1 / 36

Outline

Outline. Feasibility Permitting / Design Construction / Results Lessons Learned / Benefits Program Update. Feasibility. What is Concentrate/Brine . Reverse osmosis treatment plant produces two products 90% permeate (30-60 mg/L TDS) 10% concentrate (~15,000 mg/L TDS)

tara
Download Presentation

Outline

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Outline • Feasibility • Permitting / Design • Construction / Results • Lessons Learned / Benefits • Program Update

  2. Feasibility

  3. What is Concentrate/Brine • Reverse osmosis treatment plant produces two products • 90% permeate (30-60 mg/L TDS) • 10% concentrate (~15,000 mg/L TDS) • Concentrate stream requires disposal

  4. Concentrate Disposal Options Considered

  5. Feasibility Fatal Flaw Analysis Conducted Prior to Drilling • Potential for impact to Underground Sources of Drinking Water (USDW) • Known subsurface conditions that would preclude the use of an Injection Well • Oil & Gas Well penetrations within a 5 mile radius • Groundwater model to assess hydrogeologic conditions, injection rates, potential pressure buildup, and injectate migration • Environmental Constraints Map – to assess surface environmental conditions

  6. Permitting / Design

  7. TCEQ General Permit Class I Injection Well Defined • Authorization for a Class I injection well to inject nonhazardous brine from a desalination operation or nonhazardous drinking water treatment residuals 

  8. Class I Test Injection Well Permitting / Design Team • SAIC Energy • Subsurface Technology, Inc. • LBG-Guyton Associates • Baer Eng. & Environ. Consulting • CP&Y • San Antonio Testing Laboratory • KFW Surveying

  9. TCEQ General Permit Components • General Permit (NOI) - Over 1,400 pages • General Geology - Area of Interest • Railroad Commission Approval Letter • Well Design Details • Construction Program • Reservoir Mechanics • Waste and Waste Water Management • Well Abandonment Plans • Financial commitment for the plugging of the well was required by TCEQ 60 days prior drilling

  10. SAWS General Permit Sequence for SAWS Desalination Program • Initial Work • Original Notice of Intent (Injection Well No. 1) • Notice of Change (Injection Wells 2-5) • Notice of Change (Open Hole Completion Option) • Recent Work • Notice of Change (construction details for IW 2-3) • Current Work in Progress • Notice of Change (Pre-Injection Facilities) • Notice of Change (Pre-Injection Storage Impoundment)

  11. Class I Test Injection Well Perforated Versus Open Hole Completion

  12. Construction / Results

  13. Class I Test Injection Well Setup

  14. Class I Test Injection Well Contractor Layne Christensen • Central Texas Roads

  15. Class I Test Injection Well Coring (Confining Layer & Edwards Formation) Core Barrels Inner barrel cut prior to sending to Core Lab Del Rio Clay Edwards Formation Core Barrel Bit

  16. Upper Edwards Water Quality Greater than 10,000 mg/L Total Dissolved Solids ??? TDS > 68,000 mg/L Upper Edwards (Person Formation) Regional Dense Member Composite TDS > 90,000 mg/L Lower Edwards (Kainer Formation) Upper Glen Rose Formation

  17. Class I Test Injection Well Edwards Formation Water

  18. Well Construction Carrizo Sand (Fresh Water) Upper Wilcox Clay Injection Tubing Wilcox Sand (Brackish Water) Production Zone ~ 600 ft. Thick Midway Shale Confining Zone ~ 2,360 ft. Thick Navarro Clay Anacacho Limestone Austin Chalk Retrievable Packer Eagle Ford Shale, Buda Limestone, & Del Rio Clay Georgetown Edwards & Upper Glen Rose Limestone Injection Zone ~ 860 ft. Thick

  19. Confining Zone ~2,360 ft. Thick Production vs. Disposal Production Well Injection Well Land Surface Carrizo Sand (Fresh Water) Production Zone ~ 600 ft. Thick Upper Wilcox Clay Midway Shale Wilcox Sand (Brackish Water) TD = 1,600 ft. Navarro Clay Anacacho Limestone Injection Zone ~ 860 ft. Thick Austin Chalk Eagle Ford Shale, Buda Limestone, & Del Rio Clay Georgetown Edwards & Upper Glen Rose Limestone TD = 5,040 ft. Not to Scale

  20. Class I Test Injection Well Coring (What did we Learn?) • Flow Study • Porosity • Confining Zone - Avg. 6% • Injection Zone - Avg. 18% • Permeability • Confining Zone – 0.7 md • Injection Zone - 221 md • Acid Soluble • Mineralogy • U. Edwards – Dolomite • L. Edwards – Calcite - Anhydrite Upper Edwards Formation Lower Edwards Formation

  21. Class I Test Injection Well Injection Well Results • Depth: 5,000 – 5,300 ft • Injection Zone • Edwards Limestone • Upper Glen Rose Limestone • Native Edwards water salinity – 90,000 mg/L TDS • 450 gpm Injection Rate • Two Injection Wells required for BGD Phase I (about 1.1 MGD)

  22. Class I Test Injection Well Project Costs • Total Project Cost: $4.83M • Cost Per Linear Foot: $958

  23. Lessons Learned Benefits

  24. Class I Test Injection Well Lessons Learned from the Test Injection Well • Drilling conditions are known • Upper Edwards Formation is not an Underground Source of Drinking Water (USDW) • Re-position DV tool for second stage of cementing for the protection casing • Acidization will improve well performance

  25. Program Update

  26. SAWS BGD Program • Phase I (2016) • 12 MGD or 13,440 Acre-feet/yr. • Phase II (2021) • 12 MGD or 13,440 Acre-feet/yr. • Phase III (2026) • 6 MGD or 6,720 Acre-feet/yr. • Total • 30 MGD or 33,600 Acre-feet/yr.

  27. RO Treatment Raw Water Blending 12 MGD 10 MGD Product RO 11.11 MGD Calcite Contactor, Degasification, Sodium hydroxide Primary treatment 2 MGD Acid AS 1.11 MGD CF Post treatment 13.11 MGD Concentrate Pre-treatment AS: Anti-scalent CF: Cartridge Filter Concentrate Disposal Well

  28. Program Structure SAWS Program Manager Black & Veatch Corp. Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR) ZachryParsons Water Resources JV Design Sub-Consultants Sub-Contractors - 4 Design Teams - 20 Design Sub-Consultants - 17 SMWB Firms - 21 Local Firms - 12 Construction Packages - Multiple Subcontractors

  29. CMAR Process • Process allows: • Contractor’s input in the design • Engineer’s involvement in construction planning • Qualification based selection • Guaranteed maximum price (GMP) • Pursue SAWS SMWB goals

  30. Remaining Work for Phase I • Additional four production wells • Additional injection well • Reverse Osmosis treatment plant • Pipelines • SCADA and Electrical system

  31. Cost Phase I • Phase I total estimated construction cost is $192.66 million • $/AF: $1,177 / AF

  32. Construction Activities • Construction Manager at Risk (Zachry-Parsons) has been authorized to proceed • Site Civil & Road Construction begins in June • RO Treatment Plant construction to start during 3rd Qtr. 2014

  33. Questions?

More Related