Produced Water, The Biggest Conversation in the Permian Basin

Research, Permitting, Pilot Testing, Beneficial Reuse Strategies and Priorities

Water in the Desert 2026
Feb. 11 – 4:00 p.m. Session

Produced water was once something oil and gas operators “didn’t want anything to do with,” Amy Hardberger told attendees during Wednesday’s session. “Isn’t it interesting what time will do?”

Hardberger and freshwater ecologist Dr. Scott Collins outlined how produced water — long treated strictly as a waste product — has become one of the most closely watched water issues in West Texas.

Produced water is the mixture that returns to the surface during oil and gas production — water used in hydraulic fracturing combined with formation water from deep underground. Historically, the solution was disposal through deep well injection.

“We have put the water, the mix, the slurry, all of the things down there,” Hardberger said. “Mostly because we didn’t want to interact with it. The cost of treating it — there wasn’t a driver to treat it — and it was in fact considered waste.”

That equation is changing. Injection formations are filling. Seismic activity has increased in some areas. And in the very regions where oil and gas production is highest, freshwater supplies are limited.

“In this area of the world where a lot of the production happens… there’s not a lot of water around,” Hardberger said. That scarcity has prompted a new question: can produced water be treated and beneficially reused?

The Texas Produced Water Consortium

Hardberger and Collins are part of the Texas Produced Water Consortium, a multidisciplinary consortium created by the Texas Legislature and administered by Texas Tech University, with participation from universities, industry representatives and policy experts.

The consortium brings together engineers, hydrologists, ecologists, toxicologists, agricultural scientists and policy specialists to evaluate treatment technologies, environmental impacts and regulatory pathways associated with produced water reuse.

“What we’re funded to do is to provide this information and reports back to the legislature,” Hardberger said. “Can you clean this water? What are the concerns? If we put it here, what are the concerns if we put it there?”

Potential applications range from rangeland restoration and agricultural use to groundwater recharge and surface water discharge. But each raises distinct scientific and regulatory questions.

Permitting and Policy

One early hurdle was determining regulatory authority. Surface water discharge would fall under the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) through Clean Water Act permitting. Land application now also falls under TCEQ oversight, with the agency charged with developing standards.

Hardberger noted that many environmental laws were written at a time when “nobody would’ve thought about putting this on food crops.” Existing irrigation standards focus on pathogens and heavy metals, not necessarily the broader range of constituents found in produced water.

Meanwhile, several discharge permits are already pending before TCEQ, even as long-term research continues.

“One of the biggest challenges,” Hardberger said, “is we have this parallel process where TCEQ is already considering permitting… and the scientists are trying to understand the longitudinal impact.”

Implications for the Pecos River

Collins focused much of his remarks on what treated produced water discharge could mean for the Pecos River.

Globally, he said, rivers are shrinking and becoming saltier. The Pecos exemplifies both trends. Long-term discharge records show declining flows, while total dissolved solids have risen to levels that make survival difficult for aquatic organisms.

“It makes it a really challenging environment,” Collins said.

If treated produced water meets discharge standards and is less saline than the river itself, it could have a dilution effect.

“If you dilute the water and have more flow through the river channel itself, you’re going to improve the suitability of the habitat,” Collins said. That could lead to what he described as “this kind of rewilding of a really, really large landscape-level effect.”

Still, he emphasized caution.

“We’re data driven. We don’t want to make any claims until we actually have the data in hand to do so.”

Hydrologists are modeling potential discharge volumes, locations and timing. Permits cap total discharge amounts, and infrastructure must be built before water is released.

“It’s not gonna be a wall of water,” Collins said, noting that discharge volumes would be capped by permit and phased in over time. But he emphasized that downstream effects — from Orla to Langtry and ultimately to reservoirs and the Gulf — would need to be evaluated.

Uncertainty and Risk

Audience questions highlighted additional concerns: the source of existing salinity in the Pecos, disposal of concentrated waste streams removed during treatment, potential geomorphological impacts from increased flow, and the economic volatility tied to oil production.

“The Pecos River’s hydrology is very tied to the economic, international, and national drivers of oil demand,” Collins said.

Hardberger underscored that point from a policy perspective.

“This does not go on forever,” she said. “It is very much affected by the price of oil.”

That reality raises broader questions about how heavily communities or ecosystems should rely on a water source linked directly to energy markets.

“There’s no magic bullet to this,” Hardberger said. “It’s all about risk mitigation. It’s all about what your priorities are.”

As disposal options narrow and water scarcity deepens across the region, those priorities are coming into sharper focus. Produced water is no longer simply a waste stream — it is now at the center of one of the most consequential water conversations in West Texas.