1887

Abstract

Summary

The research is focused on determining the technical performance of membranes for treating and reinjecting produced water (PW). Ionic composition of pre-treated PW containing 90,000 ppm total dissolved solids (TDS) is manipulated by membrane separation and reinjected as smart water in carbonate and sandstone reservoirs. Nanofiltration (NF) membranes coupled with reverse osmosis (RO) membranes are tested in this research. TDS of less than 5,000 ppm with negligible divalent ions is defined as Smart Water for sandstone reservoirs. High divalent ion concentrations with TDS typically above 10,000 ppm compose Smart Water for carbonate reservoirs.

The performance of NF membranes at different pH of PW is evaluated at various pressures. An economic analysis is performed for different combinations of membranes with TDS of 90,000 ppm as reference. A combination of two NF membranes are used to produce Smart Water for carbonate reservoirs. The power consumption is calculated at 0.37 kWh/m3. PW reinjection in sandstones with TDS of 5,000 ppm require either the use of permeate from RO or supplying fresh water by other means for diluting permeate from NF. A power consumption of 14.8 kWh/m3 is calculated for the combination of two NF membranes and RO for Smart Water production for sandstones.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201700296
2017-04-24
2021-10-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Adham, S., Hussain, A., Minier Matar, J. & Gharfeh, S.
    , (2013). Screening of advanced produced water treatment technologies: overview and testing results. s.l., s.n.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Anderson, W. G.
    , 1986. Wettability Literature Survey- Part 1: Rock / Oil / Brine Interactions and the Effects of Core Handling on Wettabilty. Journal of Petroleum Technology.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Anim-Mensah, A. R., Krantz, W. B. & Govind, R.
    , 2008. Studies on polymeric nanofiltration-based water softening and the effect of anion properties on the softening process. European Polymer Journal, pp. 2244–2252.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Austad, T.
    , 2013. Water based EOR in carbonates and Sandstone: New chemical Understanding of the EOR-Potential Using ¨ Smart water¨. In: Enhanced oil recovery field case studies. s.l.:s.n., pp. 301–335.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bandini, S., Drei, J. & Vezzani, D.
    , 2005. The Role of pH and concentration on the ion rejection in polyamide nanofiltration membranes. Journal of Membrane Science, pp. 65–74.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bellona, C., Drewes, J., Xu, P. & Amy, G.
    , 2004. Factors affecting the rejection of organic solutes during NF/RO treatment - a literature review. Water Research, pp. 2795–2809.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bilstad, T., Nair, R. R. & Protasova, E.
    , (2015). American Water Works Association(AWWA). [Online] Available at: http://www.awwa.org/portals/0/files/education/conferences/membrane/mtc16/membrane%20papers/tue08%20papers/03-bilstad%20paper.pdf [Accessed 28.12.2016 Desember 2016].
  8. Bowen, W. R. & Mohammad, A. W.
    , 1998. Diafiltration by Nanofiltration: Prediction and Optimization. AIChE Journal.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Bowen, W. R., Mohammad, A. W. & Hilal, N.
    , 1997. Characterisation of Nanofiltration membranes for predictive purposes- Use of salts, uncharged solutes, atomic force microscopy. Journal of Membrane Science, pp. 91–105.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Cheryan, M.
    , (1998). Ultrafiltration and Microfiltration Handbook. USA: CRC Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Childress, A. & Elimelech, M.
    , 2000. Relating Nanofiltration Membrane Performance to Membrane Charge (Electro kinetic ) Characteristics. Environmental Science and Technology, pp. 3710– 3716.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Collins, K. D.
    , 2006. Ion Hydration: Implications for cellular function, polyelectrolytes, and protein crystallisation. Biophysical Chemistry, pp. 271– 281.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Duhon, H.
    , 2012. Produced water treatment : yesterday, today and tomorrow. SPE, pp. 29–31.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Fathi, J. S., Austad, T. & Strand, S.
    , 2011. Water- Based Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) by ¨Smart Water¨ : Optimal Ionic conposition for EOR in Carbonates. Energy & Fuels.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Fathi, S. J., Austad, T. & Strand, S.
    , 2010. Smart Water¨as a wettability modifier in chalks: The effect of salinity and ionic composition. Energy and Fuels, pp. 2514– 2519.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. , 2012. Water-based Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) by ¨Smart Water¨ in Carbonate Reservoirs. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Fink, J. K.
    , 2012. Enhanced oil recovery. In: Petroleum engineer’s guide to oil field chemicals and fluids. s.l.:s.n., pp. 459–517.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Frenier, W. W. & Ziauddin, M.
    , (2008). Formation, removal,and inhibition of inorganic scale in the oilfield environment. s.l.:Society of Petroleum Engineers.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Gilron, J., Gara, N. & Kedem, O.
    , 2001. Experimental analysis of negative salt rejection in nanofilration membranes. Journal of Membrane Science, 185, pp. 223– 236.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Hilal, N. et al.
