26 - Environmental Aspects InHeavy Oil

Environmental Issues in Heavy Oil
Development
Maurice B. Dusseault
Environmental Issues
Heavy Oil Development Concerns
Sources of heat (CH4, coal, electricity)
Heat is costly, and CH4 is a desirable resource
Sources of diluent for pipelining, transport
Suitable upgrading/refining capacities
Environmental issues
Gaseous emissions
Liquid emissions
Solid wastes
Land use impairment (mining in particular)

Heavy Oil Wastes & Emissions
Gaseous emissions
Noxious emissions: NOx, SOx, H2S, particulates
Greenhouse gases: CH4, CO2
Liquid emissions
Process waters (mining, SAGD)
Produced fmn. waters (high in Cl-, oily scum)
Liquid sludges, emulsions, tank bottoms
Solid wastes (upstream and upgrading)

Produced solids, scale, NORMs

Extraction tailings, coke, sulfur, etc.
Is Sulphur a Waste?
Sulphur at Syncrude Canada Ltd.
Is Sulfur a Waste?
There is a glut of S on the market
This glut is likely to continue for >100 years
S from sour gas (H2S)
Increasing amount of heavy oil being produced
There is a limited market for S in the world

Upgraders near the coast in Venezuela will
produce large quantities of S
Easy to ship from the coast

Increased Faja development = more S
Is Coke a Waste?
Coke
If it is stockpiled, it becomes a waste
If it has a use, it becomes a resource.
Some can be exported, but not at a profit.
Upgrading processes can be changed
Produce minimum amount of coke
Need more H2 to hydrogenate molecules
The probable use is as a fuel, but

High S content
High metals content in the ash
Is Animal Biosolid a Waste?
What is Your Point of View?
This example addresses your point of view
Dung is a waste in feedlots in Canada
Used as a solid conditioner
Generate methane anaerobically
But, expensive to handle nonetheless
In India, it is mixed with straw, used as fuel

However, early female blindness is a result
In all of these cases, there are pros and

cons
Upgrading, Transportation
Limits to upgrading capacity exist
CH4 costs are going up
A diluent shortage exists now
Solutions
More & better upgrading facilities (catalysis,
higher p & T reactions, )
Find replacement for CH4 as H2 source,
perhaps high-T H2O + heavy oil or Clean Coal)

Pipelines to ship oil to the Pacific Rim
Ship heavy oil + syncrude (50:50 blend)

The Heat Problem
Methane price likely to remain high
All steam is currently CH4-generated
60-70% of OPEX is heat costs
If CH4 price doubles
Many thermal process become uneconomical
Valuable CH4 withdrawn from market
Solutions?
Small nuclear power + steam cogen?

Burn cheap coke & coal? (CO2, S issues)
Lower SOR with SAGD, Fast SAGD?

The Hydrogen Problem
CH4 H2, reacted with oil (hydrotreating) to
make smaller, linear molecules (aliphatics)
In Canada, a problem with CH4 availability
~2015 is predicted
Other H2 Uses
Hydrogenation of edible oils (soybeans, corn etc.)
Conversion of liquid oils to margarine
Ammonia based fertilizers

Refining of petroleum, upgrading bitumen, heavy oils
Petrochemicals
The Solution
New carbon gasification technology
Provides heat (steam) for SAGD, HCS
Provides H2 for
Hydrogenation and refining needs (ammonia)
Local electricity and heat generation
Provides CO2 for

Use in EOR miscible CO2 oil recovery
Use in coal-bed methane recovery
Direct sequestration (carbon tax credits)

Clean C Combustion Potential
FT Synthesis
Oxygen Liquid Fuels
(SASOL)
or air Clean
gas (N2) Methanol Olefins
Plant Petrochemicals
Clean Gasoline
Hydrogen
Low cost Plant Hydrogen
Combustion
Gasification
feedstocks
Coal Separation Methane Synthetic
Bitumen Bottoms Conversion Plant Natural Gas
Coke
Resid
Biomass Ammonia
Plant Fertilizers
Solid wastes Clean Power

