Water use for fracking in Pennsylvania increased from 2-7 million gallons of water per well in 2008 to 14-39 million gallons of water per well in 2019.
Key Findings
Fracking permanently removes the water from the water cycle by locking it deep underground or contaminating the water with hydrocarbons, radionuclides, and high salt content.
In times of more frequent and long-lasting droughts, stringent regulations around the water used by oil and gas operations are necessary to conserve water resources locally, regionally, and potentially globally.
Water Availability in the United States
As climate change affects the United States, the Northeastern region has been receiving more annual precipitation on average than it did during the twentieth century, resulting in flash flood events. Meanwhile the Western US is receiving less precipitation amid severe drought conditions, resulting in groundwater and surface water depletion. The water shortages in the Western states are partially due to the prior appropriation water law in the West. This dates back to the early 1900s when the prior appropriation doctrine delegated a “first come, first serve” principle around water rights. This principle remains intact legally, and has contributed to the federally mandated water shortage in the Colorado River, threatening the 40 million people that rely on this water.
For reasons like these, discussions around drought and water management in the United States have naturally focused on Western regions where water management efforts have become necessary. Climate change can lead to increased variability in precipitation, meaning there will be more periods of both extreme precipitation and drought. This variability can disrupt the regular weather patterns and water cycle anywhere, impacting the amount of precipitation a region normally receives and its availability.
Ability to Produce Clean Water
Water is a fragile resource challenged by climate change, population growth, changes in land use, and increased water demand. Approximately 74% of total drinking water withdrawals in the US are from surface water sources, such as streams or reservoirs. Clean surface water is valuable for ecological and societal uses, and it is produced when precipitation occurs over natural land cover like forests, grasslands, and wetlands before entering waterways with adequate riparian cover. These catchment areas are called watersheds and they are organized into size classifications labeled with a Hydrologic Unit Code for management purposes.
The US Forest Service and Department of Agriculture created the Forest to Faucet 2.0 (F2F2) tool to assess which watersheds across the US have the most relative importance to the national drinking water supply. This tool assesses public water demand, ability to produce clean water, and projected impacts of watershed threats like climate change, diseases, and wildfires. According to F2F2, watersheds in the Eastern US have the highest importance to surface drinking water and are under the threat of climate change impacts such as drought. This will result in less water for the people and ecosystems downstream, and will further stress water treatment infrastructure.
Droughts in the Northeast
The Northeastern US has a temperate, moist climate with moderate precipitation and historically few annual short-term droughts. However, since the 1980s, drier-than-normal conditions have become more frequent and long-lasting, resulting in economically impactful droughts. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) reports that drought is the leading cause of weather-related crop loss in the Northeast. The long-term drought has become so severe that major rivers in the region have dropped to their lowest levels in local memory, with certain tributaries of the Boston area’s Charles River drying up entirely. Not a single part of Massachusetts or Rhode Island was free of drought in 2022, and extreme drought had overtaken 24.5 percent of Massachusetts and 33.63 percent of Rhode Island.
Water management approaches in upcoming years may be crucial to water security and ecological resilience across the United States. Prolonged drought can deplete groundwater aquifers that many communities rely on for drinking water and irrigation. The frequency, intensity, and duration of drought events are increasing in many areas of the United States, and this pattern is expected to continue and shift outside of historical trends.
Water Resources in Pennsylvania
Of the Northeastern states, Pennsylvania stands out as the most freshwater-rich state. It contains 86,000 miles of streams and rivers, 4,000 lakes, a border to Lake Erie, and six major watersheds. The Allegheny National Forest, along with the two million acres of state forests and the one and a half million acres of state game lands, contribute significantly to the abundance of clean water available to residents and water suppliers in the state.
Despite the rich water resources, Pennsylvania has been facing drought conditions. The PA Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP) has requested that residents voluntarily reduce their water use. As of June, at least 18 public water suppliers in the state have experienced water shortage. The variability of precipitation events brought on by climate change have resulted in a persistent lack of precipitation. The scarce precipitation has reduced stream flows and led to lowered water levels in reservoirs, lakes, and rivers. This will result in reduced water availability, decreased agricultural productivity, increased costs for water treatment and distribution, and reduced revenue from tourism and recreational activities.
