Skip to Content
Materials ProceedingsMaterials Proceedings
  • Proceeding Paper
  • Open Access

13 October 2023

7 Pages

Toward the Exploitation of Unconventional Heavy Oils: Electrostatic Technologies for the Minimization of Dehydration Cost †

,
and
1
School of Mineral Resources Engineering, Technical University of Crete, GR-73100 Chania, Greece
2
School of Mining and Metallurgical Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, GR-15780 Athens, Greece
3
Department of Mineral Resources Engineering, University of Western Macedonia, GR-50100 Kozani, Greece
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.

Abstract

The growing energy demand has created a special interest in the unconventional reserves of heavy and extra-heavy oil, despite their difficulty both in extraction and separation due to the high specific gravity, high viscosity, low mobility, and high content in asphaltenes and heteroatoms. The study is a comprehensive review of the implemented technologies and emerging techniques for the dehydration of heavy and extra-heavy oils with an °API gravity from 20 to below of 10 and a viscosity between 100 and 10,000 cP. Special focus is given to the electrostatic treatment, due to its versatility of applications and its potential for the further improvement in dehydration efficiency, thus reducing the demand for energy and chemical demulsifiers.

1. Introduction

Despite their characterization as unconventional reserves, heavy, extra-heavy crude oil, and bitumen sum up to almost the same amount as the conventional oil reserves worldwide [1]. Production of these unconventional oils, however, is much more difficult due to their high viscosities (i.e., high resistance to flow), low API gravity (high density), and the presence of pore and pipe fouling components such as asphaltenes and resins.
Heavy oils are defined by an API gravity between 10 and 20 ᵒAPI and a viscosity higher than 100 cP at reservoir conditions. Extra-heavy oils have an API gravity of less than 10 and a viscosity of less than 10,000 cP, whereas bitumens have similar API gravity values to extra-heavy oil while their viscosity is greater than 10,000 cP [2,3].
The dehydration and desalting of heavy and extra-heavy oil are possibly the most crucial treatments in the production process, and they are directly connected to the quality of the extracted oil. Since salts are soluble in the water, a reduction in the water content will reduce the salt content as well. If, however, the salt content of the produced oil remains high, a desalting stage follows the dehydration one, in which fresh water is injected into the oil to extract the remaining salt and then removed through separation.
The main challenges of both dehydration and desalination are related to the effectiveness of the oil–water separation, namely:
  • The small density difference between oil and the produced water;
  • The high oil viscosity where friction impedes the coalescence of water droplets;
  • The high w/o emulsion viscosity, especially in the typical case of heavy oil recovery, which is characterized by high water cuts;
  • The high interfacial tension between oil and water, which is mostly due to the presence of natural surfactants such as asphaltenes, prevents the coalescence of water droplets, and increases emulsion stability.
Consequently, this results in an increased use of process chemicals to remove such surfactants.
A conventional separation train includes first- and second-stage three-phase gravity separators. The outlet from the second-stage separator is introduced to a single-stage (dehydration) or dual-stage (dehydration and desalting) scheme of conventional electrocoalescers, depending on the basic sediment and water (BSW) and salinity specifications [4]. When the water content is high, a Free Water Knockout Drum (FWKD) is introduced before the first stage separator to reduce the excess water. The final oil should contain less than 0.3% of water-in-oil content and 10 lbs per thousand barrels (10 PTB) of total dissolved salts [5]. Electrostatic treatment is used in conjunction with chemical and/or heat treatment to reduce the costs of additives and energy consumption.
The technique aims at reducing the thickness of the thin film that surrounds the droplets and separates them from the continuous oil phase to a point at which it can easily rupture when the droplets come into contact. Interfacial tension is a measure of how easily this film can rupture. With the application of an electric field, the droplet surface must be energized sufficiently to overcome the interfacial tension barrier between adjacent water droplets and induce coalescence [6,7]. The high interfacial tension between water and oil makes the droplets resist deformation, and they do not coalesce, while low interfacial tension allows the droplets to deform and coalesce easily, but they can also break up as easily as they coalesce, due to the low energy barrier.
Operating conditions, flow pattern, and water/salt concentration have a significant impact on the effectiveness of the electrostatic treatment. Heavy oils may require high operation temperatures to reduce the viscosity or high pressures to avoid the formation of an excess free gas phase within the equipment. Salt and water content may also vary over a wider range than that of a typical oil field. Such conditions pose risks to the effectiveness of the electrostatic treatment with possible arch formation (voltage decay) within the produced fluids, dispersion of water droplets into smaller ones, or insufficient electric fields in some parts of the separation vessels.