    , 2004. A comprehensive review of nanofiltration membranes: Treatment, pretreatment, modelling, and atomic force microscopy. Desalination, pp. 281–308.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Hilal, N., Al-Zoubi, H., Darwish, N. & Mohammad, A.
    , 2005. Characterisation of Nanofiltration membranes using atomic force microscopy. Desalination, pp. 187–199.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Hill, G. & Holman, J.
    , (2001). Chemistry in Context, Laboratory Manual. s.l.:s.n.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Hognesen, E. J., Strand, S. & Austad, T.
    , 2005. Waterflooding of preferential oil-wet carbonates: Oil recovery related to reservoir temperature and brine composition. Society of petroleum engineers.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Kreig, H. M., Modise, S. J., Keizer, K. & Neomagus, H. W.
    , 2004. Salt rejection in nanofiltration ofr single and binary salt mixures in veiw of sulphate removal. Desalination, 171, pp. 205–215.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Luo, J. & Yinhua, W.
    , 2013. Effect of pH and salt on nanofiltraton- A critical review. Journal of membrane Science, Volume 438, pp. 18–28.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Manttari, M., Pihlajamaki, A. & Nystrom, M.
    , 2006. Effect of pH on hydrophilicity and charge and their effect on the filtration efficiency of NF membranes at different pH. Journal of Membrane Science, pp. 311–320.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Nair, R. R., Protasova, E., Strand, S. & Bilstad, T.
    , (2016). Reuse of Produced water by Membrane for Enhanced Oil Recovery (SPE-181588-MS). s.l., SPE.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Norwegian Oil and Gas industry
    , (2016). Environmental work by the Oil and Gas Industry- Facts and development trends, s.l.: s.n.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Peeters, J. M., Boom, J. P., Mulder, M. V. & Strathmann, H.
    , 1998. Retention measurements of nanofiltration membranes with electrolyte solutions. Journel of membrane science, 145, pp. 199–209.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Puntervold, T.
    , (2008). Water flooding of carbonate reservoirs - EOR by wettability alteration, s.l.: s.n.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Puntervold, T. & Austad, T.
    , 2007. Injection of seawater and mixtures with produced water into North Sea Chalk Formation: Impact on Wettability, scale formation, and rock mechanics caused by fluid-rock interaction. SPE 111237.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Puntervold, T., Strand, S., Ellouz, R. & Austad, T.
    , 2015. Modified seawater as a smart EOR fluid in chalk. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, pp. 440–443.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Ray, J. P. & Engelhardt, R. F.
    , (1992). Produced Water-Technological/Environmental Issues and Solutions. s.l.:s.n.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Reed, M. & Johnsen, S.
    , (1996). Produced water 2- Environmental Issues and Mitigation Technologies. s.l.:Environmental Science Research (Volume 52).
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Richards, L. A., Richards, B. S., Corry, B. & Schafer, A. I.
    , 2013. Experimental energy barriers to anions transporting through nanofiltration membrane. Environmental Science and Technology,47, pp. 1968–1976.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Ruston, A., Ward, A. S. & Holdich, R. G.
    , (2000). Solid-Liquid Filtration and Separation Technology. Wiley - VCH ed. Germany: s.n.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Schaep, J., Van der Bruggen, B., Vandecasteele, C. & Wilms, D.
    , 1998. Influence of ion size and charge in nanofiltration. Separation and Purification Technology, 14, pp. 155–162.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Schaep, J., Vandecasteele, C., Mohammad, W. & Bowen, R.
    , 2001. Modelling the retention of ionic components for different nanofiltration membranes. Seperation and Purification Technology22–23, pp. 169–179.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Seelenbinder, J. & Mainali, D.
    , (2015). Agilent Microlab Quant Calibration software: Measure oil in Water using Method IP 426, s.l.: Agilent Technologies.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Stosur, G.
    , 2003. EOR: Past, Present, and What the next 25 years may bring. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Tansel, B.
    , 2012. Significance of thermodynamic and physical characteristics on permeation of ions during membrane separation : Hydrated radius, hydration free energy and viscous effects. Separation and Purification Technology86, pp. 119–126.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. , 2014. 3q4e. rtg, pp. 56–67.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. , 2014. Significance. Desalination, pp. 56–78.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Tansel, B. et al.
    , 2005. Significance of hydrated radius and hydration shells on ionic permeability during nanofiltartion in dead end and cross flow modes. Seperation and Purification Technology51, pp. 40–47.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Teixeira, M. R., Rosa, M. J. & Nystrom, M.
    , 2005. The role of membrane charge on nanofiltration performance. Journal of MembraneSscience, 265, pp. 160–166.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Vezzani, D. & Bandini, S.
    , 2002. Donnan equilibrium and dielectric exclusion for characterization of nanofiltration membranes. Desalination, February.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201700296
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201700296
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error