative data on biofuel production water consumption;
- There are high uncertainties associated with the precision of historical data on average annual rate of water withdrawals for thermoelectric generation ;
- There is no comprehensive data on nuclear power plants water use as they were exempted from reporting their water use to the EIA since 2002 ;
- False water use reporting from water-cooled natural gas and coal power plants and no data about nuclear plants water use has left 27% of all freshwater withdrawals and 24% of all freshwater consumption unaccounted for . Most information about the water intensity of oil and natural gas extraction and processing are reported by industry, and federal regulation exempts declaration of some chemicals used in the process. Gleick’s work in 1994 , which is based on data from the 1970s and 1980s, is the main source of data for the majority of the literature discussing the efects of coal, natural gas, oil, and uranium on water [66, 71, 153]. Te lack of comprehensive information on the energy sector’s water use has created an incomplete picture of the impacts this sector has on water resources. Te policymakers need more accurate data to regulate operations and development of these resources.
8.2. Policy and Governance Policy barriers are among the main challenges to moving toward a nexus approach.
National water policy choices have to find the tradeoff between environmental sustainability and economic affordability. For this purpose, governments and policy designers should find ways to encourage synergies among different sectors and implement innovations that accelerate nexus security. Some existing policy gaps and shortcomings are discussed below.
Federal and state supports, such as state revolving funds for wastewater treatment, loan and grant programs of the USDA’s Rural Utilities Service, and the Community Development Block Grants from the Department of Housing and Urban Development, undermine incentives for water and wastewater services to make cost-effective decisions ; the lack of regulatory requirements and government funding has resulted in the fact that utilities wait until direct and indirect costs become unbearable before they rehabilitate water pipeline; the lack of federal legislation for wastewater recycling has substantially slowed its development down, even though the development of recycled water is very promising; promotion of water-recycling projects is affected by water rights laws; specific requirements for treatment or monitoring for recycling have not been stated in the Safe Drinking Water Act ; the only guideline on non-potable water reuse, documented by the U.S. EPA , is partially based on a review and evaluation of current state regulations, not on rigorous risk assessment methodology [40, 155]; hydraulic fracturing was exempted under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act, creating substantial uncertainties associated with the type of chemicals used in the process and therefore their impact on water and the environment.
A set of regulations for the oil and natural gas industries was issued by the U.S. EPA in 2012. These regulations were under the Clean Air Act and addressed emissions, leaks and spills . However, more Background Paper 145 regulations are demanded under the Safe Drinking Water Act to address pumping chemicals underground . For the fracking industry, a Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemical Act was proposed in Congress twice in 2009 and 2011, but it was never passed”.
F U R T H E R M O R E…….
“No water, no energy. No energy, no water.”