Oil & Gas — water evidence database

Public guides, reported developments and reviewed evidence. Counts describe this library’s coverage.

Partial: confirmed material onlyPartial coveragePublic snapshot 2026-11-03 19:56 · UTC+8

Related guides: 250
Reported events: 1
Reviewed facts: 0
Published dossiers: 0
Independent sources: 1

Guides are article candidates, events are source-supported reports, and facts are reviewed records. Countries and industries overlap; grouped counts cannot be added into a global total.

Country × industry coverage

Select a cell to inspect its records. Coverage measures published material, never market size, factories or local project volume.

Related guides · more published material

Select a cell to inspect its records. Coverage measures published material, never market size, factories or local project volume.
Country	Textile	Food & Beverage	Chemical Manufacturing	Pharmaceutical Manufacturing	Oil & Gas	Municipal Wastewater
Algeria	1	3	—	1	1	6
Angola	3	3	—	1	1	5
Argentina	1	5	1	1	—	1
Australia	2	4	—	1	1	21
Azerbaijan	—	—	—	1	—	—
Bahrain	1	1	1	1	—	6
Bangladesh	8	1	—	2	—	1
Bolivia	1	—	—	—	—	—
Brazil	1	4	1	1	1	9
Cambodia	2	2	—	1	—	2
Cameroon	2	3	—	1	—	4
Canada	2	5	2	—	—	26
Chile	1	3	—	1	—	1
China	5	1	1	1	—	1
Colombia	1	3	—	—	—	1
Costa Rica	—	1	—	—	—	1
Cyprus	—	—	—	—	—	1
Czech Republic	—	1	—	—	—	2
Denmark	—	2	—	1	—	1
Dominican Republic	1	2	1	—	—	1
Ecuador	1	3	2	1	—	1
Egypt	4	2	—	1	—	8
Ethiopia	2	3	—	1	—	1
Fiji	—	—	—	—	—	1
Finland	—	1	—	—	—	1
France	1	3	1	—	—	4
Germany	1	3	—	2	—	1
Ghana	2	3	—	1	—	6
Greece	—	1	—	—	—	1
Hungary	—	2	—	—	—	—
India	34	17	4	5	—	50
Indonesia	11	6	3	1	—	15
Iran	6	4	5	1	1	8
Iraq	1	3	1	1	2	8
Ireland	—	3	—	—	—	2
Israel	1	1	—	—	—	5
Italy	1	2	—	1	—	3
Ivory Coast	1	1	—	1	—	4
Japan	1	1	1	1	—	1
Jordan	2	1	—	1	—	6
Kazakhstan	1	1	—	1	1	5
Kenya	4	3	—	1	1	3
Kuwait	1	3	3	—	2	7
Malaysia	1	6	—	3	—	6
Mexico	3	4	1	3	—	8
Mongolia	1	1	—	—	—	1
Montenegro	—	1	—	—	—	—
Morocco	6	3	1	1	—	9
Mozambique	3	1	—	1	—	6
Myanmar	1	1	1	1	—	1
Namibia	—	—	—	—	—	1
Nepal	3	2	—	1	—	1
Netherlands	1	2	—	—	—	2
New Zealand	—	2	—	—	—	2
Nigeria	5	4	3	1	1	7
Norway	1	1	—	—	—	2
Oman	2	2	3	1	3	6
Pakistan	11	3	3	—	—	6
Panama	2	4	2	—	—	2
Peru	4	4	—	1	—	1
Philippines	3	2	2	—	—	5
Poland	1	1	—	1	—	3
Portugal	1	2	—	—	—	1
Qatar	2	3	2	1	—	6
Romania	—	1	—	—	—	2
Russia	—	2	1	1	—	1
Rwanda	2	2	1	1	—	3
Saudi Arabia	1	7	4	1	2	15
Senegal	2	1	1	1	—	4
Singapore	1	1	—	1	—	1
South Africa	2	3	—	1	—	13
South Korea	2	1	—	—	—	5
Spain	1	3	—	1	—	2
Sri Lanka	3	2	1	—	—	1
Sweden	1	1	—	1	—	1
Syria	—	—	—	—	—	1
Tajikistan	—	—	—	—	—	1
Tanzania	1	4	—	1	—	1
Thailand	3	7	—	1	—	1
Turkey	4	2	1	1	—	1
Turkmenistan	3	1	—	1	—	3
Uganda	5	5	—	1	—	5
Ukraine	—	—	—	—	—	1
United Arab Emirates	2	3	2	1	1	9
United Kingdom	1	3	1	1	—	20
United States	20	246	374	32	213	64
Uzbekistan	4	1	—	1	—	4
Vietnam	5	3	1	3	—	9

A dash means coverage is unknown or unconnected. A verified zero is shown only when the metric scope is known.