Electricity
Fuel Cells
CO2 for EOR, CBM, Sequestration This cycle has the best potential for
commercial production of clean
power with near zero emissions
within the next 10 to 15 years
How Does it Work?
Any combustible C source is a potential feed.
Use fluidized bed combustion and maximize
production of CO over CO2
Cogen electricity, send steam to SAGD
Separate CO, CO2 (membrane technology?)
Send CO2 to deep oil fields in Can, USA
CO is used as synthesis gas (Fischer-Tropf)
H2, synfuels, ammonia, etc (SASOL technology)

Other products used or disposed
Coal Gasification + H2 Direct Use
Oxygen Surface stockpiles, industrial use, or injection

or air
Use or geological sequestration
Slurry
Sulphur CO2 Combined
Cycle Plant
Gasifier Electricity
Sour Acid Gas H2

Low cost Steam for
Shift Removal SAGD
feedstocks Gas Steam
Coal
Turbine Turbine
Heavy
Coke
Resid Hydrogenation Upgrading
Biomass
Slag Fuel Cells

Electricity
Heat
This cycle has the best potential for commercial production of clean
power with near zero emissions within the next 10 to 15 years
Modified from Eddy Isaacs, AERI - 2003

FutureGen
A full-scale project was being developed in
the USA, but is on hold! (2008)
They will be using coal and air combustion
We must watch these projects; also, we have
some advantages in the HO business:
We can use residual heat (steam cogen)
We can use the CO2 (EOR, CBM)
We have the technology for solids disposal
We need the H2 in the same facility

All the C we need

Sedimentary Basin Sequestration
Gaseous Emissions
Fluidized bed combustion is highly efficient
Gas stack scrubbers (CaCO3 slurry leads to
CaSO4, flue gas desulphurization sludge)
If O2 is used as the combustion agent, stack
gas treatment will be easier
CO2 is now a resource, CO a synthesis gas
This is off-the-shelf technology.
Almost zero emissions is now a reasonable

goal if we us O2 as an oxidant.
Sulfur and Coke?
Coke is now a valuable feedstock for the
process, as well as:
C-rich emulsions (too $$ to break)
C-rich reject from coal cleaning plants
All biomass wastes generated on site
Sulfur remains a serious issue

Glut means stockpiling in some manner
Use a section of the mining hole (mining area)
Stockpile on the surface (Yellow Brick Road)
Inject as a slurry at shallow depth (~300 m)

Clinker
The combustion system produces a clinker
or a slag.
If CaCO3 added to fluidized bed much CaSO4
Slag has calcined clays, heavy metals
It leaches readily, has no known use
We have the technology to dispose of it!

Grind slag to -5 mm
Slurry with waste water, waste emulsions, waste

sand, cuttings, etc.)
Inject or place in salt caverns
Solid Waste Disposal Problem
Particularly in CHOPS, but all heavy oil
Huge volumes of sand, emulsion, and other
solid and slurry waste streams
Road-spreading, field spreading???
Washing oil out of sand??? ($$)
Solutions
Landfill use has been relaxed
Deep injection of sand + emulsion + H2O
Disposal in dissolved salt caverns

We Have the Technology!
In our industry, we have the technology to
totally eliminate surface solid wastes!
Slurry Fracture Injection (SFI) has been
around for 15 years for deep disposal of
Produced sand and solids
Emulsions that are too $$ to break or treat
NORMs
Tank bottoms, spills, sludges

For more hazardous wastes? Salt caverns!

Disposal of Waste Solids and Liquids
Through Deep Injection
Maurice Dusseault
Ideal SFI Lithostratigraphy
possible SFI well locations flat or gently inclined strata
surficial deposits
low permeability strata mudstone
300 3000 metres

silty shale
blanket sand in
a thick shale
channel sand in
a silty shale
blanket sand
horizontal flow regimes

limestone
5-30 km
Many areas are suitable for SFI not to scale
Why a High-k Site?
Usually high porosity (sandstones > 25% ),

therefore good storativity
Flow is usually horizontal in high k zone
High site means high compressibility
High k means that we will not permanently
pressurize a large reservoir volume
Bleed off almost immediate, no long-distance
fracture propagation, waste localized near well

