This story is published in partnership with Inside Climate News, a nonprofit, independent news organization that covers climate, energy and the environment. Sign up for the ICN newsletter here.
ORLA — Elected officials and industry leaders warn that Texas is at the “precipice” of running out of underground space to dispose of the nearly 1 billion gallons of wastewater that oil and gas production generates every day in the Permian Basin.
The toxic wastewater, known as produced water, is usually injected underground into disposal wells. However, these wells have increased underground pressure, triggering earthquakes and blowouts. In response, the oil industry is now exploring alternatives to treat and reuse produced water.
Experts recently conveyed at a legislative hearing in Austin and a conference in Midland that a lack of disposal space could soon limit oil production in the Permian Basin. This concern is heightened by the fact that the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) is developing new permitting programs for reusing treated produced water.
The agency began accepting permit applications to discharge treated wastewater into rivers in 2024 but has yet to issue any permits. Earlier this year, TCEQ proposed a rule allowing the application of treated produced water on land for irrigation or rangeland restoration.
During public testimony, Commissioner Jim Wright of the Railroad Commission, which regulates oil and gas, emphasized the urgency of providing alternatives to disposal wells. “Continued delay could restrict oil and gas development across the Permian Basin,” he stated during a Texas Senate hearing. “I respectfully urge TCEQ to finalize and issue workable permits as soon as possible.”
As political pressure mounts on TCEQ to issue permits, pilot projects using treated produced water are ongoing. Researchers are still gathering data to publish peer-reviewed papers that will inform the permitting programs. However, advocates question whether regulators are moving too quickly by drafting permits while research continues on the safety of treated produced water and treatment technologies.
TCEQ declined an interview request from Inside Climate News and did not respond to specific questions about the scientific basis of its rulemakings or when it anticipates issuing the first permits for produced water discharges. However, spokesperson Victoria Cann provided a statement emphasizing that TCEQ develops permits unique to each entity’s proposed activities and location, ensuring compliance with Texas Surface Water Quality Standards and protecting drinking water, aquatic life, and other existing uses of the receiving waterway.
Senators Hear Updates in Austin
TCEQ regulates discharges from numerous municipal and industrial sources, but produced water presents a particularly complex waste stream. Fracking companies inject often-toxic chemicals underground to stimulate wells. As a result, produced water returns to the surface alongside extremely salty water that has been trapped for thousands of years in inaccessible underground formations. This wastewater may contain hazardous compounds including bromide, arsenic, strontium, barium, radioactive isotopes, and volatile organic compounds such as benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes.
TCEQ obtained primacy in 2021 from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to permit discharges of treated produced water. During the 2025 legislative session, Texas lawmakers transferred authority to permit land application of treated produced water from the Railroad Commission to TCEQ, which has greater expertise in water quality.
In April, the Texas Produced Water Consortium, a research group funded by the state and based at Texas Tech University, published a report with water quality data from five pilot projects.
A sign on the side of the highway in the Permian Basin advertises fresh water for sale. Fracking requires significant volumes of water to complete wells. Martha Pskowski/Inside Climate News
Recently, the Texas Senate Natural Resources Committee convened in Austin to receive updates from regulators and industry representatives. Michael Lozano of the Permian Basin Petroleum Association testified that companies could soon face a shortage of disposal space. “We’re at this precipice,” he remarked, highlighting the urgent need for new avenues to manage produced water.
State Sen. Kevin Sparks, a Republican from Midland and committee chair, emphasized the necessity for a prompt response from TCEQ, particularly regarding discharges of treated produced water from treatment plants. “Obviously, we want to make sure that the work product that comes out of these plants is acceptable,” he noted, while also stressing that timing is critical.
Not everyone echoed the call for haste. Julie Range, policy manager for the nonprofit organization Commission Shift, cautioned that TCEQ has not yet made public any water quality standards for hazardous compounds in produced water, and that much of the data informing the permitting process remains inaccessible to the public. “Let’s not trade one problem for another by hastily allowing unsafe waste fluids into our soils and into our rivers,” she warned.
A Massive Ice Maker in the Desert
In the Permian Basin, energy companies are advancing treatment technology without waiting for regulatory certainty. The day before the Senate committee hearing, Texas Pacific Water Resources celebrated the opening of a new treatment facility outside the small town of Orla, capable of treating up to 10,000 barrels, or 420,000 gallons, of produced water daily.
Located in the oilfields of Reeves County, near the New Mexico state line, the facility was designed with the region’s seismic response area in mind, where the Railroad Commission has reduced underground injection to mitigate earthquake risks. Texas Pacific anticipates that demand for produced water treatment will be concentrated in these areas.
The company employs freeze desalination technology to treat the raw produced water, which can be significantly saltier than seawater. Adrianne Lopez Billings, who leads research at Texas Pacific Water Resources, described the technology as a “massive ice maker.” When water molecules freeze, the salts are expelled, separating into a brine. About half of the treated produced water will be recoverable for reuse, while the remaining brine still requires underground disposal.
State Sen. Charles Perry, a Republican from Lubbock, commended Texas Pacific for its “risk taking” and investment in the technology. “If they tell me it’s good enough to drink one day, I’ll drink it,” he stated enthusiastically, expressing optimism about the future of treated produced water.
Texas Pacific Water Resources, a subsidiary of Texas Pacific Land Corp., one of the state’s largest landowners, already holds a permit for a pilot project to apply treated produced water onto nearby rangeland. They have recently requested to increase the permitted volume to 2.73 million gallons per day spread across 102 acres.
In 2024, Texas Pacific Water Resources submitted an application to TCEQ to discharge treated produced water into Salt Creek, a tributary of the Pecos River. More than two years later, they are still awaiting approval. Other companies have also applied to discharge treated produced water into the Pecos River watershed, and Lopez Billings hopes for approval of their second draft of the permit by the end of the year.
The Texas Pacific Water Resources facility requires 5.5 megawatts of electricity to power the treatment of produced water. Natural gas micro-turbines on site provide 4 megawatts. Martha Pskowski/Inside Climate News
Lopez Billings has collaborated with scientists at Texas Tech University to explore using treated produced water to irrigate alfalfa at another Texas Pacific facility near Midland. Their peer-reviewed study, published in the journal Irrigation Science shortly before the ribbon-cutting, indicates that irrigating alfalfa with treated produced water “has the potential” to enhance existing irrigation resources. However, the authors caution that results should be considered preliminary due to the study’s limitation to a single growing season, recommending multi-year studies to assess cumulative effects.
Another study published in July in Separation and Purification Technology addressed existing “knowledge gaps,” indicating that short-term laboratory experiments do not adequately reflect operational variability or long-term reliability of treatment technologies under real-world conditions. The authors also noted a “lack of comprehensive water quality characterization and toxicity studies for produced water treatment.”
The Sierra Club Lone Star Chapter, a member of the Texas Produced Water Research Consortium, has called for additional research to determine the necessary level of treatment, establish water quality standards, and assess potential long-term environmental and public health impacts. They argued, “Writing the regulations before robust research can inform them is unreasonable.”
This ongoing uncertainty has sparked public concern over the use of treated produced water outside the oilfields. TCEQ received nearly 450 comments on the proposed land application rule earlier this year, with an analysis from the organization Future Heist revealing that over two-thirds of commenters opposed the draft rule.
Disclosure: Permian Basin Petroleum Association, Sierra Club – Lone Star Chapter, and Texas Tech University have been financial supporters