Daily public additions

First verified public appearance in this library, by UTC+8 day. Source publication dates do not create historical growth.

Reported eventsReviewed factsPublished dossiersRelated guides

—10-05

—10-06

—10-07

—10-08

—10-09

—10-10

—10-11

—10-12

—10-13

—10-14

—10-15

10-16

10-17

10-18

10-19

10-20

10-21

10-22

10-23

10-24

10-25

10-26

10-27

10-28

10-29

10-30

10-31

11-01

11-02

11-03

History is accumulating. Missing or failed days remain gaps; a single snapshot cannot establish a trend. Historical baseline and backfill are labelled separately.

Inspect recorded days and changes

Day (UTC+8)	Coverage status	new records	Historical backfill	Revised
2026-10-15	Partial: confirmed material only	—	0	0
2026-10-16	Partial: confirmed material only	2	0	0
2026-10-17	Partial: confirmed material only	2	0	0
2026-10-18	Partial: confirmed material only	3	0	0
2026-10-19	Partial: confirmed material only	2	0	0
2026-10-20	Partial: confirmed material only	3	0	0
2026-10-21	Partial: confirmed material only	3	1	0
2026-10-22	Partial: confirmed material only	5	0	0
2026-10-23	Partial: confirmed material only	2	0	0
2026-10-24	Partial: confirmed material only	1	0	0
2026-10-25	Partial: confirmed material only	1	0	0
2026-10-26	Partial: confirmed material only	1	0	17
2026-10-27	Partial: confirmed material only	1	0	0
2026-10-28	Partial: confirmed material only	5	0	0
2026-10-29	Partial: confirmed material only	3	0	0
2026-10-30	Partial: confirmed material only	6	0	0
2026-10-31	Partial: confirmed material only	3	0	0
2026-11-01	Partial: confirmed material only	1	0	0
2026-11-02	Partial: confirmed material only	2	0	0
2026-11-03	Partial: confirmed material only	4	0	0

Current sources and reviewed facts

Two separate stocks at the published watermark. No historical stock line is reconstructed from article dates.

Current snapshot only

Independent sources12026-11-03 19:56

Reviewed facts02026-11-03 19:56

Record explorer

Inspect the records behind the selected coverage or day. Source links open the original publisher.

Record type	Record	Country	First public verification	Evidence
Guide candidate	How Do Petroleum Plants Near Montgomery Meet Sewer Limits?English source title	United States	2026-11-03 16:00	Open the record for its evidence
Guide candidate	How Do Petroleum Refineries Near San Luis Obispo Meet Sewer Limits?English source title	United States	2026-11-03 16:00	Open the record for its evidence
Guide candidate	DAF vs Clarifier for Petroleum Wastewater in Lockhart (2026)English source title	United States	2026-11-03 16:00	Open the record for its evidence
Guide candidate	How Do Petroleum Plants Near San Antonio Meet Sewer Limits?English source title	United States	2026-11-03 16:00	Open the record for its evidence
Guide candidate	DAF vs. Clarifier for Petroleum Wastewater in 2026English source title	United States	2026-11-02 14:40	Open the record for its evidence
Guide candidate	How Do Petroleum Plants Near Morrilton Meet Pretreatment Limits?English source title	Country scope not reported	2026-11-02 14:40	Open the record for its evidence
Guide candidate	MBR vs Conventional Activated Sludge for Petroleum Wastewater (2026)English source title	United States	2026-11-01 17:33	Open the record for its evidence
Guide candidate	How Petroleum Bulk Plants Meet Sewer Pretreatment Limits in 2026English source title	United States	2026-10-31 15:06	Open the record for its evidence
Guide candidate	MBR vs Conventional Activated Sludge for Petroleum Wastewater in Calera, 2026English source title	United States	2026-10-31 15:06	Open the record for its evidence
Guide candidate	MBR vs Conventional Activated Sludge for Petroleum Wastewater in LeesburgEnglish source title	United States	2026-10-31 15:06	Open the record for its evidence
Guide candidate	How Petroleum Bulk Plants Near Jasper Meet Pretreatment LimitsEnglish source title	United States	2026-10-30 14:38	Open the record for its evidence
Guide candidate	DAF vs. Clarifier for Petroleum Wastewater in Baytown (2026)English source title	Country scope not reported	2026-10-30 14:38	Open the record for its evidence

Related guides

Technical and news articles provide reading paths and candidate associations; they do not prove a local project or reviewed fact.

