Commitments and Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Litigation We are named defendants in several lawsuits and respondents in certain governmental proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. While the outcome of lawsuits or other proceedings against us cannot be predicted with certainty, management does not consider it reasonably possible that a loss resulting from such lawsuits or other proceedings in excess of any amounts accrued has been incurred that is expected to have a material adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity. On March 18, 2011, we filed a lawsuit in the Circuit Court of Union County, Arkansas, asserting claims of professional negligence, breach of contract and other claims against the engineering firm we hired for engineering design, equipment, procurement, advisory, testing and startup services for our El Dorado, Arkansas chemical production facility. The engineering firm disputed our claims and promptly filed a motion to compel the matter to arbitration. After a lengthy procedural dispute in Arkansas state court, arbitration proceedings were initiated on November 15, 2013. Ultimately, on December 16, 2016, the arbitration panel ruled in our favor, declared us as the prevailing party, and awarded us a total net amount of $12.8 million. We received full payment of the $12.8 million final award on January 5, 2017, and this amount was credited to earnings during the first quarter of 2017. From May 2009 to December 2014, EPIC Diving & Marine Services, LLC (“EPIC”), a wholly-owned subsidiary, was the charterer of a dive support vessel from a service provider. At the time of redelivery of the vessel there was a dispute between EPIC and the service provider that was submitted to arbitration in London pursuant to the dispute resolution provision of the charter agreement. Just prior to the scheduled arbitration proceedings in June 2017, EPIC reached a favorable settlement in relation to certain of the service provider's claims against EPIC. EPIC’s dispute with the service provider that a fee was due at the time of redelivery of the vessel proceeded to arbitration on June 20, 2017. On July 6, 2017, the arbitration panel issued its ruling against EPIC, awarding the service provider $3.0 million, plus interest and fees. A net exposure of $2.8 million was accrued and charged to earnings during 2017. Environmental One of our subsidiaries, TETRA Micronutrients, Inc. (TMI), previously owned and operated a production facility located in Fairbury, Nebraska. TMI is subject to an Administrative Order on Consent issued to American Microtrace, Inc. (n/k/a/ TETRA Micronutrients, Inc.) in the proceeding styled In the Matter of American Microtrace Corporation, EPA I.D. No. NED00610550, Respondent, Docket No. VII-98-H-0016, dated September 25, 1998 (the "Consent Order"), with regard to the Fairbury facility. TMI is liable for ongoing environmental monitoring at the Fairbury facility under the Consent Order; however, the current owner of the Fairbury facility is responsible for costs associated with the closure of that facility. While the outcome cannot be predicted with certainty, management does not consider it reasonably possible that a loss in excess of any amounts accrued has been incurred or is expected to have a material adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity. Product Purchase Obligations In the normal course of our Fluids Division operations, we enter into supply agreements with certain manufacturers of various raw materials and finished products. Some of these agreements have terms and conditions that specify a minimum or maximum level of purchases over the term of the agreement. Other agreements require us to purchase the entire output of the raw material or finished product produced by the manufacturer. Our purchase obligations under these agreements apply only with regard to raw materials and finished products that meet specifications set forth in the agreements. We recognize a liability for the purchase of such products at the time we receive them. As of December 31, 2017, the aggregate amount of the fixed and determinable portion of the purchase obligation pursuant to our Fluids Division’s supply agreements was approximately $113.4 million, including $9.5 million during 2018, $9.5 million during 2019, $9.5 million during 2020, $9.5 million during 2021, $9.5 million during 2022, and $66.2 million thereafter, extending through 2029. Amounts purchased under these agreements for each of the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016, and 2015, was $16.1 million, $13.3 million, and $22.0 million, respectively. Other Contingencies During 2011, in connection with the sale of a significant majority of Maritech's oil and gas producing properties, the buyers of the properties assumed the associated decommissioning liabilities pursuant to the purchase and sale agreements. In March 2018, we closed the Maritech Asset Purchase Agreement with Orinoco that provided for the purchase by Orinoco of the Maritech Properties. Also in March 2018, we finalized the Maritech Equity Purchase Agreement with Orinoco, that provided for the purchase by Orinoco of the Maritech Equity Interests. As a result of these transactions, we have effectively exited the businesses of our Offshore Services and Maritech segments and Orinoco assumed all of Maritech's remaining abandonment and decommissioning obligations, For those oil and gas properties Maritech previously operated, the buyers of the properties assumed the financial responsibilities associated with the properties' operations, including abandonment and decommissioning, and generally became the successor operator. Some buyers of these Maritech properties subsequently sold certain of these properties to other buyers who also assumed these financial responsibilities associated with the properties' operations, and these buyers also typically became the successor operator of the properties. To the extent that a buyer of these properties fails to perform the abandonment and decommissioning work required, the previous owner, including Maritech, may be required to perform the abandonment and decommissioning obligation. A significant portion of the decommissioning liabilities that were assumed by the buyers of the Maritech properties in 2011 remains unperformed, and we believe the amounts of these remaining liabilities are significant. We monitor the financial condition of the buyers of these properties from Maritech, and if oil and natural gas pricing levels deteriorate, we expect that one or more of these buyers may be unable to perform the decommissioning work required on the properties acquired from Maritech. Certain oil and gas producing companies that bought Maritech properties are currently experiencing severe financial difficulties. With regard to certain of these properties, Maritech has security in the form of bonds or cash escrows intended to secure the buyers' obligations to perform the decommissioning work. One company that bought, and subsequently sold, Maritech properties filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in August 2015. Maritech and its legal counsel continue to monitor the status of these companies. As of December 31, 2017, we do not consider the likelihood of Maritech becoming liable for decommissioning liabilities on sold properties to be probable.