Much better than injection into a shale!
Conditions for SFI Siting
Deep, well below potable water sources

In horizontal strata of great lateral extent
Stratum must be sufficiently thick & porous
Permeability must meet certain standards
Thick ductile overlying shales are desirable
At least one overlying permeable bed
Formation water briny, flowing horizontally

No exploitable resources to be impaired
Ideal SFI Lithostratigraphy
possible SFI well locations flat or gently inclined strata
Shale barriers to
flow
3000-10,000
Permeable zones
to blunt upward
migrtation
Zones with good

storage
5-30 km High k zones

not to scale
No reserves
View of SFI System

View of SFI System

Indonesian SFI Site
Caltex, permanent site, 3 wells (2007)
Disposal of sand from thermal production
Waste
fluids
Mix tank screen
pumps power
SFI System
SFI System
SFI System
SFI System
SFI System
SFI System
SFI System
SFI System
Waste pits in Indonesia
Truck Dumping Slops into the Pit
Oilfield Wastes - Indonesia
Solid Waste Injection Site
SFI in the Field
Typical Processing and Injection Equipment
Operations can be fully enclosed

for severe weather or odor control
Cleaning Sludge from Tanks
Tank Bottom Sludges
50% H2O
30% oil
20% minerals
30 m3 Vacuum Truck
Oily Sand Wastes

SFI Mobile Slurry Unit
Screening, mixing, controlling, injecting,

monitoring are the functions
Mixing assures a uniform slurry: mobile unit
includes auger mixing, washing through a
screen, and density control in an auger tank
All systems are operated by hydraulic motors
Pumping is by a triplex PDP, supercharged
with a centrifugal pump (hydraulic)

System fits on three lowboys (truck loads)
SFI Operations
Start-up, shut-down and well management are

critical aspects of slurry injection
The density, rate, amount and time are pre-
planned based on a reservoir study, but opera-
tionally optimized based on reservoir response
-Step-rate build up tests
-Pressure responses in adjacent wells
-Pressure build-up rate, drop-off rate after shut-in

-Surface deformation relaxation with time, .....
Typical Surface Uplift
~symmetric
10 cm uplift max slope ~1:5,000
no uplift at
1.5 km distance
700 m deep
waste site, 100-150 m

radius maximum V ~ 16,000 m3
SFI Well Capacity
Proper formation choice required

To date, the maximum we have injected in
a single well is 30,000 m3 sand
Water dissipates into the sediments
We believe 50,000 to 100,000 m3 is quite
feasible for a SFI well
Target stratum tracking during SFI
allows continuous re-evaluation of capacity

Advantages of SFI
Wastes are permanently entombed
Proper stratum choice gives exceptionally
high environmental security (minimal risk)
No chance of repository impairment
No chance of surface H2O contamination
Potential environmental liability for the
company is zero after placement
Costs are reasonable, even for difficult wastes

Technology is well-established
SFI Injection Cycles
pressure
repose sand
5 period inj.
6 5 6
2 4 7 2 4 7
8 8
3 3
9
10 sv = 11.4MPa
1 1
24-hr cycle
initial pore pressure = 4.6 MPa

time
SFI Stages
Begin injection with clear water
Fracture generation with clear water
Momentum built up in system with water
Begin adding solids to clear waste water
Stable SFI injection, 6-14 hrs.
Gradually shut off the solids
Post-flush with clear water
Stop water injection altogether

Shut in and get closure pressures
Obtain long-term p for analysis

In Situ Solids Placement
Early time SFI

Wastes fractures into the Day 3
formation Day 1
Solids deposits causes slight
increase in local formation
stresses
Changes in local stresses
cause re-orientation of each Day 2
new fracture (fracture SFI
rotation) Well
Waste Pod Development
Later time SFI Waste Pod

Cumulative impact of development
solids placement and from past SFI cycles Todays
fracture rotation is to ( compressibility, Fracture
create a waste pod. perm)
Waste pod has different
mechanical & flow
characteristics (stiffer,
lower permeability)
SFI well
Virgin Formation
( compressibility, perm)
Waste Pod Growth
Longer fractures:
- access more formation
- waste pod extension
Virgin Formation Well
Short fracture:
- contained in waste pod