3. Conclusions

In the past few years, there have been significant improvements in the capacity and performance of the electrostatic treaters through continuous improvements in their mechanism and research over the electric field development. The significance of the well-distributed flow inside the electrocoalescers has been highlighted, together with the use of variable electric fields and turbulent flow conditions to increase the collision rate of the water droplets.
Each one of the presented techniques exhibits different characteristics, advantages, and disadvantages that render them suitable for certain industrial applications. Even though these techniques cannot fully replace thermal and chemical demulsification, they have significantly reduced the respective requirements.
  • VIEC, HT VIEC, and LOWACC technologies are designed to provide efficient dewatering in the first- and/or second-stage separation, where the high gas and water content in the feed prohibits other separation solutions.
  • Dual-Frequency crude dehydration utilizes modulated voltage/frequency, and it has been applied over the last 15 years in second- and third-stage separation processes. Dual-Frequency crude dehydration results in the further reduction in the treater size and heating demand, while it increases the treatment capacity.
  • The 3D Horizontal Flow Electrocoalescer is the preferred dehydration method for heavy oils and crudes that exhibit foaming tendencies.
  • CEC is an inline vertical lightweight coalescer that is tolerant to high water cuts, water slugs, and level fluctuations (vessel motions), but non-tolerant to a gas content higher than 10% per volume. The inline electrostatic coalescer is suitable for subsea and offshore facilities that face weight and space limitations.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, D.M. and V.G.; methodology, C.A.; investigation, C.A.; writing—original draft preparation, D.M.; writing—review and editing, V.G.; supervision, D.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Publicly available datasets were analyzed in this study. This data can be found here: https://dias.library.tuc.gr/view/manf/68399 (accessed on 12 October 2023).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Speight, J.G. Introduction to Enchanced Recovery Methods for Heavy Oils and Tar Sands; Elsevier: Laramie, WY, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  2. Saniere, A.; Hénaut, I.; Argillier, J.F. Pipeline Transportation of Heavy Oils. Oil Gas Sci. Technol. 2004, 59, 455–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  3. Meyer, R.F.; Attanasi, E.D.; Freeman, P.A. Heavy Oil and Natural Bitumen Resources in Geological Basins of the World; Open File-Report 2007–1084; U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Department of the Interior: Reston, VA, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  4. Anarzguioui, M.; Wärtsilä, P.C.J. Overcoming Separation Challenges by Use of Electrocoalescence Technology. In Proceedings of the SPE Asia Pacific Oil & Gas Conference and Exhibition, SPE-171483-MS. Adelaide, Australia, 14–16 October 2014. [Google Scholar]
  5. Less, S.; Vilagines, R. The electrocoalescers’ technology: Advances, strengths and limitations for crude oil separation. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2012, 81, 57–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  6. Noïk, C.; Chen, J.; Dalmazzone, C. Electrostatic Demulsification on Crude Oil: A State-Of-The-Art Review. In Proceedings of the SPE International Oil & Gas Conference and Exhibition, SPE-103808-PP. Beijing, China, 5–7 December 2006. [Google Scholar]