How Do Petroleum Plants Near Montgomery Meet Sewer Limits?English source title
How Do Petroleum Refineries Near San Luis Obispo Meet Sewer Limits?English source title
DAF vs Clarifier for Petroleum Wastewater in Lockhart (2026)English source title
How Do Petroleum Plants Near San Antonio Meet Sewer Limits?English source title
DAF vs. Clarifier for Petroleum Wastewater in 2026English source title
How Do Petroleum Plants Near Morrilton Meet Pretreatment Limits?English source title
MBR vs Conventional Activated Sludge for Petroleum Wastewater (2026)English source title
How Petroleum Bulk Plants Meet Sewer Pretreatment Limits in 2026English source title
MBR vs Conventional Activated Sludge for Petroleum Wastewater in Calera, 2026English source title
MBR vs Conventional Activated Sludge for Petroleum Wastewater in LeesburgEnglish source title
How Petroleum Bulk Plants Near Jasper Meet Pretreatment LimitsEnglish source title
DAF vs. Clarifier for Petroleum Wastewater in Baytown (2026)English source title
DAF or Clarifier for Petroleum Wastewater in Newark: 2026English source title
DAF or Clarifier for Petroleum Wastewater in Elk City: 2026English source title
DAF vs. Clarifier for Petroleum Wastewater in Mansfield (2026)English source title
How Do Dallas Petroleum Plants Meet 2026 Pretreatment Limits?English source title
How Petroleum Plants Near Somerset Meet Sewer Limits in 2026English source title
DAF or Clarifier for Petroleum Wastewater in Mechanicsburg: 2026English source title
DAF or Clarifier for Petroleum Wastewater in Nazareth: 2026English source title
How Do Petroleum Plants Near Grand Rivers Meet Sewer Limits?English source title
How Do Petroleum Plants Near Tacoma Meet Sewer Limits in 2026?English source title
How Petroleum Bulk Plants Near Long Beach Meet Sewer LimitsEnglish source title
DAF or Clarifier for Petroleum Wastewater in Pasadena, 2026English source title
How Do Petroleum Plants Near Altoona Meet Sewer Limits?English source title

More country-specific reading is available through the country links in the coverage table.

Recent reported developments

Source publication and first public verification are separate dates. Reported developments remain observations.

2026-10-21 13:32Source published

US EPA detailed study of the petroleum refining industry reviewing refinery wastewater discharges and the existing effluent limitations regulations for potential revision.

Inspect original excerpt

1. Introduction This report summarizes information collected and analyzed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as part of a detailed study of the petroleum refining industry. The EPA conducted this study to review discharges from petroleum refineries and to determine whether the current wastewater discharge regulations for these operations should be revised. The EPA promulgated effluent limitations guidelines and standards (ELGs) for the Petroleum Refining Point Source Category in 1974. The ELGs were challenged in the U.S. Court of Appeals; as a result of the litigation, the EPA made revisions and finalized the ELGs on October 18, 1982.

Original source

First public verification: 2026-10-21 15:40

Comparable water samples

Compare only matching parameter, unit, water stage and scope. Individual facility samples never represent a national average or a continuous water-quality trend.

No group of at least two comparable, reviewed samples is available. Read individual evidence in the published dossiers.

Move from evidence to a treatment discussion

Carry the selected country and industry into your enquiry. Confirm influent conditions, discharge destination and operating scope with the engineering team.

Treatment options Discuss your wastewater

Snapshot scope and provenance

Version: 06576ec9365c2caa1bed326a38ef57469f9d5bae37e07e98af9e9e7710091f69
Industry classification version: 2026-10-15.1
Reviewed foundation version: 20261015T105811-e19facf957c3
Observation version: 069adfb40390e0bde3e7e0a165f78e84e98e57b60318e1d8990ca50d9f19d111
Public coverage watermark: 7902430107d4450eba22474ab9fb9d6c0a46ebb915013ff693164de65e8bae9d
Historical baseline cutoff: Not reported

Only caller-frozen public records are counted. Language versions and revisions share a record identity; source versions share the independent source identity.

Without JavaScript, coverage cells open country libraries and day links open complete English daily archives. Guide and original source links remain available. In-page filtering, interactive record details and CSV export require JavaScript.