Produced Water Desalination: Science and Solutions

Transcription

1 Produced Water Desalination: Science and Solutions The Environmentally Friendly Drilling Program: Lowering Footprint of Energy Production November, 2011

2 Environmentally Friendly Drilling David B. Burnett Global Petroleum Research Institute Harold Vance Department of Petroleum Engineering Texas A&M University

3 The A&M Program: What We Do Saline Water Injection into Oil and Gas Zones Desalination Gas Oil Surface Water Gas Oil Active Water Drive Production Water Water Disposal Well For more Info see: October 2008Texas A&M Produced Water Treatment

4 Mobile Membrane Testing Unit A Research Unit 50 bbls per day

5 Desalination Methodologies: Comparison of Thermal vs. Membranes

6 Thermal Brine Desalination

7 Reverse Osmosis Definitions (RO) R 1 C P / C F Salt rejection Transmembrane pressure Feed, permeate, reject or concentrate rates Fluxes (volumetric rate/area) Feed Flux: J F = Q F / A F TMP P F 2 P R P P P C y P x C F October 2008Texas A&M Produced Water Treatment

8 TECHNICAL ISSUES Filtration and Reverse Osmosis: Definitions Micro Filtration (MF) ( m) Bacteria, suspended particles Ultrafiltration (UF) ( m) Colloids, macromolecules Nanofiltration (NF) (5e -3-5.e -4 m) Sugars, dyes, divalent salt ppts. Reverse Osmosis (RO) (1.e -4-1e -5 m) Monovalent salts, ionic metals Water October 2008Texas A&M Produced Water Treatment

9 Why Membranes 9 Membranes are designed for colloidal filtration Modern membranes are robust and find wide application in various processes and industries They are energy efficient, small footprint and easy maintenance and use. October 2008Texas A&M Produced Water Treatment

10 Operating Conditions Affecting Output Stream Composition Feedstock solids concentration (ppm) Temperature ph Membrane Type Trans membrane pressure Re-circulation Steps (Separation Efficiency) Feed flow rate October 2008Texas A&M Produced Water Treatment

11 Design of Field Mobile Laboratory

12 All Weather Mobile Unit for Site Treatments (2011) Mobile testing laboratory in South Texas.

13 Analytical Laboratory at A&M

14 Marcellus Shale Brine Re- Use Courtesy Williams Bros. Company Deliverables Identify optimal treatment techniques for ultra-high brine concentrations Provide information to community leaders Status Current field trials in New York A&M Separation Sciences pilot testing new technology Creation of new Analytical Services Roundtable

15

16

17 Characteristics of Field Brine Silurian Formation Well Sample Analyte Result Sample Analyte Result 1 Conductivity 222,000 us/cm ~144,000 TDS (1) 1 Conductivity 222,000 us/cm ~144,000 TDS (1) 1 ph 4.10 SU 1 ph 5.10 SU 1 Turbidity NTU 1 Turbidity NTU 1 Dup. Turbidity NTU 1 Dup. Turbidity NTU 1 TOC as NPOC 68.0 mg/l. 1 TOC as NPOC 68.0 mg/l. 1 Dup. TOC as NPOC 65.5 mg/l. 1 Dup. TOC as NPOC 65.5 mg/l. A,B & C BTEX (avg. from previous Sx s.) < 1.00 mg/l. A,B & C BTEX (avg. from previous Sx s.) < 1.00 mg/l. A,B, & C Oil/Grease (avg. from previous Sx s) mg/l. A,B, & C Oil/Grease (avg. from previous Sx s) mg/l. 1 Ammonia as NH mg/l. 1 Ammonia as NH mg/l. Na 49,809 1 Total Barium mg/l. 1 Total Barium mg/l. 1 Boron 4.00 mg/l. 1 Boron 4.00 mg/l. 1 Calcium as Hardness 46,000 mg/l. 1 Calcium as Hardness 4,600 mg/l.

