- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: WSJ Article: America’s Biggest Oil Field Is Turning Into a Pressure Cooker
Posted on 12/29/25 at 3:25 pm to Pax Regis
Posted on 12/29/25 at 3:25 pm to Pax Regis
quote:
Next dumb question - why is it saltwater to start with? Where is this saltwater coming from that they are pumping in - the Gulf?
Water is the universal solvent. Virtually all ions dissolve in water, but especially true for the molecules that make up rock and metal. Because of that, the water dissolves the rock over time and the ions stay in the water until they become over saturated and precipitate out.
Posted on 12/29/25 at 3:25 pm to 777Tiger
Astrophysics on the case of May and I think the bassist has a degree in electrical engineering or something like that.
Posted on 12/29/25 at 3:40 pm to ragincajun03
quote:
Maybe the investors of these data centers would be willing to chip in on the costs to clean up that water if it means they then can use it for "free"?
No indeed not. That water is more expensive to render usable than seawater would be.
Posted on 12/29/25 at 4:01 pm to jnethe1
quote:
So why not use a closed system?
Because running water chillers is more expenaive
Posted on 12/29/25 at 4:04 pm to Penrod
quote:
That water is more expensive to render usable than seawater would be.
So it would be more cost effective to plan, acquire rights, construct, and operate a pipeline from the Pacific Ocean or GOM to West TX/SE NM?
Posted on 12/29/25 at 4:07 pm to ragincajun03
quote:
So it would be more cost effective to plan, acquire rights, construct, and operate a pipeline from the Pacific Ocean or GOM to West TX/SE NM?
Not saying that; just pointing out that that is extraordinarily expensive. They are getting by without either now, and I expect they will continue to rather than de-oil and desalinate produced water.
Posted on 12/29/25 at 4:11 pm to Pax Regis
quote:
How about water?
About 15 years ago we wanted to use river water rather than evaporative cooling for our data center. Similiar to how Waterford 3 worked. We never could get epa approval
Posted on 12/29/25 at 5:47 pm to ragincajun03
Lived in aforementioned permian basin for much of my life.
This is all bullshite scaremongering.
This is all bullshite scaremongering.
Posted on 12/29/25 at 5:52 pm to CastleBravo
quote:
Lived in aforementioned permian basin for much of my life.
This is all bullshite scaremongering.
You lived there so are an expert on the subterranean happenings..?
Posted on 12/29/25 at 5:54 pm to 777Tiger
quote:
doesn't that process create a highly salty, slushy byproduct that is a problem of its own?
Yes, and the higher the chloride content of the stream being treated, the higher percentage of by product produced. You may only be saving 30% of the original stream if it has a very high salt content.
Posted on 12/29/25 at 5:54 pm to ragincajun03
quote:
Maybe the investors of these data centers would be willing to chip in on the costs to clean up that water if it means they then can use it for "free"?
None of those guys got rich paying for a cost they could shift to someone else for free.
Posted on 12/29/25 at 6:01 pm to DavidTheGnome
quote:
You lived there so are an expert on the subterranean happenings..?
Yup. Family and friends are geologists.
Posted on 12/29/25 at 6:01 pm to CastleBravo
quote:
Lived in aforementioned permian basin for much of my life.
This is all bullshite scaremongering.
You gonna tell me there isn’t produced water coming up through cracks in the ground and up old wellbores?
Look, do I think we should just shut down the oilfield over this? Absolutely not. But industry needs to find some additional solutions other than sending all that water back in the ground, because the political/environmental pendulum swings back and forth, and we don’t want to be on the wrong side of it. America as a whole will hurt if we are and will be back to depending on OPEC for our energy needs.
Posted on 12/29/25 at 6:08 pm to jnethe1
quote:
So why not use a closed system?
Ultimately you still need to remove the heat from a closed-loop system somewhere.
The approach temperatures are too low for air-cooled exchangers (think “fin fan” coolers) to really be efficient enough.
Closed loop systems cooled by vapor-compression refrigeration work great, but they have way higher capital, operating, and maintenance costs than evaporative cooling with water.
Posted on 12/29/25 at 6:14 pm to Pax Regis
quote:
The oil then needs to be cooled,
quote:
Isn’t this what heat exchangers are for? Most petrochemical plants use them….. why not datacenters?
Sure, that’s what heat exchangers are for. Most of your heat exchangers for cooling in chemical plants / refineries use water as the cooling medium. The heat is then removed from that water via.. evaporative cooling in cooling towers.
It’s the same thing.
Posted on 12/29/25 at 6:20 pm to ragincajun03
quote:
other than sending all that water back in the ground,
It's salty because it has absorbed ions directly from the rock in the area, so essentially all that is happening is that the salts and chemicals present (for the most part) were already in the ground anyway. Right? I don't suppose they're shipping waste water from the Bakken to Texas and vice versa.
Posted on 12/29/25 at 6:26 pm to ragincajun03
quote:
Maybe the investors of these data centers would be willing to chip in on the costs to clean up that water if it means they then can use it for "free"?
Why would they do that? American voters ain't gonna do jack about it cause it's "economic growth".
Posted on 12/29/25 at 6:42 pm to aTmTexas Dillo
quote:
You're an oil person. Can you give a back of the envelope estimate of how many barrels of water have been injected compared to barrels recovered? I know it's kind of in the clips you provided. How did that water go overpressured? So there's that much compression pressure injected into the ground?
The water isn’t injected into the exact same place.
If you were producing 5 barrels of water for every 1 barrel of oil and you injected that water right back into the same exact well it came out of, then you wouldn’t expect any increase in reservoir pressure over time. However, you’d end up re-extracting the water you just injected instead of the oil you’re trying to extract.
So instead you have to inject it somewhere else. You can go elsewhere in the same formation that you’re producing from, in which case the water (hopefully) helps maintain reservoir pressure over time. That’s called waterflood. But waterflood is tricky, particularly for shale oil production.
In reality, most of the water is being hauled off to dedicated disposal wells. So basically you’ve got producing wells that are depleting reservoir pressure in one place while disposal wells increase reservoir pressure somewhere else.
Posted on 12/29/25 at 6:47 pm to LemmyLives
quote:
I don't suppose they're shipping waste water from the Bakken to Texas and vice versa.
No, but also, while the water to oil cuts in the Bakken can be high, it’s not as high as the Permian. Also, there’s multiples more of production in the Permian than the Bakken.
Posted on 12/29/25 at 6:49 pm to LemmyLives
quote:
It's salty because it has absorbed ions directly from the rock in the area, so essentially all that is happening is that the salts and chemicals present (for the most part) were already in the ground anyway. Right? I don't suppose they're shipping waste water from the Bakken to Texas and vice versa.
Sort of. There are kind of two separate issues at hand.
One issue is the buildup of reservoir pressure where the injection wells are located. This is what’s happening in cases like the saltwater “geyser” described in the OP. That high reservoir pressure causes the water to migrate elsewhere - either into another part of the formation or possibly to the surface, in the case of shallow disposal wells.
This is where the salinity becomes a problem. The salt itself doesn’t create an issue until it migrates somewhere we don’t want large amounts of saltwater. The biggest concerns being the surface (where it can cause ecological issues) and fresh water aquifers (where it can contaminate fresh water supplies).
ETA: There is a separate issue where the saltwater produced by different wells/reservoirs can be incompatible, leading to scale formation. But this is mainly an issue for the injection wells themselves because it causes things to plug up. Incompatible brine isn’t really an issue for the larger population AFAIK.
This post was edited on 12/29/25 at 6:54 pm
Popular
Back to top


0





