SiC Membranes for Produced Water Treatment
-
Upload
h2osystems -
Category
Engineering
-
view
281 -
download
3
Transcript of SiC Membranes for Produced Water Treatment
SiC Membranes for Produced Water
Treatment:Case Study 1
Challenge
• Discharge/Re-injection of Produced Water from oil production becoming difficult.• Oil wells maturing and water cut
increasing• Tighter government regulations
are being enforced for discharge of Produced Water.
Key contaminants in produced water
stream
• TSS,• Oil in Water (ppm)• TOG (residual total oil & grease) • ALL CAN CAUSE FOULING IN
DOWNSTREAM EQUIPMENT.• CONTAMINATE GROUNDWATER
WHEN PW IS DISCHARGED.
Existing Technologies
1. Oil & Water separation via free water knock out, demulsifiers
2. Skim tanks 3. Gas flotation 4. Filters (Wallnut Shell)
SEVERAL SHORTCOMINGS
1. More process steps2. Heavy in footprint3. Uses large amounts of chemicals and biocides
4. Require large amount of labor5. High in OPEX AND CAPEX.6. Removal of fine particles in conventional settling tanks take a long time.
7. Reduced efficiency of dispersed oil removal.
Our Solution
SiC Ceramic Membranes Used in a wide variety industrial settings and make the perfect candidate when dealing with oil separation given their oil repelling characteristics.
Unique hydrophilic properties leads to higher water fluxes -> continuous process flux for oil/water separation is between 200-2000 L/(m2*h)
What can I remove?
• Oil • Grease• Iron• TSS• Bacteria • Algae• Organic Matter
Why SiC Membranes
• Oil repelling• Inert• Less Footprint• Longer lifetime• High Recovery• Self-cleaning
All this filtration can be accomplished in 1 single
step!
Why SiC over traditional methods
POLYMERIC MEMBRANES ARE • Not as chemically or temperature resistant as not good (ecspecially at high temperatures of oil&gas industry)
• Handle oil very poorly Polymeric membranes are
• Expensive • Low water flux
0.04 Micron 3,000 L/(m2hr)
4,000 L/(m2hr)
10,000 L/(m2hr)
>12,000 L/(m2hr)
FluxPore size
0.1 Microns
1 Microns
3 Microns
Filtration capability
How it works
feed flow is tangential to the surface of the membrane in order to sweep rejected particles and solutes away
CROSS FLOW FILTRATION
CASE 1: Produced
Water Treatment for
Discharge
Application: PW Treatment at off-shore oil platform in the North SeaChallenge: Customer cannot meet discharge limit of 30 ppm oil with conventional technology.Feed Water:Oil: 2500 ppm (highly emulsified)TSS: 75-200 mg/LTemperature: 2-17 °CMembrane: 0.04 micron pore sizeProcess Data:Cross flow: 2m/s-2 stagesTMP: 0.4 barPermeate Flux: 200 LMHPermeate:Oil: <10 ppmTSS: <10 mg/L
Case 1: Final Installation of H2O Systems SiC Membranes
Case 1: Permeate-Feed-Concentrate
CASE 2: Produced
Water Treatment for Re-Injection
Application: PW Treatment for re-injection at on-shore production site. Challenge: Field trial in order to evaluate performance and feasibility of SiC membranes for PW filtration prior to re-injection.Feed Water:Oil: up to 60 mg/L TSS: up to 9 mg/LTemperature: 60 °CMembrane: 0.04 micron pore sizeProcess Data:Cross flow: 1.2-1.6 m/sTMP: 0.7-1.0 barPermeate Flux: 400-600 LMHPermeate:Oil:0-5 mg/L TSS: <0.03 mg/L
Case 2: Test setup with automatic prefiltration (300 μm), CIP unit and H2O Systems MultiBrain
membrane filtration unit
Case 2: Samples from field trialsPermeate (left), Feed (right)
Conclusion
• Possible to remove oil & TSS from PW below required limits regardless of feed water oil concentration.
• SiC membranes can replace conventional technologies with 1 step process (i.e. microflotation, walnut shell filters)
Next Steps• Meeting• Submit water analysis • Proposal and savings • Trial• Full systems intergration