MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2509087009 · doi:10.2523/86671-ms

Meeting the Zero Discharge Challenge for Produced Water

2004· article· en· W2509087009 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Børre Knudsen, M. Hjelsvold, Tone Karin Frost, M. B. E. Svarstad, P.G. Grini, C. F. Willumsen, H. Torvik

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPE International Conference on Health, Safety, and Environment in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater-Energy-Food Nexus Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitationLibrary scienceZero (linguistics)World Wide WebComputer sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Meeting the Zero Discharge Challenge for Produced Water B.L. Knudsen; B.L. Knudsen Statoil ASA Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar M. Hjelsvold; M. Hjelsvold Statoil ASA Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar T.K. Frost; T.K. Frost Statoil ASA Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar M.B.E. Svarstad; M.B.E. Svarstad Statoil ASA Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar P.G. Grini; P.G. Grini Statoil ASA Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar C.F. Willumsen; C.F. Willumsen Statoil ASA Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar H. Torvik H. Torvik Statoil ASA Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the SPE International Conference on Health, Safety, and Environment in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, March 2004. Paper Number: SPE-86671-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/86671-MS Published: March 29 2004 Connected Content Related to: Meeting the Zero-Discharge Challenge for Produced Water Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Knudsen, B.L., Hjelsvold, M., Frost, T.K., Svarstad, M.B.E., Grini, P.G., Willumsen, C.F., and H. Torvik. "Meeting the Zero Discharge Challenge for Produced Water." Paper presented at the SPE International Conference on Health, Safety, and Environment in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, March 2004. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/86671-MS Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentAll ProceedingsSociety of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)SPE International Conference and Exhibition on Health, Safety, Environment, and Sustainability Search Advanced Search AbstractReduced environmental impact is the goal when choosing produced water treatment technologies. On the Norwegian sector the method used for quantifying this impact is the Environmental Impact Factor, EIF. This method is computerized in a tool that calculates the environmental impact from each of a number of chemical component groups that are present in produced water.Re-injection of produced water is the preferred option, and mostly used when pressure support is required. This paper, however, describes new treatment technologies aimed at produced water being released to sea. The technologies are suitable for different produced water compositions. The components in the produced water that contribute to the environmental impact are mainly: aliphatic hydrocarbons, heavy aromatic compounds (PAH), alkylated phenols and man added production chemicals. At several Statoil operated fields the corrosion inhibitor and H2S scavenger are giving a significant contribution.Several new technologies will be described. Statoil has had a leading role and actively participated in the development and qualification of most of these technologies. The results from this work will be presented. The technologies will include the CTour process, Epcon CFU, droplet coalescing technologies as well as new technologies to reduce discharge of production chemicals.The main conclusion is that knowledge is needed about which compounds contribute to the environmental impact of produced water before deciding which technology to use.IntroductionThe main focus in reducing the possible pollution from produced water to the sea has traditionally been on reducing the content of dispersed oil. Even though some countries have placed their attention on other compounds, international regulations like the new OSPAR regulations [1] still focus mainly on dispersed oil content in produced water. The new OSPAR regulations demanding less than 30 mg/l dispersed oil, and a 15 % reduction in total oil from year 2000 level will be implemented by 2006.On the Norwegian sector of the North Sea, all operators must, in addition to fulfilling and reporting according to the dispersed oil regulations, report the total environmental impact of the produced water release to the sea to the Norwegian Pollution Control Authorities (SFT) [2]. This reporting is done on an annual basis and is based on thorough (GC-MS) analysis of the produced water to quantify the content of all compounds of interest. The method for quantifying the environmental impact is the Environmental Impact Factor, EIF [3], which relies on DREAM (Dose Related Risk and Effect Assessment Model) [4]. In this model a comparison is made between the concentrations of possible environmentally harmful compounds and the predicted no effect concentration, based on an environmental risk assessment approach. The EIF is not only a valuable tool for quantifying the total environmental impact from one platform or a group of them, but also for evaluating the contribution from the different constituents in the produced water.In this paper three different technologies for produced water purification will be presented. The CTour process that is a liquid-liquid extraction process, the Epcon Compact Flotation Unit and Mare's Tail that is an oil droplet coalescer. In addition to these three technologies measures to reduce the environmental impact from production chemicals will be presented.Produced Water Purification ProcessesThe compositions of produced water from different fields vary significantly. Hence, each field should be evaluated with respect to which compounds contribute to the environmental risk. When selecting produced water treatment technologies, one should focus on the major contributors to reduce the total environmental impact. Experience has shown that the major contributors to the EIF are dispersed oil, volatile aromatics, heavy aromatics, alkylated phenols, and added chemicals. Keywords: environmental impact, statoil, efficiency, produced water discharge, separation and treating, phenol, production chemical, scavenger, reduction, contribution Subjects: Processing Systems and Design, Environment, Separation and treating, Water use, produced water discharge and disposal This content is only available via PDF. 2004. Society of Petroleum Engineers You can access this article if you purchase or spend a download.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPE International Conference on Health, Safety, and Environment in Oil and Gas Exploration and ProductionSame topicWater-Energy-Food Nexus StudiesFrench-language works237,207