• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Water Quality Treatment - Produced Water & Flowback
 

Water Quality Treatment - Produced Water & Flowback

on

  • 333 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
333
Views on SlideShare
333
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
9
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Oil and gas within underground in source rock referred as Formations.Geology of formations vary along with hydrocarbons characteristics.Different methods are used for different formations.While some oil and gas are produced by drilling a well and relying on the natural pressure to come out to the surface, hydraulic fracking is used to extract some hydrocarbons .hydraulic fracking: Injection of water along with chemicals and sand under high pressure inside the ground.Produced water is a key byproduct comes out to the surface along with oil and gas.250mbbr of produced water was generated per day in the world in 2009, corresponding to 80mbbrs of produced oil.21mbbrs of PW was generated in the USA.Although treatment technologies has been improving, producers hesitant to imply themAbout 90% of produced water is injected to the deep wells.Given this huge amount of produced water and growing demand of fresh water give a potential source of water in replace of conventional source of water

Water Quality Treatment - Produced Water & Flowback Water Quality Treatment - Produced Water & Flowback Presentation Transcript

  • Water Quality and Treatment of Frac Flowback and Produced Water Nasim Esmaeilirad Ryan Hutcherson Colorado State University August 12, 2013
  • Overview on produced water • Oil and gas within underground in source rock referred as Formations. • Geology of formations vary along with hydrocarbons characteristics. • Different methods are used for different formations. • While some oil and gas are produced by drilling a well and relying on the natural pressure to come out to the surface, hydraulic fracking is used to extract some hydrocarbons . • Hydraulic fracking: Injection of water along with chemicals and sand under high pressure inside the ground. • Produced water is a key byproduct comes out to the surface along with oil and gas. • 250mbbr of produced water was generated per day in the world in 2009, corresponding to 80mbbrs of produced oil. • 21mbbrs of PW was generated in the USA. • About 90% of produced water is injected to the deep wells. • Given this huge amount of produced water and growing demand of fresh water give a potential source of water in replace of conventional source of water
  • Basic Water Use Model Groundwater Municipal Water Surface Water Drilling and Hydraulic Fracturing Flowback and Produced Water Deep Injection Well
  • Water Reuse Model Groundwater Municipal Water Surface Water Drilling and Hydraulic Fracturing Flowback and Produced Water Deep Injection Well Treatment Dilution
  • 0 50 100 150 200 250 0 20 40 60 80 100 Iron(mg/L) Days Frac Fluid ll Frac Fluid ll 0 50 100 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 0 20 40 60 80 100 Aluminum(mg/L) Days Frac Fluid ll Frac Fluid ll 0 2 4 6 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Raw Water Quality
  • Raw Water Quality 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 0 20 40 60 80 100 Calcium(mg/L) Frac Fluid l Frac Fluids ll 0 100 200 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 20 40 60 80 100 Barium(mg/L) Days Frac Fluid l Frac Fluid ll 0 2 4 6 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
  • Raw Water Quality 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 0 20 40 60 80 100 Chloride(mg/L) Days Frac Fluid l Frac Fluid ll 0 5000 10000 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 0 20 40 60 80 100 Sulfate(mg/L) Days Frac Fluid l Frac Fluid ll 0 500 1000 1500 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
  • Raw Water Quality 1000 2000 3000 4000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 TOC(mg/L) Frac Fluid l Frac Fluid ll 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 TDS(mg/L) Days Frac Fluid l Frac Fluid ll 400 900 1400 1900 2400 2900 3400 3900 0 1 2 3 4
  • Raw Water Quality 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 20 40 60 80 100 pH Frac Fluid ll Frac Fluid l
  • (1) Electrocoagulation => Softening => Solid-Liquid Separation (2) Softening => Electrocoagulation => Solid-Liquid Separation (3) Chemical coagulation => Softening => Solid-Liquid separation Chemical and Electro Coagulation (EC) Processes Studied Goals: • Determine the point in time when flowback can be treated effectively • Determine what type of treatment and dosage is most effective on early flowback • Determine which water quality parameters could be used as indicators of whether treatment will be successful