  7. Mhatre, S.; Vivacqua, V.; Ghadiri, M.; Abdullah, A.M.; Al-Marri, M.J.; Hassanpour, A.; Hewakandamby, B.; Azzopardi, B.; Kermani, B. Electrostatic phase separation: A review. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 2015, 96, 177–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  8. Walsh, M.J.; Sams, G.; Lee, J. Field Implementation of New Electrostatic Treating Technology. In Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Conference, OTC 23200. Houston, TX, USA, 30 April–3 May 2012. [Google Scholar]
  9. Sellman, E.; Sams, G.W.; Mandewalkar, P. Benefits of Using Advanced Electrostatic Fields in Crude Oil Dehydrators and Desalters. In Proceedings of the SPE International Production and Operations Conference and Exhibition, SPE 156299. Doha, Qatar, 14–16 May 2012. [Google Scholar]
  10. Sellman, E.; Mandewalkar, P.; Sams, G.W. Compact and Light Weight Equipment for Floating Production Systems. In Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Conference, OTC-24727-MS. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 25–28 March 2014. [Google Scholar]
  11. Sellman, E.; Alvarez, J.; Guillen, J.C. Improved Dehydration of Colombian Heavy Crude Oil Using Dual Frequency Treaters. In Proceedings of the International Petroleum Coference and Exhibition, ACIPET Corferias, Bogota, Colombia, 20–22 November 2013. [Google Scholar]
  12. Sellman, E.; Sams, G.; Mandewalkar, S.P. Improved Dehydration and Desalting of Mature Crude Oil Fields. In Proceedings of the SPE Middle East Show and Conference, SPE 164289. Manama, Bahrain, 10–13 March 2013. [Google Scholar]
  13. Mandewalkar, S.P.; Sellman, E. 2-Pronge Approach for Improved Operating Range of Electrostatic Crude Oil Treaters. In Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Conference, Rio de Janeiro, OTC 26348. Brazil, 27–29 October 2015. [Google Scholar]
  14. Amarzguioui, M.; Jacobsen, P.R. Efficient and Flexible Crude Oil Processing Technology for Oil Separation Facilities. Wärtsilä Oil & Gas Systems AS. Available online: https://www.norwep.com/Market-info/Markets/Canada/Events/Recent-Advances-in-Offshore-Technology-Seminar/Waertsilae-Oil-Gas-Systems-AS (accessed on 21 July 2014).
  15. Fjeldly, T.A.; Hansen, E.B.; Nilsen, P.J. Novel Coalescer Technology in First-Stage Separator Enables Single Stage Separation and Heavy Oil Separation. In Proceedings of the SPE Projects, Facilities & Construction 2008, SPE 118891-PA, OTC 18278. Houston, TX, USA, 17 June 2008. [Google Scholar]
  16. Wolff, E.A.; Knutsen, T.L.; Piasecki, W.; Hansson, P.; Nilsen, P.J. Advanced Electrostatic Internals in the 1st Stage Separator Enhance Oil/Water Separation and Reduce Chemical Consumption on the Troll C Platform. In Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, TX, USA, 3–6 May 2004. [Google Scholar]
  17. Hamworthy Technology & Products. Product Information: Oil Systems, Vessel Internal Electrostatic Coalescer–Low Water (VIEC-LW®). Available online: https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/2848650/vessel-internal-electrostatic-coalescer-viecr-hamworthy (accessed on 12 October 2023).
  18. Urdahl, O.; Nordstad, K.; Berry, P.; Wayth, N.; Williams, T.; Bailey, A.; Thew, M.S. Development of a New, Compact Electrostatic Coalescer Concept. Prod. Facil. 2001, 16, 4–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  19. Tienhaara, M. Offshore processing challenges with heavy oils and use of robust high performance technologies. In Proceedings of the 2nd Tekna Conference on Heavy Oil Technology for Offshore Applications, Stavanger, Norway, 26–27 September 2012. [Google Scholar]
  20. Grave, E.J.; Olson, M.D.; Menchaca, A.E.; Westra, R.W.; Akdim, M.R. Performance Testing of an Inline Electrocoalescer Device with Medium and Heavy Crudes. In Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Conference, SPE-174090-PA. Houston, TX, USA, 5–8 May 2015. [Google Scholar]
  21. Eow, J.S.; Ghadiri, M. Electrostatic enhancement of coalescence of water droplets in oil: A review of the technology. Chem. Eng. J. 2002, 85, 357–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.