The debate over the regulation of wastewater discharge from the oil and gas industry in New Mexico has sparked a contentious discussion between state officials, environmental activists, and the public. Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s proposal to reuse the water for alternative energy development has faced significant opposition from concerned citizens, Indigenous groups, and some lawmakers.
The proposal, known as the “Strategic Water Supply,” aimed to purchase natural brackish and oilfield-produced water, treat it through private companies, and then provide the cleaned water to green industries like solar and wind energy and electric vehicle manufacturing. The $500 million investment was touted as a way to strengthen climate resiliency and protect freshwater resources. However, many at the hearing argued against any discharge of treated or untreated produced water, citing concerns over toxicity and contamination.
Members of the New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission listened to testimony from various stakeholders during the hearing, with the majority expressing reservations about the potential risks associated with using produced water. Environmental and Indigenous activists criticized the proposal, labeling it a “false solution” that benefits the oil and gas industry.
Despite the lack of support in the legislature, the state has continued to explore options for the treatment and industrial reuse of produced water. The New Mexico Environment Department collected information on treatment technologies and potential pilot projects under the plan. Mike Hightower, program director of the New Mexico Produced Water Research Consortium, highlighted the safety of treating and using produced water, emphasizing the data available in support of the practice.
New Mexico’s position at the center of the debate is due to the Permian Basin, the nation’s most productive oilfield, which generates significant volumes of wastewater. With intensifying drought and limited storage options, the management of produced water has become a pressing issue for the state. Secretary James Kenney stressed that the proposed reuse of produced water would not be for drinking water or agriculture but could offset freshwater use in energy development projects.
However, public health advocates have raised concerns about the toxicity of produced water, citing potential hazards to human health. The surge in wastewater from the Permian Basin is a consequence of the fracking boom, which extracts oil and gas through hydraulic fracturing. The composition of produced water includes a variety of contaminants, posing risks to human health and the environment.
As the debate continues, the regulation and research surrounding produced water in the Permian Basin will be crucial for addressing water scarcity and protecting public health. Western states are tasked with enforcing regulations under the Clean Water Act, authorizing beneficial reuse of water in arid regions like the West. The need for sustainable water management practices in oil and gas production remains a priority for policymakers, industry stakeholders, and environmental advocates alike. The reuse of produced water outside of oilfields is a topic of ongoing debate and research, with some states already approving limited uses for irrigation, livestock watering, and discharge into waterways. New Mexico is proposing a significant investment in treating and reusing produced water for green energy projects, but some scientists are calling for more federal oversight to ensure public health and environmental protection.
Produced water, a byproduct of oil and gas drilling, contains a complex mixture of chemicals, including naturally occurring radioactive metals, volatile organic compounds, and added chemicals used in drilling fluids. While some studies have found that treated produced water is non-toxic, there are concerns about the lack of toxicity data for many chemicals found in produced water, as well as the potential synergistic effects of exposure to multiple chemicals.
Treatment processes for produced water typically involve multiple steps, including separation of oil and grease, filtration, adsorption, disinfection, and salt removal. However, addressing all components of produced water in a single treatment process can be challenging due to the diverse range of chemicals present. Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as “forever chemicals,” have also been found in produced water, raising additional concerns about contamination and treatment.
Researchers are conducting toxicity studies to better understand the effects of the combined chemicals in produced water on plants and animals, in order to ensure that treated water will not pose risks to human health or the environment. As the use of produced water for non-oilfield purposes continues to expand, it will be important to develop comprehensive treatment processes that address the full range of contaminants present in produced water. In a recent statement, Hightower expressed his hope that toxicity testing for produced water will become the standard practice for all states. This testing process is crucial in ensuring that the water is safe for reuse or disposal. However, Schettler pointed out that the treatment technologies required for cleaning up produced water are currently very energy intensive and expensive. Seth Shonkoff also highlighted the challenge of monitoring all the chemicals in produced water, as there are no affordable off-the-shelf solutions available.
Despite the cost and challenges associated with treatment technologies, Hightower emphasized that with rising disposal costs and stricter regulations, investing in the treatment of produced water is becoming more cost-effective. In fact, the cost of treating Permian produced water is already comparable to disposal costs and is expected to become even more cost-effective in the coming years.
One of the challenges posed by the treatment process is the generation of hazardous waste that needs to be disposed of properly. While some proponents see potential value in the lithium-rich waste, there are concerns about the safe disposal of hazardous waste left after water treatment. Additionally, there is the issue of transporting produced water, with nearly a third of New Mexico’s produced water being transported to Texas for disposal due to stricter permitting requirements in New Mexico.
The reuse potential of treated produced water also raises concerns among environmental advocates, particularly in regions like the San Juan basin, which is rich in cultural resources. Indigenous groups, such as the Navajo Nation and other ancestral Pueblo communities, have expressed concerns about the impact of produced water transport and potential spills on their sacred cultural sites and groundwater.
As New Mexico considers regulations for the discharge of produced water and explores new markets for its reuse, there is a need to balance water conservation efforts with potential risks to human health and the environment. Governor Lujan Grisham’s proposal for the Strategic Water Supply has drawn criticism from some who argue that there are more pressing needs for water conservation and infrastructure improvements.
Ultimately, the debate around produced water reuse highlights the complex challenges faced by states in managing finite water resources amidst competing demands from various sectors. As climate change exacerbates water scarcity issues, finding sustainable solutions for water management becomes increasingly urgent. Public health advocates stress the importance of carefully weighing the risks and benefits of using emerging water sources like treated produced water to ensure the well-being of communities and the environment.