- waste pod packing
Fmn. Thickness (20 - 60 m)
Waste Pod Growth
Overlying Shale
Underlying Shale
Waste pod created by
previous fracturing Current fracture
Waste Pod Growth
Overlying Shale Waste Pod

Underlying Shale
Water leakoff into
sand formation
In Situ Mechanisms
Slurry forced in at fracture pressures

High k causes rapid pressure bleed-off
Solids injection changes stress state:
Lateral stress (sh) rises
Vertical stress (sv) is constant
Mixed horizontal and vertical fracturing
Fractures change direction, shape, length

Pressures decay, overburden stress is re-

imposed on solids, compaction occurs
Control Parameters for SFI
Methods to avoid reservoir impairment

Surry injection rate can be varied
The slurry composition (oil%...)can be varied
Slurry density can be varied (brines used)
Injection period length and volume of
solids/liquids input can be changed

Relaxation period between episodes can be
changed to allow p and V dissipation

The proper reservoir selection is important
SFI Well Completion
conventional high security

potable water
sources
security casing
surface casing
impermeable,
ductile shale
injection casing
SFI stratum
perforated zone
not to scale
Step-Rate Test, SFI Injection
bottom-hole pressure (psi) bottom-hole pressure (psi)

1200 1200
stop injection
1100
1100
1080 psi
1000
1000
900
decay
data
Step rate test Injection
800 cycle
900
700
begin
800 injection rate (m3/min) injection

600
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 24 hours

SFI - Typical Case (Ia)
-390 metres, east-central Alberta

Depleted heavy oil field (thermal recovery)
Four monitoring wells available
17 m thick, 2-5 Darcy permeability
200 m of smectitic shale overlies target
Lateral flow, formation brines 40 MYBP
17,000 m3 of waste sand, 1000 m3 of emulsion
Disposal took place over two years (summer)

Injection Behavior
Late Time Behavior

20000 4.0
3 3 3 3
Slurry: 416 m Slurry: 505 m Slurry: 498 m Slurry: 740 m
Sand: 45 m3 Sand: 80 m3 Sand: 85 m3 Sand: 113 m3
Bottomhole Pressure (kPa)
15000 3.0
Slurry Rate (m /min)

Project TTI_3
(Norcen 1997)
3
10000 2.0
5000 1.0
BHP
Slurry Rate
0 0.0
Jul 14 0:00 Jul 15 0:00 Jul 16 0:00 Jul 17 0:00 Jul 18 0:00 Jul 19 0:00
SFI - Typical Case (Ib)
The waste was injected without problems

Small amounts of oily wastes added
No problem injecting, restablishing fracture
Shut down periods up to 6 weeks
12 hours injection, 12 hours off
After job, CBL run, new well chosen
because some of the bond had been

impaired
New well 400 m away for fall of 1996
SFI - Typical Case (IIa)
m in Alberta, Cold Lake oil sands
Clean, 1 - 4 Darcy fine-grained uncon-
solidated sandstone, 13 m thick
150 m of ductile shale overburden
3 permeable zones overlying the target
between the shale and the injection zone
Heavy oil project 100 m lower down
3500 m3 of slops and wastes disposed in

two sessions, Nov - 95, June - 96
SFI - Typical Case (IIb)
A lot of ground slop was injected, tar,

heavy oil, etc., as well as sand, gorp
Screening (5 x 8 mm screens) essential
because of gravel, sticks, etc in the waste
No long-term p observed in the reservoir,
decay was rapid and complete
Good reservoir response throughout job
Tilt showed local containment for solids, no

breakthrough, no screen-outs, no problems
One Days Injection Record
Injection Bottom Hole Pressure (psi)
Daily Pressure vs. Time
(Injection period: 4-12hrs/day)