The first Pennsylvania State Water Plan was released in 2002, following a six-month consecutive drought in PA, and it aimed to strategize water planning across the state. The most recent State Water Plan, released in January 2023 emphasizes the importance of water planning on a holistic watershed basis, considering both droughts and floods, and placing responsibility on the River Basin Commissions and local governments to manage water ordinances.
One specific goal that is mentioned in the state plan is “Improving the collection, assessment and sharing of reported water use data including consumptive use in projecting future demand trends and managing and accessing water supply and water availability on a watershed scale.”
As explained further in the text, this goal fails to discuss fracking activities as consumptive water use, which we will discuss below.
Fracking Threatens Pennsylvania Water
The Marcellus shale play is a type of shale that spreads across parts of Pennsylvania, New York, West Virginia, Ohio, Maryland, and Virginia. Natural gas extraction and processing from Marcellus shale accelerated in 2008 after advancements in high-volume slick-water hydraulic fracturing technology, commonly known as fracking. The Marcellus shale play was the third-largest unconventional gas producer in the world in 2021. The number of permitted unconventional gas wells in the region as of 2023:
- Pennsylvania: 22,723 wells permitted.
- Ohio: 3,988 wells permitted.
- West Virginia: around 5,386 wells permitted.
In Pennsylvania, freshwater used in the fracking process is typically drawn from surface water sources such as streams and rivers. The Oil & Gas Act of 2012 in Pennsylvania requires operators of hydraulically fractured wells to disclose some chemicals used in the process to a database called FracFocus. It’s important to note that many chemicals, including hazardous ones, are usually left out of the disclosure under protections of trade secrets.
Efforts are being made to make FracFocus less challenging to use, like Open-FF. This is an open-source, public service project that transforms the fracking industry’s FracFocus disclosure data into a usable resource. It uses python code stored at CodeOcean to convert FracFocus data into CSVs, making it easier to decipher and track chemicals used during operations.
FracFocus also includes information on water usage by fracking operators. Between 2008 and 2022, FracFocus received 8,653 well disclosures across the state of Pennsylvania. However, there is a discrepancy between the number of wells that exist (PA DEP claims over 23,000) and the number of wells reported to FracFocus (8,653), suggesting that conclusions drawn from FracFocus data severely underestimate the true impact of fracking.
The withdrawal of surface water for fracking purposes can have a significant impact on the hydrologic regime of nearby streams and rivers. This water is removed permanently from the water cycle, which in turn affects the surrounding ecosystem. This highlights the potential environmental consequences of consuming large amounts of water for fracking operations. These withdrawals undergo permitting processes prior to well development, and one of those is to produce a Water Management Plan.
A Water Management Plan (WMP) is a plan associated with drilling or completing a well in an unconventional formation, as required by the PA DEP. It demonstrates that the withdrawal and use of water sources within Pennsylvania waters protect those sources as required by law and it takes into account contamination, water quantities, and safety practices. In PA, WMP’s are reviewed by their respective River Basin Commission and the PA DEP before fracking operations begin.
Fracking Activity Over Annual Drought Conditions in Pennsylvania
This interactive map looks at annual non-consecutive weeks of drought as well as fracking operations in Pennsylvania.
View the map “Details” tab below in the top right corner to learn more and access the data, or click on the map to explore the dynamic version of this data. Data sources are also listed at the end of this article. In order to turn layers on and off in the map, use the Layers dropdown menu. This tool is only available in Full Screen view. Items will activate in this map dependent on the level of zoom in or out.
View Full Size Map | Updated 7/1/2023 | Map Tutorial
Freshwater Consumption
The US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) noted the danger of freshwater consumption for fracking in 2021. Their review of the effects of fracking on the water cycle revealed that less than 10-30% of injected fluid was recovered as flowback across the Marcellus shale play and of that, less than 1% of flowback is treated and returned to surface water.
Millions of gallons of lost water remain stuck underground, essentially removed from the hydrologic cycle and unable to be processed and recycled. Many studies, including the US EPA study, note that there is scientific evidence that activities in the hydraulic fracturing water cycle can impact the quantity and quality of drinking water resources.
Hydraulic fracturing uses extremely high volumes of water. FracTracker Alliance’s previous review of freshwater use found the range of 2-7 million gallons of water per well in 2008 had increased over the years, to 14-39 million gallons of water per well in 2019. An updated review of FracFocus water use found the annual average volume of freshwater consumed in well development has increased at a rate of 1 million additional gallons of water per well each year.
