Oil Extraction from Oil-Contaminated Drill Cuttings Using a Recyclable Single-Phase O/W Microemulsion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Oil-contaminated drill cuttings (OCDCs), often regarded as hazardous wastes, pose several environmental problems. Conventional methods exhibit certain drawbacks and limitations when used onsite. This paper developed a single-phase O/W microemulsion as a detergent and a practical processing method to treat OCDCs. The experimental results demonstrated that the oil retention could be reduced to a level that will allow offshore disposal. The used microemulsion and rinse water could be reused. The washed-out oil could be recycled to prepare oil based drilling fluid again when mixing with the same amount or greater of fresh base oil. Thus, the entire process of treatment was similar to microemulsion extraction. In the experiments, surfactant mixtures of sodium alcohol ether sulfate and n-butyl lactate were shown to form Winsor type I and type III microemulsions with N-pentyl propionate and linear Alpha Olefins C14 in the oil phase using a salinity scan. Two optimum formulas selected by the detergency performance were identified next to Winsor type III but still inside the Winsor type IV region, which is different from the lowest interfacial tension. By studying contact angle changes, one possible reason for this phenomenon was that for Winsor type III microemulsion, the higher concentration of surfactants cannot be washed away thoroughly with limited rinse water. The oil removal mechanism was also analyzed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".