3000
2000 end injection shut-in period
1000
start injection
time
5:00 7:00 9:00 11:00 13:00 15:00 17:00 19:00 21:00 23:00
13-Sep-97
Past and Future SFI Projects
Alaska, THUMS
Coyote Hills, Los Angeles (Chevron), 1280 m.
23,000 m3 oily sand in Saskatchewan, 650 m.
4-5000 m3 tank fluids, slops in Alberta, 750 m,
automated & remote control (PanCanadian).
Produced sand in Duri Indonesia, started in Oct
2002, two injection wells available, millions of
barrels to date, third well now operating, etc

Los Angeles 2008 Biosolids Injection
SFI & Regulatory Agencies
Generally favorable to SFI for oil industry

produced sand and drilling wastes
They accept the argument that wastes from
nature are returned to nature
They insist on containment demonstration
They insist SFI well has good CBL, etc.
They support the low-cost alternative
provided by SFI
But, they must be carefully educated!!
How Cuttings Are Injected
Injection is through the annulus between an

exterior and interior casing
The cuttings are generally ground up to a
fine powder and slurries, sometimes even
with viscosifying agents
Invariably, ground cuttings are injected at
the shoe into low-k shales
This is not an optimum approach

Cuttings Injection
injection into deeper casing

annulus shallow casing
fracture
fracture
planeplane
casing shoe
cement
injection of ground
cuttings generally
occurs in shale shale
Cutting Re-Injection Problems
Grinding offshore = a $ 1-2 million system
Shales are low permeability, extremely slow
bleed-off, strata pressures remain high
Low bleed-off means vertical fractures
climb substantially, fracture extent is large
Environmental containment is problematic
Mud blowouts have occurred (BP/Amoco)
Several reported losses of casing (excessive

distortion develops in injected zone)
Best Method for Cuttings, Mud
Consider using a dedicated slurry injection
well, placed away from other well casings
The well can be slim-hole, economical
Or, if you have an available abandonment
Choose a permeable stratum, high bleed-off
Dont pulverize shale, just grind it to -5 mm
Dilute slurry with waste water, do not add
any other thickening or viscosifying agents

Carry out SFI properly, monitor carefully
Problems With SFI
Well blockages could occur
Formation could become blocked
Pressure bleed-off behavior may deteriorate
Containment could be impaired
Well casings could shear off (several cases)
Fortunately, it appears that properly
executed SFI can avoid these problems
This requires continuous monitoring and
analysis of p and V data, proactive

Stress Changes in SFI
SFI well liquid leakage to higher

region of reduced lateral stress
zones may occur
**regions of largest
shear stress change
+V
(+ p)
**Large stress changes may lead to casing expansion from

shear if uncontrolled injection allowed slurry injection
SFI Injection Cycles
pressure
repose sand
5 period inj.
6 5 6
2 4 7 2 4 7
8 8
3 3
9
10 sv = 11.4MPa
1 1
24-hr cycle
initial pore pressure = 4.6 MPa
time
Alberta case, about 480-500 m deep
SFI Stages
Begin injection with clear water
Fracture generation with clear water
Momentum built up in system with water
Begin adding solids to clear waste water
Stable SFI injection, 6-14 hrs.
Gradually shut off the solids
Post-flush with clear water

Stop water injection altogether
Shut in and get closure pressures
Obtain long-term p for analysis

In Situ Mechanisms
Slurry forced in at fracture pressures

High k causes rapid pressure bleed-off
Solids injection changes stress state:
Lateral stress (sh) rises
Vertical stress (sv) is constant
Horizontal fracturing soon dominates

Pressures decay, overburden stress is re-

imposed on solids, compaction occurs
Step-Rate Test, SFI Injection
bottom-hole pressure (psi) bottom-hole pressure (psi)

1200 1200
stop injection
1100
1100
1080 psi
1000
1000
900
decay
data
Step rate test Injection
800 cycle
900
700
begin
800 injection rate (m3/min) injection

600
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 24 hours

SFI - Typical Case (Ia)
-390 metres, east-central Alberta
Depleted heavy oil field (thermal recovery)
Four monitoring wells available
17 m thick, 2-5 Darcy permeability
200 m of smectitic shale overlies target
Lateral flow, formation brines 40 MYBP
17,000 m3 of waste sand, 1000 m3 of gorp
Disposal took place over two years (summer)

