Scrapping produced water reuse to get Strategic Water Supply Act across finish line

A major change to a bill that would commercialize the treatment and reuse of saltwater resources seems to have swayed more legislators into supporting the effort. The legislation passed its second of three House committees unanimously Saturday.

House Bill 137, known as the Strategic Water Supply Act, would allow the state to dole out money and enter into contracts with entities that treat and reuse brackish water — saline water found in places like underground aquifers. Previously, the legislation would have allowed reuse projects for produced water, a toxic byproduct of oil and gas operations.

But after the bill narrowly passed its first committee, with a Democrat voting against it because of its produced water components, bill sponsors decided to compromise on the legislation: They took out all of its produced water components.

Bill sponsor Rep. Susan Herrera, D-Embudo, told the House Energy, Environment and Natural Resources Committee that New Mexico needs every drop of water it can get as it expects a decreasing water supply in future decades. In a statement Friday, she said the Strategic Water Supply Act is too important to let its produced water provisions cause its failure.

The change swayed some legislators, such as Rep. Miguel García, D-Albuquerque, who said he initially opposed the bill but was sold on it with its changes.

However, Rep. Matthew McQueen, D-Galisteo, who’s been wary of the effort, said he appreciates the work done on the bill, but it doesn’t fix climate change. Brackish water isn’t located “everywhere we need water to be,” he said, and treatment will be expensive.

Brackish water projects are estimated to cost between $3 million and $107 million, according to a November feasibility study from the New Mexico Environment Department and an environmental research organization. The costs are significantly less than those of produced water projects, which would range between $13 million and $667 million.

The state wouldn’t be fronting all those costs. It would have the ability to enter into contracts or award grants for treated brackish water projects, pulling from a $75 million strategic water supply program fund HB137 would create.

“What the state receives in return is saving freshwater resources while providing a new or alternative water resource to projects that align with state goals,” said Rebecca Roose, state infrastructure adviser, in response to McQueen.

New Mexico’s brackish water resources are largely undeveloped due to the high costs as well as a need to construct wells to access the water, according to the feasibility study. Three basins are particularly fruitful for alternative water supply options: the Española Basin in Santa Fe, the Mesilla Basin in southern New Mexico and the Albuquerque Basin.

McQueen also said he’s consistently heard the state isn’t buying and selling water, but still has concerns with how the state would be supporting private entities rather than public entities. Projects could include reusing water for green hydrogen production, data centers and solar panel manufacturing, according to NMED.

He questioned how the public can get involved in the project process, to which Roose said projects require tribal consultation and a community benefit plan.

”I think the opportunities for public input are vague. ... There’s not a clear public role in this process,” McQueen said, still ultimately voting in support of the bill.

The legislation also seeks $28.7 million to continue aquifer mapping. The feasibility study noted the state needs a better characterization of brackish water resources to “understand the treatment processes needed,” so more data collection is necessary.

A lack of sufficient information was the cause for many environmental advocacy organizations still opposing the bill.

“While there is progress in the removal of produced water, the intent of this is purely based in economic development and a pathway to commodify brackish water without proper scientific understanding and appropriate legal framework,” said Julia Bernal, executive director of Pueblo Action Alliance.

Rep. Rod Montoya, R-Farmington, said this isn’t new technology, using processes like reverse osmosis to treat water. About two-thirds of states in the U.S. have at least one desalination plant, according to the NMED feasibility study, with neighboring state Texas having 52 plants — the third-most in the nation.

“If drought conditions persist, this is a good answer for folks who rely on acequias, who rely on ditches all across the state of New Mexico, and especially as I have no idea going forward how much we’re going to be fighting with the state of Texas over water,” Montoya said.

Pursuing produced water reuse later

Herrera said she hopes to revisit produced water legislation next year instead, and Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham “remains committed to advancing research for produced water treatment,” according to a Friday news release.

HB137 also asks for $4 million so New Mexico State University, which has a produced water research consortium, can continue its research and technology development for water reuse projects, both on brackish and produced water.

Since the bill is only focused on brackish water now, Roose said the intent is for the state-funded research to primarily focus on brackish water. McQueen said he’s concerned that the bill doesn’t have language specifying that.

“We’re essentially funding the existing (produced water) research, but we’re sort of-kind of saying, ‘Well, now you should focus on brackish water,’” he said. “My concern would be the … (rationalization) to include produce water because potentially, going in the future, that could be included under this program.”