Well Stimulation Treatment in California: Evaluation of Disclosure Data, May 2015 – October 2019
Skip to main content
eScholarship
Open Access Publications from the University of California

Well Stimulation Treatment in California: Evaluation of Disclosure Data, May 2015 – October 2019

Abstract

In this document, disclosure data from 1,228 well stimulations occurring May 2015 to October 2019 in California are evaluated. This evaluation updates a previous study that was based on 618 well stimulations occurring May 2015 to June 2016 (Stringfellow, W.T., Camarillo, M.K., and Jordan, P. 2017, Status of Well Stimulation in California Since Implementation of SB-4 Regulations, Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA). While the goal of the previous study was to provide a summary of information obtained since passage of California Senate Bill No. 4—Oil and Gas, the goal of the current evaluation is to provide a basis for studying chemical indicators that could potentially be used to detect aquifer contamination. We evaluate chemical indicators is a separate document using the data contained herein as well as data from monitoring wells located within oil fields. Compared with the data used by Stringfellow et al. 2017, the current evaluation is based on a more diverse data set. While the previous study contained data for only two oil fields with more than 30 well stimulations, the current data set contains four oil fields with more than 30 well stimulations, making these data more ideal for comparisons using statistical tests. More producers and a new oil field, Buena Vista Nose, are represented in the current data set. Some well stimulation practices remain relatively unchanged since the previous study. Well stimulation is mostly occurring in Kern County with the exception of a single well stimulation in Orange County. Almost all well stimulations are hydraulic fracturing. The current data set contains two acid fracturing treatments and one matrix acidizing treatment. The median number of chemicals added per well stimulation—excluding water and proppant—was previously 21; the number in the expanded data set is 20. Median water added per well stimulation was previously 89,000 gallons and is now 98,000 gallons. While this water use represents a 10% increase, water use for hydraulic fracturing in California is still lower than water use in other oil and gas fields. Chemical formulations appear to have shifted since the previous study. This shift may be related to a change in the predominant service company. We identified 26 chemicals for which the frequency of use has changed by more than 30%. The total number of chemicals used has also expanded. Previously, 178 unique chemicals were identified as being added to well stimulation fluids. The total number of unique chemicals is now 205. Analytical data available for base and recovered fluids has expanded. The number of base fluid samples has increased from 12 to 35 and the number of recovered fluid samples has increased from 1,078 to 2,166. The expanded data set is more ideal for an evaluation of indicator chemicals and comparisons across different formations. The analytical data for recovered fluid samples indicates that many ions, radioactive constituents, and organics are consistently observed, making these chemicals ideal for consideration as potential indicators of aquifer contamination.

Main Content
For improved accessibility of PDF content, download the file to your device.
Current View