SFI - Typical Case (Ib)
The waste was injected without problems

Small amounts of oily wastes added
No problem injecting, restablishing fracture
Shut down periods up to 6 weeks
12 hours injection, 12 hours off
After job, CBL run, new well chosen because
some of the bond had been impaired

New well 400 m away for fall of 1996
SFI - Typical Case (IIa)
360 m deep zone in northern Alberta, Cold
Lake oil sands (AMOCO site)
Clean, 1 - 4 Darcy fine-grained uncon-
solidated sandstone, 13 m thick
150 m of ductile shale overburden
3 permeable zones overlying the target
between the shale and the injection zone
Heavy oil project 100 m lower down

3500 m3 of slops and wastes disposed in
two sessions, Nov - 95, June - 96
SFI - Typical Case (IIb)
A lot of ground slop was injected, tar,
heavy oil, etc., as well as sand, gorp
Screening (5 x 8 mm screens) essential
because of gravel, sticks, etc in the waste
No long-term p observed in the reservoir,
decay was rapid and complete
Good reservoir response throughout job
Tilt showed local containment for solids, no

breakthrough, no screen-outs, no problems
Stress Changes in SFI
SFI well liquid leakage to higher

region of reduced lateral stress
zones may occur
**regions of largest
shear stress change
+V
(+ p)
**Large stress changes may lead to casing expansion from

shear if uncontrolled injection allowed slurry injection
Salt Solution Cavern Disposal
Maurice Dusseault
Solution Cavern Disposal (SCD)
Toxic wastes are sized, blended and slurried

Typically: 10-25% toxic solid waste
25-40% shale chips
50% ground NaCl (5 mm)
Saturated brine to make a slurry
Placed in caverns dissolved in deep salt beds
Dense slurry fills cavern, settles, compacts
Cavern closure permanently entombs waste

Cavern Creation
Dissolve NaCl with
fresh water fresh water brine
out
Control shape using
gas/oil pad on top overburden casing
Control depth with shoe

hanging pipe gas/oil
pipe placements, tailpipe
rates of injection brine
Measure shape with salt

strata
sonar surveys
tubings casing top of salt

roof salt shoe
rathole
height
free brine
volume spacing
waste mixture volume

500 -
3000 m
width
floor salt
Waste Placement
in a Salt Cavern
Western Canada
NWT Canadian Shield NWT

Cretaceous
Subcrop Athabasca
Basin
(Precambrian)
Alberta
Syncline WESTERN
B Canadian Shield
CANADIAN Basin
C SEDIMENTARY edge
BASIN
Salt solution
front
x x xx ONT
x x
approximate sites of
potash
mines
solution caverns
x
ALTA SASK Williston Basin MAN
USA
Cavern Closure With Time
Eventually, salt closure will permanently isolate the wastes, as salt

is essentially impermeable = very high environmental securtity
closure means salt flows slowly

loss of volume to close the
cavern gradually
overburden
salt
tubings casing top of salt

roof salt shoe
rathole
height
free brine
volume spacing
waste mixture volume

500 -
3000 m
width
floor salt
SCD Advantages
Technology is straightforward
Permanent disposal with minimal risk, no
long-term liability, no maintenance
Costs depend on toxicity level:
<$Cdn 90.00/m3 for low-toxicity waste
Up to $Cdn 950.00/t for high-toxicity materials
No permanent land use impairment

Suitable strata exist in Alberta and
Saskatchewan, Ontario, NB, NS, USA

Design is a geomechanics issue, using
viscoplasticity behavior laws, etc.
Cavern Design for Difficult Waste
Integrity limestone, shale overburden
Stability
salt
Security shale, anhydrite
Safety casing shoe

roof salt, >25 m
1150 m
Longevity
roof span
15 m
H ~ 75-100 m
internal pressure pi
bounding
D ~ 100 m
ellipsoid
approximate
cavern
shape rubble
floor salt, >10 m
Salt Cavern Numerical Modelling
Environmental Security, Liability
SFI and cavern disposal are secure
Compare them to landfilling
Compare them to road-spreading, ponds
Compare them to any other technology
They are also reasonable cost alternatives

Somewhat more costly than landfills, ponds
Far cheaper than treatment, chemicals
Liability
Solids waste injection means minimal liability
Also, they are the greenest option
Conclusions
Conventional oil will peak (next 2-4 years?)