18 For more Info see:

19

20

21

22 Low Pressure BTEX Removal

23 Oil & Grease Removal

24 Media Filtration 9.22 Polymer Ventures/ABS Cum. Vol., gal Elapsed Time, min. 0.50

25 Field BTEX INFICON Performance Sample No. Process Step BTEX Reading, ppb Benzene Toluene Ehylbenzene Xylene Napthalene Blank STD Test Sample ND S 1 Fld Brine S 78 Field Brine ND ND ND G 79 after Mycelx cartridge ND ND S 80 After ABS Media ND ND ND 0.01 S 81 Before Ceramic Micro filter ND ND S 82 After ceramic micro filter ND ND S 8 After Nano filter ND ND ND ND 0.006

26 Analytical Equipment for BTEX Analysis on Site

27 Solids Removal

28 TSS Removal by Micro-Filter 40 Pressure and Rate Koch Hollow Fiber August 25, 2011 Axis Title :00:00 1:12:00 2:24:00 3:36:00 4:48:00 6:00:00 Axis Title Pressure Injection Rate

29 Suspended Solids - Contd TSS Removal Pall Ceramic Graver Stainless Steel Pall Hollow Fiber TDS Removal Dow NF Before After TSS TSS TSS TSS 1.51

30 Solids Removal by Micro-F 30 Turbidity, NTU Before Micro F Cumulative Throughput, gallons

31

32 High Pressure Membranes and On-Line Sensors

33

34 Nano - Continued Sample No. Analyte Before Membrane After Membrane S-7, S-8 Sufate S-7, S-8 Chlorides by titration 186, ,000 S-60, S-61 Hardness, Ca++ 67,200 51,600 mg/l S-70, S-71 Hardness, Ca++ 210,500 56,000 mg/l S-63 S-44 Ferric - field brine 110 S-70, S-71 Ferric - B/A Type of Membrane Dow N-245 (A) Dow N-245 (A) Hydranautic s

35

36 Field Frac Brine after Three Weeks Treated Un-Treated

37 Representative power costs of desalination of oil field brine Salinity of Feed Brine, tds (ppm) Pre- treatment Power Costs Kw Hr per 1,000 gal. Permeate RO desalination Operating Cost, $ per 1,000 gal. Operating Cost, $ per bbl Contaminated Surface water ~1,500 tds. Gas well produced brine ~ 3,600 tds. $.65 $1.25 $1.90 $0.08 $2.50 $2.00 $4.50 $0.19 Oil well produced brine ~50,000 tds $2.20 $6.00 $8.20 $0.34 Gas well produced brine ~ 35,000 tds $2.00 (est.) $4.20 (est.) $6.20 (est.) $0.26 October 2008Texas A&M Produced Water Treatment

38 Representative Power Costs for Brine Treatment* Samples Date Test DescriptioDuration kw usedost per bbl S 62, S 63 Sept. 2 Running Dow NF (B) $ 0.84 S 58, S 59 2 Sep Koch U F $ S 84, S 85 Sept. 20 media 325 gal. 0.3 $ Koch UF $ 0.14 $ 0.98 * Texas A&M Field Trial, NY September,2011

39 Benefit to Communities Brackish Water Desalination with Re-Use of Concentrate

40 Comparison of Desalinated Produced Water with Municipal Water from College Station. TX

41 Inventory Map of Brackish Ground Water Aquifers in Texas

42 Barnett Shale Well Equivalent to City of 4,000 Population Water Usage Well Operations City Operations(1) Comments Water Usage 10 million gal 18 million gal (3 mo.) 5-6 mm gal frac. 1-2 mm gal well ops. Power Use 7,500 HP 6 MW (8,000 Hp) Avg. SCR rig Solid Waste 43,000 cu ft. (wbm, 7,000 ft well) 55,000 cu.ft 3 mo. Ops. Unit Budget ~$ 2.2 MM ~$1.7 MM 3 mo. Ops. (1) Based on comparison to Andrews TX city budget (pop.9,600) 2008 FY October 2008Texas A&M Produced Water Treatment

43

44 All Weather Mobile Unit for Site Treatments (2011) Mobile testing laboratory in South Texas.

45

46 Business Model for On Site Treatment Brine/oil Membrane Reject Produced brine +$$ Operating cost Weighted brine +$$ Fresh Water +$$ Profit = Income (Sales clean brine + Fresh water + produced water pay -Cost (operating & reject disposal) October 2008Texas A&M Produced Water Treatment

47

48

49

50 For More Information

51 Any Questions?