The following interactive map is intended to view the total amount of water used by fracking operations within each watershed (HUC12) boundary during a chosen year. It’s common practice to use county boundaries to visualize fracking related activities. However, we chose to use natural watershed boundaries, as these reflect the affected ecosystems and better aid management strategy. These fracking operations may have transported water to the site, so it’s important to note that this map does not show how much water was removed from the watersheds. The transparency around water use and trade across all sectors, despite being a shared resource, is an issue that limits the tracking of their use and origin.
Annual Water Volume Used for Fracking in Pennsylvania
This interactive map shows the total volume of water used by fracking operations within watershed (HUC12) boundaries each year in Pennsylvania.
View the map “Details” tab below in the top right corner to learn more and access the data, or click on the map to explore the dynamic version of this data. Data sources are also listed at the end of this article. In order to turn layers on and off in the map, use the Layers dropdown menu. This tool is only available in Full Screen view. Items will activate in this map dependent on the level of zoom in or out.
View Full Size Map | Updated 7/1/2023 | Map Tutorial
The Takeaway
Regionally, fracking water withdrawals from small streams has resulted in 10-20% flow reductions in about half of HUC12 watersheds in the Ohio River Basin. On a global scale, scientists are concerned about freshwater appropriation and overuse. “Conceptually we know that there must be a limit for how much we can disturb the [hydrological] system before we start feeling serious impacts on the Earth system and then, by extension, to humanity,” Miina Porkka, a postdoctoral researcher at the Water and Development Group at Aalto University in Finland, told Mongabay in the article “Beyond boundaries: Earth’s water cycle is being bent to breaking point.”
Water management plans guide water withdrawals during drought or dry conditions and although a basic framework exists, a statewide standard must be developed to further protect small stream flows. In times of more frequent and long-lasting droughts, stringent regulations around the water used by oil and gas operations are necessary to conserve water resources locally, regionally, and potentially globally.
References & Where to Learn More
- Read the next articles in this series:
- Watch the research presentation featuring Kat Wilson, FracTracker Environmental Health Fellow, on the impacts of fracking on surface water in Pennsylvania
Topics in This Article:
Join the Conversation
Stay Informed
FracTracker Newsletter
Support Our Work
FracTracker Alliance helps communicate the risks of oil and gas and petrochemical development to advance just energy alternatives that protect public health, natural resources, and the climate.
By contributing to FracTracker, you are helping to make tangible changes, such as decreasing the number of oil and gas wells in the US, protecting the public from toxic and radioactive chemicals, and stopping petrochemical expansion into vulnerable communities.
Your donations help fund the sourcing and analysis of new data so that we can keep you informed and continually update our resources.
Please donate to FracTracker today as a way to advocate for clean water, clean air, and healthy communities.
What You Should Read Next
Comment Opposing the Southeast Supply Enhancement Project (SSEP) – Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit Application (SAW-2024-01961)
California’s New Oil Wells Average 13.5 Barrels/Day — Far Below State Projections
FracTracker Launches Oil, Gas, and Petrochemical Data Portals
Colorado Operators Increase Chemical Disclosures After Public Pressure, but Major Gaps Remain
Evaluation of Federal Requirements for Plugging Orphaned Oil and Gas Wells: A Missouri Case Study
Methane Matters, but Make Polluters Pay: FracTracker’s Response to Carl Pope
Shell Polymers Monaca: 17.9 Billion Pounds of Emissions and Repeated Violations in Pennsylvania
Plum Borough Rejects Fracking Waste Injection Well After Public Pushback
Power Plant Locations and Unemployment Rates
Pipeline Incidents Are a Daily Occurrence
Environmental Justice Analysis of Oil Extraction in Los Angeles Communities
How Increased Protective Buffer Zones Could Help Protect 3.6 million Pennsylvanians
Regulatory Gaps and Resistance: The Battle Over Fracking in Southern Illinois
Can California Energy Policy Move Past its Contradictions?
