Back To The Water Issue In The Bakken -- It's Still Not An Issue -- Those Working Outdoors In The Mud Tend To Use More Water Than Office Workers -- DOE's Argonne National Laboratory -- May 21, 2016

Somehow this research doesn't quite measure up to what I would expect to come out of the Argonne National Laboratory. The laboratory has an incredibly rich nuclear energy history.

Maybe not so much any more if measured by this article in which the laboratory noted that blue collar workers, working in the outdoors, in the mud, tend to use more water on a daily basis than office workers.

The article also fails to note that these workers are not paying for their water on a usage basis; it comes as part of the "hotel" daily or weekly or monthly charge. The study also does not note that even if they did pay by usage, these guys would well afford it, being paid 1.5x, 2x, maybe as much as 5x what an office worker would get paid.

Before you get to deep into the article, this buried deep in the story:

Most of the water used in the North Dakota Bakken comes from Lake Sakakawea. Recent increases in the lake's water use due to population growth and oil development are not currently an issue in terms of continued availability.

Yes, that is correct: water remains a non-issue in the Bakken, and especially now that all the temporary workers have left and fracking has come to a standstill.

But this does take me back to my numerous posts early on with the data showing that water use in the Bakken was negligible compared to the amount released daily by the US Army Corps of Engineers.

It took me about 15 minutes to do that "research," and it cost the taxpayer nothing for my services.

Back to the linked article. The writer talks about three issues:

• water used in initial fracking (the writer doesn't mention that ND is advocating "produced water" for fracking
• freshwater for well maintenance (required for the life of the well)
• personal freshwater use by temporary oil workers

I can't make this stuff up.

This is an incredibly important piece of research however:

• it becomes a footnote in the history of the Bakken; and,
• it pretty much ensures that the Argonne folks won't come back to re-visit this story any time soon.

Hey, by the way, I posted a note on "freshwater for well maintenance" back in 2013. I'll be contacting Argonne to see if I was cited in their research. I don't expect to hear back.

Argonne Laboratory: a 2016 Geico Rock Award nominee?

I still get a kick out of learning that folks working in the mud tend to use more water than office workers.

*********************************

Water May Not Be An Issue In The Bakken, But ...

Lake Mead is setting new records -- but records we don't want to see.  The lake has declined to lowest levels in history.

As of Thursday afternoon, the lake’s level stood at an elevation of about 1,074.6 feet. The federal Bureau of Reclamation, which manages the reservoir and Hoover Dam, projects the level to decline a few feet more to an elevation of about 1,071 feet by the end of June, before the level begins to rise again with releases of water from Lake Powell.

Under the federal guidelines that govern reservoir operations, the Interior Department would declare a shortage if Lake Mead’s level is projected to be below 1,075 feet as of the start of the following year. In its most recent projections, the Bureau of Reclamation calculated the odds of a shortage at 10 percent in 2017, while a higher likelihood – 59 percent – at the start of 2018.

But those estimates will likely change when the bureau releases a new study in August. Rose Davis, a public affairs officer for the Bureau of Reclamation, said if that study indicates the lake’s level is going to be below the threshold as of Dec. 31, a shortage would be declared for 2017.

California has nothing to worry about:

That would lead to significant cutbacks for Arizona and Nevada. California, which holds the most privileged rights to water from the Colorado River, would not face reductions until the reservoir hits a lower trigger point.

Actually my hunch is that if there are significant cutbacks for Phoenix, Tucson, and Las Vegas but not for California, the cities and the states will sue. It would likely end up at the US Supreme Court but based on recent history, if the court remains at 4 - 4 split, it's unlikely to take the case.

The 4 - 4 court has ruled that contracts can be broken by midstream operators/MLPs in bankruptcy proceedings, or something to that effect -- I saw the headline about two weeks ago, but did not read the article. Nothing surprises me any more. Laws and contracts were meant to be broken, I guess.