Heavy oil, bitumen will fill the coming gap
Now, we must demonstrate:
Our commitment to environmental protection
Our sophisticated technical approach
Our ability to do better than other industries
Fortunately, FutureGen + SFI + our needs

provide us with a solution to all of this
More Conclusions
FutureGen can give us
CO2 for EOR + CO for synthesis products
Large fixed heat source for steam EOR
H2 for treating oil or other uses
A means of using coke and C-rich wastes
Slurry injection can give us

Economical disposal of slag, sand, NORMs, &
other solids wastes, + waste water disposal
Superior environmental protection
Large reduction in environmental liabilities

Recommendations
All companies will become heavy oil
companies over the next 40 years
Your company should:
Realize that environmental issues will affect the
development of heavy oil
CO2 issues are not going to go away
Accept its environmental responsibility
Utilize current technologies to

Perfect emerging technologies (FutureGen)
Lead the innovation loop, not follow it
Show that zero emissions is feasible

Closing the Loop Zero Emissions
Soon, we will almost close the loop on the
environment issue, based on:
Using our own industrys technologies
(upgrading + FutureGen + SFI)
Improving, optimizing, implementing
Fully integrating our heavy oil projects
Or you can
Fight a losing battle against society
Be subject to more regulations, penalties
Worsen our industrys negative reputation

26 - Environmental Aspects InHeavy Oil

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

26 - Environmental Aspects InHeavy Oil

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Environmental Issues in Heavy Oil

Land use impairment (mining in particular)

Liquid sludges, emulsions, tank bottoms

Solid wastes (upstream and upgrading)

Produced solids, scale, NORMs

There is a limited market for S in the world

Easy to ship from the coast

The probable use is as a fuel, but

But, expensive to handle nonetheless

In India, it is mixed with straw, used as fuel

In all of these cases, there are pros and

perhaps high-T H2O + heavy oil or Clean Coal)

Ship heavy oil + syncrude (50:50 blend)

Small nuclear power + steam cogen?

Lower SOR with SAGD, Fast SAGD?

Ammonia based fertilizers

Refining of petroleum, upgrading bitumen, heavy oils

Provides CO2 for

Use in coal-bed methane recovery

Direct sequestration (carbon tax credits)

Solid wastes Clean Power

H2, synfuels, ammonia, etc (SASOL technology)

Oxygen Surface stockpiles, industrial use, or injection

Sour Acid Gas H2

Slag Fuel Cells

Modified from Eddy Isaacs, AERI - 2003

We have the technology for solids disposal

We need the H2 in the same facility

All the C we need

Almost zero emissions is now a reasonable

All biomass wastes generated on site

Sulfur remains a serious issue

Use a section of the mining hole (mining area)

Stockpile on the surface (Yellow Brick Road)

Inject as a slurry at shallow depth (~300 m)

It leaches readily, has no known use

We have the technology to dispose of it!

Slurry with waste water, waste emulsions, waste

Deep injection of sand + emulsion + H2O

Disposal in dissolved salt caverns

Tank bottoms, spills, sludges

For more hazardous wastes? Salt caverns!

possible SFI well locations flat or gently inclined strata

300 3000 metres

horizontal flow regimes

Usually high porosity (sandstones > 25% ),

fracture propagation, waste localized near well

Deep, well below potable water sources

Formation water briny, flowing horizontally

possible SFI well locations flat or gently inclined strata

Zones with good

5-30 km High k zones

View of SFI System

View of SFI System

Typical Processing and Injection Equipment

Operations can be fully enclosed

Oily Sand Wastes

Screening, mixing, controlling, injecting,

with a centrifugal pump (hydraulic)

Start-up, shut-down and well management are

-Pressure build-up rate, drop-off rate after shut-in

waste site, 100-150 m

Proper formation choice required