The Permian Basin and the Eagle Ford Shale are two of the state’s most active shale plays for hydraulic fracturing. However, for an oil production process that requires immense amounts of water, both regions are stricken by drought and are being forced to find new approaches to preserving their freshwater resources.

A study recently released by the Texas Water Journal illustrates how different policies throughout the state have created a patchwork of various rules and stipulations in regards to freshwater use, and suggests that these policies could be made more consistent. 

“We find that policies are inconsistent statewide with great variability from district to district in regulations and potential solutions to the challenge of freshwater us,” the study read.

The Ogallala Aquifer, for example -- which reaches from northern Nebraska down to the Permian Basin and serves Texas agriculture and hydraulic fracturers -- has seen a significant drop in water levels in the past decade. Yet Texas’ portion of the aquifer is regulated by nearly a dozen local authorities, or groundwater conservation districts, each with its own approach to freshwater preservation. Groundwater provides 100 percent of the water used for oil and gas operations in the Permian Basin, according to the study. Yet how the groundwater supplies are managed vary from district to district.

Delegated by the Texas Legislature to protect and manage groundwater resources, these conservation districts play a major role in permitting and distributing underground water resources to farms, municipalities and fracturers alike.

Overall, the state Legislature recognizes the authority of 98 groundwater conservation districts spread across Texas’ nine major aquifers.

The study recommends a cohesive policy to help reduce freshwater use for hydraulic fracturing in order to increase usage of recycled water.

Some of these recommendations include mandate operators to report their water source; levy a fee on users who are disposing produced and used water, which would increase the cost of disposal and make recycling a more viable option; and create tax break incentives to encourage recycling innovation.

“Groundwater conservation districts in the same aquifer have differing policies for freshwater and brackish water, production limits, exporting, and other issues that could create confusion among oil and gas operators,” the study read.

But during a joint hearing before the House of Natural Resources and Energy Committee in February, several Permian Basin production companies outlined how market forces were already pushing the need for water recycling. Midland-based Faskin Oil and Ranch already has eliminated the use of freshwater from its drilling operations on a portion of their property, according to a previous Reporter-Telegram report. 

And Irving-based Pioneer Natural Resources is negotiating deals with the cities of Midland and Odessa to use recycled municipal wastewater in exchange for renovated treatment facilities, according to the same report.

“This is one of those industry-driven things in a lot of respects,” said Railroad Commission Chairwoman Christie Craddick during the joint hearing. “The opportunities with industries doing it themselves without government interference, I think, are the real opportunities. Overregulation is what kills an industry overall.”

But the Water Journal’s study suggests that the use of alternative water supplies, such as brackish water, effluent and recycled produced water, should still be a higher priority. The policy framework, according to the study, should be retooled in order to further encourage alternative water use.

“Technological innovation unlocked shale resources and great economic returns, changing the global energy balance. That same adaptation of technological innovation can address the complex issues associated with production in water scarce regions,” the study read.