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Litigation

We are named defendants in several lawsuits and respondents in certain governmental proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. While the outcome of lawsuits or other proceedings against us cannot be predicted with certainty, management does not consider it reasonably possible that a loss resulting from such lawsuits or other proceedings in excess of any amounts accrued has been incurred that is expected to have a material adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity.

On March 18, 2011, we filed a lawsuit in the Circuit Court of Union County, Arkansas, asserting claims of professional negligence, breach of contract and other claims against the engineering firm we hired for engineering design, equipment, procurement, advisory, testing and startup services for our El Dorado, Arkansas chemical production facility. The engineering firm disputed our claims and promptly filed a motion to compel the matter to arbitration. After a lengthy procedural dispute in Arkansas state court, arbitration proceedings were initiated on November 15, 2013. Ultimately, on December 16, 2016, the arbitration panel ruled in our favor, declared us as the prevailing party, and awarded us a total net amount of $12.8 million. We received full payment of the $12.8 million final award on January 5, 2017, and this amount was credited to earnings during the first quarter of 2017.

From May 2009 to December 2014, EPIC Diving & Marine Services, LLC (“EPIC”), a wholly-owned subsidiary, was the charterer of a dive support vessel from a service provider. At the time of redelivery of the vessel there was a dispute between EPIC and the service provider that was submitted to arbitration in London pursuant to the dispute resolution provision of the charter agreement. Just prior to the scheduled arbitration proceedings in June 2017, EPIC reached a favorable settlement in relation to certain of the service provider's claims against EPIC. EPIC’s dispute with the service provider that a fee was due at the time of redelivery of the vessel proceeded to arbitration on June 20, 2017. On July 6, 2017, the arbitration panel issued its ruling against EPIC, awarding the service provider $3.0 million, plus interest and fees. A net exposure of $2.8 million was accrued and charged to earnings during 2017.

Environmental

One of our subsidiaries, TETRA Micronutrients, Inc. (TMI), previously owned and operated a production facility located in Fairbury, Nebraska. TMI is subject to an Administrative Order on Consent issued to American Microtrace, Inc. (n/k/a/ TETRA Micronutrients, Inc.) in the proceeding styled In the Matter of American Microtrace Corporation, EPA I.D. No. NED00610550, Respondent, Docket No. VII-98-H-0016, dated September 25, 1998 (the "Consent Order"), with regard to the Fairbury facility. TMI is liable for ongoing environmental monitoring at the Fairbury facility under the Consent Order; however, the current owner of the Fairbury facility is responsible for costs associated with the closure of that facility. While the outcome cannot be predicted with certainty, management does not consider it reasonably possible that a loss in excess of any amounts accrued has been incurred or is expected to have a material adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity.

Product Purchase Obligations

In the normal course of our Fluids Division operations, we enter into supply agreements with certain manufacturers of various raw materials and finished products. Some of these agreements have terms and conditions that specify a minimum or maximum level of purchases over the term of the agreement. Other agreements require us to purchase the entire output of the raw material or finished product produced by the manufacturer. Our purchase obligations under these agreements apply only with regard to raw materials and finished products that meet specifications set forth in the agreements. We recognize a liability for the purchase of such products at the time we receive them. As of December 31, 2017, the aggregate amount of the fixed and determinable portion of the purchase obligation pursuant to our Fluids Division’s supply agreements was approximately $113.4 million, including $9.5 million during 2018, $9.5 million during 2019, $9.5 million during 2020, $9.5 million during 2021, $9.5 million during 2022, and $66.2 million thereafter, extending through 2029. Amounts purchased under these agreements for each of the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016, and 2015, was $16.1 million, $13.3 million, and $22.0 million, respectively.

Other Contingencies

During 2011, in connection with the sale of a significant majority of Maritech's oil and gas producing properties, the buyers of the properties assumed the associated decommissioning liabilities pursuant to the purchase and sale agreements. In March 2018, we closed the Maritech Asset Purchase Agreement with Orinoco that provided for the purchase by Orinoco of the Maritech Properties. Also in March 2018, we finalized the Maritech Equity Purchase Agreement with Orinoco, that provided for the purchase by Orinoco of the Maritech Equity Interests. As a result of these transactions, we have effectively exited the businesses of our Offshore Services and Maritech segments and Orinoco assumed all of Maritech's remaining abandonment and decommissioning obligations, For those oil and gas properties Maritech previously operated, the buyers of the properties assumed the financial responsibilities associated with the properties' operations, including abandonment and decommissioning, and generally became the successor operator. Some buyers of these Maritech properties subsequently sold certain of these properties to other buyers who also assumed these financial responsibilities associated with the properties' operations, and these buyers also typically became the successor operator of the properties. To the extent that a buyer of these properties fails to perform the abandonment and decommissioning work required, the previous owner, including Maritech, may be required to perform the abandonment and decommissioning obligation. A significant portion of the decommissioning liabilities that were assumed by the buyers of the Maritech properties in 2011 remains unperformed, and we believe the amounts of these remaining liabilities are significant. We monitor the financial condition of the buyers of these properties from Maritech, and if oil and natural gas pricing levels deteriorate, we expect that one or more of these buyers may be unable to perform the decommissioning work required on the properties acquired from Maritech.

Certain oil and gas producing companies that bought Maritech properties are currently experiencing severe financial difficulties. With regard to certain of these properties, Maritech has security in the form of bonds or cash escrows intended to secure the buyers' obligations to perform the decommissioning work. One company that bought, and subsequently sold, Maritech properties filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in August 2015. Maritech and its legal counsel continue to monitor the status of these companies. As of December 31, 2017, we do not consider the likelihood of Maritech becoming liable for decommissioning liabilities on sold properties to be probable.