Characteristics of oil based muds and influence on the environment

• Autorzy: Jamrozik A. , Protasova E. , Gonet A. , Bilstad T. , Żurek R.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.7494/drill.2016.33.4.681

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Oil based muds (OBM) are highly important in well drilling. Water based muds (WBM) and synthetic based muds are not providing sufficient qualities in fulfilling all of the functions of OBM. OBMs ensure more efficient drilling but also disadvantages such as higher initial cost, more stringent pollution controls and reduced effectiveness of some logging tools. Expenses for mud are reaching 10–15% of total well cost. However, high costs are still low compared to expenses for corrective measures in the case of using mud with poor properties, which could lead to drilling disruption as well as excessive time and cost. OBM and cuttings are saturated with toxic compounds and if discharging to sea poses ecological threats. Perhaps the most hazardous oil component for aquatic organisms are low-boiling aromatics, which consist of benzenes and naphthalenes both soluble in water. Additionally, the higher-boiling aromatic fractions are of high environmental interest due to their persistence in sediments, leading to enzyme induction, cellular dysfunctions, genetic alterations, and chronic effects on organisms. There is a difference in volume of generated waste between using water- and oil-based muds. WBM produces 7,000–13,000 bbl of waste per well. Depending on well depth and diameter 1,400–2,800 bbl are drill cuttings. OBM generates mush less waste as the mud is usually recycled and only drill cuttings with volumes of 2,000–8,000 bbl per well need treatment prior discharge. This paper discusses the hazardous effect of toxic compounds in OBM and evaluates the efficiency of different OBM treatment towards zero discharge.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

oil based muds; drilling waste; toxicity

• Wydawca: AGH University of Science and Technology Press
• Czasopismo: AGH Drilling, Oil, Gas
• Rocznik: 2016
• Tom: Vol. 33, no. 4
• Strony: 681--691
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 37 poz., rys., tab., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Jamrozik A.

• AGH University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Drilling, Oil and Gas, Krakow, Poland

autor

Protasova E.

• University in Stavanger, Faculty of Science and Technology, Stavander, Norway

autor

Gonet A.

• AGH University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Drilling, Oil and Gas, Krakow, Poland

autor

Bilstad T.

• University in Stavanger, Faculty of Science and Technology, Stavander, Norway

autor

Żurek R.