Data Gaps: A Critical Examination of Oil and Gas Well Incidents in Ohio
Indigenous Communities’ Fight Against CO2 Pipelines in the Great Plains
Pennsylvania Oil and Gas Industry Trends: Drilled Wells, Violations, Production, and Waste
A Closer Look at Risks of the Appalachian Hydrogen Hub
Falcon Pipeline Criminal Charges Explained
The Importance of Surveying Rural Landowners in North Dakota on Fracking
Exploring the Fallout of Precision Scheduled Rail: A Rail Worker’s Perspective on Precision Scheduled Rail

Not-So-Radical Transparency: An Ineffective and Unnecessary Partnership Between Pennsylvania Governor Shapiro and the Gas Company CNX
California Must Improve Management of Idle Wells
Holes in FracFocus
Mapping PFAS Chemicals Used in Fracking Operations in West Virginia
Chevron’s $2.3 Billion Asset Adjustment Raises Questions Amidst Regulatory Changes in California
Stop Toxic Threat: A Heavy Industrial Zoning Battle
East Palestine Warning: The Growing Threat From Hazardous Waste Storage
Index of Oil and Gas Operator Health in California Shows Risks to State Economy and Taxpayers
Calling for Change: Life on the Fracking Frontlines
On the Wrong Track: Risks to Residents of the Upper Ohio River Valley From Railroad Incidents
Digital Atlas: Exploring Nature and Industry in the Raccoon Creek Watershed
Why Do Houses Keep Exploding in One Pennsylvania Suburb?
FracTracker Alliance Releases Statement Opposing Governor Shapiro’s Agreement With CNX
Oil and Gas Activity Within California Public Health Protection Zones
Assessment of Oil and Gas Well Ownership Transfers in California
Evaluation of the Capacity for Water Recycling for Colorado Oil and Gas Extraction Operations
Evidence Shows Oil and Gas Companies Use PFAS in New Mexico Wells
CalGEM Permit Review Q1 2023: Well Rework Permits Increase by 76% in California
2022 Pipeline Incidents Update: Is Pipeline Safety Achievable?

Testimony On EPA’s Proposed Methane Pollution Standards for the Oil and Gas Industry
Assessment of Rework Permits on Oil Production from Operational Wells Within the 3,200-Foot Public Health Protection Zone
CalGEM Permit Review Q4 2022: Oil Permit Approvals Show Steep Rise Within Protective Buffer Zones
A Contentious Landscape of Pipeline Build-outs in the Eastern US
Major Gas Leak Reveals Risks of Aging Gas Storage Wells in Pennsylvania
Coursing Through Gasland: A Digital Atlas Exploring Natural Gas Development in the Towanda Creek Watershed
Falcon Pipeline Online, Begins Operations Following Violations of Clean Streams Law
Synopsis: Risks to the Greater Columbus Water Supply from Oil and Gas Production
Desalination: The Chemical Industry’s Demand for Water in Texas
Take Action in Support of No New Leases
Carbon Capture and Storage: Developments in the Law of Pore Space in North Dakota
Carbon Capture and Storage: Industry Connections and Community Impacts
Carbon Capture and Storage: Fact or Fiction?
Pipeline Right-of-Ways: Making the Connection between Forest Fragmentation and the Spread of Lyme Disease in Southwestern Pennsylvania
FracTracker Finds Widespread Hydrocarbon Emissions from Active & Idle Oil and Gas Wells and Infrastructure in California
California Regulators Approve More Oil Well Permits Amid a Crisis of Leaking Oil Wells that Should be Plugged
An Insider Take on the Appalachian Hydrogen & CCUS Conference
Does Hydrogen Have a Role in our Energy Future?
Oil and Gas Brine in Ohio
PA Environment Digest Blog: Conventional Oil & Gas Drillers Dispose Of Drill Cuttings By ‘Dusting’
Real Talk on Pipelines
2021 Production from Pennsylvania’s Oil and Gas Wells
Mapping Energy Systems Impacted by the Russia-Ukraine War
Dimock residents working to protect water from a new threat: fracking waste
Implications of a 3,200-foot Setback in California
New Trends in Drilling Permit Approvals Take Shape in CA
Oil and Gas Drilling in California Legislative Districts
New Report: Fracking with “Forever Chemicals” in Colorado
Introducing: FracTracker’s comprehensive new Pennsylvania map!
