As Texas faces mounting pressure from population growth, prolonged drought, and aging water infrastructure, lawmakers and industry leaders are pushing an ambitious plan to reuse wastewater from fracking operations to help relieve the state’s strained water supply. But the oil and gas industry says it won’t move forward without one critical assurance: legal protection.
House Bill 49, introduced by state Rep. Drew Darby of San Angelo, is at the center of the debate. The bill seeks to shield oil companies, treatment operators, and landowners from legal liability after they sell or transfer treated fracking wastewater, known as produced water, for reuse. That includes water used in agriculture, industrial operations, or possibly released into rivers, lakes, or other natural bodies of water.
“Without legal certainty, companies won’t commit,” said Michael Lozano, public affairs director at the Permian Basin Petroleum Association. “There are millions of barrels of water being treated daily that could replace fresh water, but no one wants to get sued if something goes wrong.”
Texas produces billions of gallons of wastewater annually from its booming oil and gas sector. For every barrel of oil pumped, up to five barrels of produced water are generated. This water, drawn from deep underground, carries a complex mix of heavy metals, salts, hydrocarbons, and other pollutants. Historically, it has been reused for further fracking or injected back underground. But with freshwater becoming more scarce, lawmakers and energy companies are looking for ways to clean and reuse this wastewater for broader applications.
Darby’s bill was approved by the Texas House earlier this year and is awaiting debate in the Senate. If passed, it would mark a major shift in how the state handles oilfield wastewater. But it’s also triggering concern from environmental watchdogs who say Texas regulators don’t yet have the tools or data to ensure it can be done safely.
The Promise and the Risk
Supporters of the bill say the potential benefits are enormous. Treating and reusing produced water could take pressure off freshwater aquifers and rivers, help farmers struggling with irrigation supply, and open a new commercial market for companies that specialize in water treatment.
Companies like Texas Pacific Water Resources have already begun pilot programs to test treatment technologies near Midland, using methods like oxidation with hydrogen peroxide. Industry-funded research through the Texas Produced Water Consortium, established by the Legislature in 2021, has helped identify possible paths forward.
But critics say the science isn’t ready. Produced water can contain hundreds of chemical compounds, many of which are not fully understood or regulated. Some environmental advocates worry that contaminants could escape into water bodies and cause harm to wildlife or public health.
“We’re talking about discharges into rivers that Texans depend on,” said Nichole Saunders, a senior attorney with the Environmental Defense Fund. “Until we know exactly what’s in that water and how to treat it effectively, we’re gambling with public safety.”
Legal Liability and the Heart of the Debate
House Bill 49 attempts to ease those fears by setting liability boundaries. Once an oil company or treatment firm transfers treated produced water for another use, they would no longer be held liable if problems arise—except in cases of gross negligence, intentional misconduct, or failure to follow state and federal treatment laws.
Landowners who treat or sell the water would also be protected from claims related to injury, death, or property damage. The bill directs the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to set rules governing water treatment standards and discharge permits.
Darby says the goal is not to protect bad actors. “Anyone who breaks the law or violates their permit remains fully liable,” he said in a statement. But the bill would eliminate the open-ended risk of lawsuits for companies that follow the rules.
Environmental experts argue the bill goes too far, too fast. Dan Mueller, an engineer and water policy consultant, warns that the state lacks the technical infrastructure to oversee such a large-scale transition. “These pilot programs haven’t been running long enough,” he said. “We don’t know yet if these treatment systems work consistently.”
Mueller says that without stronger financial safeguards, like environmental remediation funds or insurance mandates, the state could end up paying for cleanup if problems arise. “And that means taxpayers are stuck with the bill,” he said.
A Regulatory Tightrope
TCEQ currently oversees all water discharges in the state and is in the process of reviewing permit applications from four companies hoping to release treated produced water into rivers and streams. The agency says it follows both state and federal guidelines and is working closely with the Produced Water Consortium to improve monitoring and oversight.
Still, environmental groups argue the agency lacks critical data. They point out that produced water samples vary wildly depending on the geological formation and extraction method. Some contain radioactive materials or PFAS—so-called “forever chemicals” linked to cancer and reproductive harm.
Saunders believes more time is needed to study the risks. “We’re relying on the strength of our permitting system rather than the actual science,” she said.
Industry Sees Urgency
The oil and gas industry says it cannot afford to wait. Texas oil production continues to break records, particularly in the Permian Basin. With every new well, more water comes up from the ground—water that has to be stored, reused, or disposed of.
Treatment gives producers a new outlet for this waste, potentially turning a costly liability into a commercial asset. But without protection from lawsuits, companies say they’re hesitant to invest in large-scale treatment systems or long-term contracts with agricultural users or industrial buyers.
Lozano said failure to act could hamper production. “This isn’t just about water—it’s about energy security,” he said.
What Happens Next?
It remains unclear when or if the Texas Senate will vote on the bill. Lawmakers are under pressure to address the state’s worsening water crisis, but public resistance to discharging treated oilfield wastewater into rivers may grow as more people learn about the risks.
If the legislation passes, Texas could become the first major oil-producing state to allow widespread reuse of produced water outside the oilfield. Other states, including New Mexico and Colorado, are watching closely.
For now, the debate continues. Lawmakers, scientists, and industry leaders must weigh the promise of a new water source against the risk of environmental damage. And Texans will be left to decide how much faith they place in regulators—and the companies eager to clean up oilfield waste and sell it back to the public.