• Institute of Nature Conservation, Polish Academy of Science, Krakow, Poland

Bibliografia

• [1] SPE: Drilling Fluids, in: Petroleum Engineering Handbook. USA, 2006, pp. 112–113.
• [2] Friedheim J., Candler J.: The base fluid dilemma: what can we use and where can we use it?. Texas, USA, 2008.
• [3] Fadairo A. et al.: New Technologies in the Oil and Gas Industry,2012.
• [4] King Petroleum Service Ltd.: Introduction to well engineering. Drilling fluids, 2009. http://www.kingpetroleum.co.uk/training/wellEngHandout/training_chap09.php#&panel1-1.
• [5] Schonacher D. et al.: Meeting Zero Discharge Requirements in the Gulf of Mexico Using a Unique Cuttings Transport System. San Antonio, Texas, 2003.
• [6] Orszulik S.: Environmental technology in the oil industry. UK: Springer, 2016, p. 112.
• [7] SINTEF: Toxicity of drilling discharges. ERMS Report, 2006.
• [8] DACC: An industrial recommended practice – IRP 14: Non Water Based Drilling Fluid, vol. 14, 2014.
• [9] Drilling Fluid Processing. Handbook, Elsevier, 2005.
• [10] OGP: Environmental aspects of the use and disposal of non-aqueous drilling fluids associated with off shore oil & gas operations, 2003. http://www.ogp.org.uk/pubs/342.pdf [Access 28.03.2016].
• [11] Norwegian Oil and Gas Association. Environmental Report. Facts and development trends, 2015.
• [12] Oil & Gas UK: Activity Survey, 2015.
• [13] Oil & Gas UK: Economic Report, 2015.
• [14] Burke C.J., Veil J.: Synthetic-based drilling fluids have many environmental pluses. Oil & Gas Journal, 1995.
• [15] OSPAR Commission: Best Available Techniques (BAT) and Best Environmental Practice (BEP), 2015. http://www.ospar.org/work-areas/rsc/bat-bep [Access 16.04.2016].
• [16] SCOMI Group: The Extractor Cutting Dryers, 2013. http://www.scomigroup.com.my/core/DWM/pdf/treatmentDisposal/Extractor_Cuttings_Dryer_1208.pdf [Access 30.03.2016].
• [17] Halliburton: Drilling waste management. Vertical cuttings dryer and centrifuge, Halliburton, 2014. http://www.halliburton.com/public/bar/contents/Data_Sheets/web/Sales_Data_Sheets/H010844.pdf [Access 20.04.2016].
• [18] Stantec: Cuttings treatment technology evaluation. Report 166, July 2009. http://www.esrfunds.org/pdf/166.pdf [Access 19.04.2016].
• [19] Aquateam COWI: Characterising thermal treated OBM drill cuttings. Sampling, characterisation, environmental analysis and risk assessment of off shore discharges, 2014. https://www.norskoljeoggass.no/Global/NOROG-%20TCC%20treatment%20of%20OBM%20cuttings%20Final%20English%20version%20of%20report-July%202014.pdf [Access 9.03.2016].
• [20] Hara C.: Study of treated and untreated oil-based drilling waste exposure in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) using a biomarker approach: EROD and oxidative stress parameters, Stavanger, Norway, 2014.
• [21] Rozporządzenie Ministra Środowiska z dnia 9 września 2002 r. w sprawie standardów jakości gleby oraz standardów jakości ziemi. Dz.U. 2002, nr 165, poz. 1359.
• [22] OGP: Aromatics in produced water: occurrence, fate and effect and treatment, 2002.
• [23] IADC: Drilling Manual, 2000. http://210.31.208.121/jpkc/zuanjing/down /201042015 43973499.pdf [Access 30.03.2016].
• [24] Macdonald C., Lockhart L., Gilman A.: Effect of oil and gas activities on the environment and human health, in: AMAP Assesment 2007: Oil and Gas Activities in the Arctic; Volume 2. Oslo 2007, pp. 5.1–5.139.
• [25] Jamrozik A., Gonet A., Fijał J., Terpiłowski K., Czekaj L.: Analysis of waste mud stability. AGH Drilling, Oil, Gas, vol. 31, no. 1,2014, pp. 25–38.
• [26] Health & Safety Executive: Drilling fluids composition and use withing the UK Off -shore drilling industry. Off shore Technology Report OTO 199 089, 2000.
• [27] OSPAR: Background document on polycyclicaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), 2009. http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/publications/p00399/p00399_pahs%20up-date.pdf [Access 20.01.2015].
• [28] ATSDR: Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs), 2013. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/csem.asp?csem=13&po=8 [Access 20.01.2015].
• [29] Leusch F., Bartkow M.: A short primer on benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes (BTEX) in the environment and in hydraulic fracturing fluids, 2010.
• [30] OSPAR: Report on discharges, spills and emissions from off shore oil and gas installations. OSPAR Commission, 2015.
• [31] Oil & Gas UK: The statutory regime, 2014. http://oilandgasukenvironmentallegisla-tion.co.uk/contents/pages/statutory.htm [Access 17.04.2016].
• [32] ProSep: CTour process, 2014. http://prosep.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/CTour--Tech nology-Process-Letter.pdf [Access 16.04.2016].
• [33] Statoil: Annual Report 2011. Water management in Statoil, 2011. http://www.statoil.com/annualReport2011/en/Sustainability/ClimateAndEnvironment/Pages/WaterMan-agementInStatoil.aspx [Access 16.04.2016].
• [34] EPA: Drinking water standards and health advisories table, 2007. https://www3.epa.gov/region9/water/drinking/fi les/dwsha_0607.pdf [Access 18.04.2016].
• [35] Alberta Energy Regulator: Directive 050. Drilling Waste Management, 6 April 2016. https://www.aer.ca/documents/directives/Directive050.pdf [Access 18.04.2016].
• [36] IOGP: Environmental performance indicators – Data 2013e, 2014.
• [37] International Association of Drilling Contractors: IADC Drilling manual,Houston 2000.

Uwagi

EN

The research leading to these results has received funding from the Polish-Norwegian Research Programme operated by the National Centre for Research and Development under the Norwegian Financial Mechanism 2009–2014 in the frame of Project Contract No. Pol-Nor/200375/58/201