New Letter from Federal Regulators Regarding how the Falcon has Been Investigated
US Army Corps Muskingum Watershed Plan ignores local concerns of oil and gas effects
Oil and gas companies use a lot of water to extract oil in drought-stricken California
Southeastern Texas Petrochemical Industry Needs 318 Billion Gallons of Water, but the US EPA Says Not So Fast
Chickahominy Pipeline project tries to exploit an apparent regulatory loophole
Map Update on Criminal Charges Facing Mariner East 2 Pipeline
It’s Time to Stop Urban Oil Drilling in Los Angeles
Infrastructure Networks in Texas
California Prisons are Within 2,500’ of Oil and Gas Extraction
New power plant proposal called senseless and wasteful by climate groups
Ongoing Safety Concerns over Shell’s Falcon Pipeline
New Neighborhood Drilling Permits Issued While California Fails to Act on Public Health Rules
The world is watching as bitcoin battle brews in the US
California Oil & Gas Drilling Permits Drop in Response to Decreased Permit Applications to CalGEM
California Denies Well Stimulation Permits
Mapping PFAS “Forever Chemicals” in Oil & Gas Operations
Updated National Energy and Petrochemical Map
Ohio, West Virginia, Pennsylvania Fracking Story Map
Ohio & Fracking Waste: The Case for Better Waste Management
Pennsylvania Conventional Well Map Update
Impacts of 2020 Colonial Pipeline Rupture Continue to Grow
Gas Storage Plan vs. Indigenous Rights in Nova Scotia
Mapping Gathering Lines in Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Trends in fracking waste coming to New York State from Pennsylvania
2021 Pipeline Incidents Update: Safety Record Not Improving
New York State Oil & Gas Well Drilling: Patterns Over Time
Risky Byhalia Connection Pipeline Threatens Tennessee & Mississippi Health, Water Supply
Shell’s Falcon Pipeline Under Investigation for Serious Public Safety Threats
Kern County’s Drafted EIR Will Increase the Burden for Frontline Communities
Pennsylvania’s Waste Disposal Wells – A Tale of Two Datasets
California Oil & Gas Setbacks Recommendations Memo
Oil and Gas Wells on California State Lands
Industrial Impacts in Michigan: A Photo Essay & Story Map
People and Production: Reducing Risk in California Extraction

Documenting emissions from new oil and gas wells in California
FracTracker in the Field: Building a Live Virtual Map
Mapping Gathering Lines in Ohio and West Virginia
The North Dakota Shale Viewer Reimagined: Mapping the Water and Waste Impact
Falcon Pipeline Construction Releases over 250,000 Gallons of Drilling Fluid in Pennsylvania and Ohio
Systematic Racism in Kern County Oil and Gas Permitting Ordinance
Fracking Water Use in Pennsylvania Increases Dramatically
New Yorkers mount resistance against North Brooklyn Pipeline
California, Back in Frack
California Setback Analyses Summary
Air Pollution from Pennsylvania Shale Gas Compressor Stations – REPORT
New York State Oil & Gas Wells – 2020 Update
National Energy and Petrochemical Map
Governor Newsom Must Do More to Address the Cause of Oil Spill Surface Expressions
Oil & Gas Well Permits Issued By Newsom Administration Rival Those Issued Under Gov. Jerry Brown
Pipelines Continue to Catch Fire and Explode
The Hidden Inefficiencies and Environmental Costs of Fracking in Ohio
Fracking in Pennsylvania: Not Worth It
Fracking Threatens Ohio’s Captina Creek Watershed
How State Regulations Hold Us back and What Other Countries are doing about Fracking
New Method for Locating Abandoned Oil and Gas Wells is Tested in New York State
Abandoned Wells in Pennsylvania: We’re Not Doing Enough
The Underlying Politics and Unconventional Well Fundamentals of an Appalachian Storage Hub
Permitting New Oil and Gas Wells Under the Newsom Administration
Mapping the Petrochemical Build-Out Along the Ohio River
Impact of a 2,500′ Oil and Gas Well Setback in California
Production and Location Trends in PA: A Moving Target
The Falcon Public Monitoring Project
Release: The 2019 You Are Here map launches, showing New York’s hurdles to climate leadership
Idle Wells are a Major Risk
Literally Millions of Failing, Abandoned Wells
Wicked Witch of the Waste
The Growing Web of Oil and Gas Pipelines
Unnatural Disasters
Getting Rid of All of that Waste – Increasing Use of Oil and Gas Injection Wells in Pennsylvania
A Disturbing Tale of Diminishing Returns in Ohio
Pennsylvania Drilling Trends in 2018
![]()
216 Franklin St, Suite 400, Johnstown, PA 15901
Phone: +1 (717) 303-0403 | info@fractracker.org
FracTracker Alliance is a 501(c)3 non-profit: Tax identification number: 80-0844297