  • Chemical Coagulation • Destabilize (charge neutralize) solid particles using tri-valent cations • A blend of Aluminum and a polymer were used • HCl was used to lower the raw water pH to 6 (increase hydration of floc blend) • Each raw sample was treated with a dosage of 5 parts per thousand of Floc Blend and stirred for approximately 2 minutes • Floc Blend consists of a 1:1 ratio of Aluminum Chlorohydrate (ACH) and Poly- aluminum Chloride (PACl) • Aluminum dosage was approximately 449 mg/L • Floc was allowed to settle for approximately 20 minutes • Once settled water was decanted off the top softened at a pH of 10.2 (NaOH) 2.5μm glass fiber filters either with positive pressure or a vacuum were used • HCl was then used to lower pH to neutral (~ 7)
  • Electrocoagulation Insitu generating coagulants: • Using electricity to dissolution and oxidation of metal ions in anode: Aluminum or/and Iron plates/disc. • Formation of hydroxyl ions(Aluminum hydroxide) and hydrogen gas at the cathode. • Reacting with the hydroxyl ion (from the cathode) to form Aluminum hydroxide. • The hydroxide flocculates and coagulates purifying the water.
  • EC/Softening (1) and Softening/EC (3) Schematics Raw water EC pH = 10.2 (NaOH) pH = 7 (HCl)(1) (2) 2.5 m filter Sample A 2.5 m filter Sample B 2.5 m filter DissolvedTotal 2.5 m filter 2.5 m filter pH = 7 (HCl) pH = 9.5 (NaOH) Sample A Sample B Sample C EC
  • EC (1) and Chemical Coagulation (2) Schematics Raw water EC pH = 10.2 (NaOH) pH = 7 (HCl)(1) (3) 2.5 m filter Sample A 2.5 m filter Sample B Sample A Sample B Sample C 2.5 m filter DissolvedTotal Chemical Treatment pH = 10.2 (NaOH) 2.5 m filter 2.5 m filter pH = 7 (HCl)
  • Treated Water Quality (EC vs. CC) 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 1 2 26.5 69.5 90 153 161 183 1 2 70 % Aluminum(mg/L) Raw Post-EC Post-CC % Removal-EC % Removal-CC Frac Fluid l (guar based, pH=10.2) Frac Fluid ll (non-guar, pH=5) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 50 100 150 200 250 1 2 26.5 69.5 90 153 161 183 1 2 70 % Iron(mg/L) Raw Post-EC Post-CC % Removal-EC Series5
  • Treated Water Quality (EC vs. CC) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 1 2 26.5 69.5 90 153 161 183 1 2 70 % Calcium(mg/L) Raw Post-EC Post-CC % Removal-EC % Removal-CC 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 1 2 26.5 69.5 90 153 161 183 1 2 70 % Barium(mg/L) Raw Post-EC Post-CC % Removal-EC % Removal-CC Frac Fluid l (guar based, pH=10.2) Frac Fluid ll (non-guar, pH=5)
  • Treated Water Quality (EC vs. CC) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 1 2 26.5 69.5 90 153 161 183 1 2 70 % COD(mg/L) Raw Post-EC Post-CC % Removal-EC % Removal-CC 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 1 2 26.5 69.5 90 153 161 183 1 2 70 % TOC(mg/L) Raw Post-EC Post-CC % Removal-EC % Removal-CC Frac Fluid l (guar based, pH=10.2) Frac Fluid ll (non-guar, pH=5)
  • 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 1 2 26.5 69.5 90 153 161 183 1 2 70 % Turbidity(NTU) Raw Post-EC Post-CC % Removal-EC % Removal-CC Treated Water Quality (EC vs. CC) Frac Fluid l (guar based, pH=10.2) Frac Fluid ll (non-guar, pH=5)
  • Treated Water Quality (softening before/after EC) -61.71 -38.43 -46.15 87.62 95.06 99.68 99.76 99.82 98.85 99.72 98.56 -150.00 -100.00 -50.00 0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 0.00 500.00 1000.00 1500.00 2000.00 2500.00 3000.00 3500.00 4000.00 4500.00 1 1 2 2 30 60 60 90 153 161 183 Removal% Turbidity(NTU) Days Turbidity Raw EC pH EC removal pH removal
  • -500.00 0.00 500.00 1000.00 1500.00 2000.00 2500.00 3000.00 3500.00 4000.00 4500.00 0.00 500.00 1000.00 1500.00 2000.00 2500.00 3000.00 1 1 2 2 30 60 60 90 153 161 183 Turbidity(NTU) TOC(mg/l) Days TOC Vs Turbidity TOC TOC-EC TOC-pH Turbidity Turbidity-EC Turbidity-pH Treated Water Quality (softening before/after EC)
  • 0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00 300.00 350.00 400.00 450.00 1 1 2 2 30 60 60 90 153 161 183 Concentration(mg/) Days Hardness Raw-Ca+2 EC-Ca+2 pH-Ca+2 Raw-Mg+2 EC-MG+2 pH-Mg+2 Treated Water Quality (softening before/after EC)
  • 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00 50.00 0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00 180.00 200.00 1 1 2 2 30 60 60 90 153 161 183 Al+3(mg/l) Fe+2(mg/l) Days Al vs Fe Fe+2 EC-Fe+2 pH-Fe+2 Al+3 EC-Al+3 pH-Al+3 Treated Water Quality (softening before/after EC)
  • Treatment Comparison after 1 hour Treated Water Quality (softening before/after EC)
  • Comparison between EC Only and Increased pH before EC Treated Water Quality (softening before/after EC)
  • Future Work • Collect water samples for chemical treatability study • 5 days, 10 days, 20 days • Frac Fluid l and Frac Fluid ll • Use same chemical treatment process • Repeat flowback study • Time intervals to be determined • Treat samples with various coagulants and processes (i.e. Alum, Ferric Chloride, 2 stage treatment) • Measure change in dose-repose over the first month to better understand treatability changes with time. • Additional Analytical Parameters • Detailed characterization of organics • Seek a more simple measure of the class of organics which are found to be most important (from a treatment point of view)