Souring and Corrosion in Light Oil Producing Reservoirs and in Pipelines Transporting Light Hydrocarbon
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Calgary PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository Graduate Studies The Vault: Electronic Theses and Dissertations 2015-11-19 Souring and Corrosion in Light Oil Producing Reservoirs and in Pipelines Transporting Light Hydrocarbon Menon, Priyesh Menon, P. (2015). Souring and Corrosion in Light Oil Producing Reservoirs and in Pipelines Transporting Light Hydrocarbon (Unpublished master's thesis). University of Calgary, Calgary, AB. doi:10.11575/PRISM/27835 http://hdl.handle.net/11023/2644 master thesis University of Calgary graduate students retain copyright ownership and moral rights for their thesis. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission. Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY Souring and Corrosion in Light Oil Producing Reservoirs and in Pipelines Transporting Light Hydrocarbon by Priyesh Menon A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE GRADUATE PROGRAM IN BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES CALGARY, ALBERTA NOVEMBER, 2015 © Priyesh Menon 2015 i Abstract Microbial life can be hindered by the presence of light oil or low molecular weight hydrocarbons. The study focuses on how microorganisms survive in a diluent transporting pipeline, on souring in a field producing light oil, and on inhibition of acetate-utilizing sulfate reducing bacteria (SRB) by light oil. The study of pigging samples from a diluent transporting pipeline showed that microorganisms were able to survive in encrusted nodules where they were protected from the toxic and harsh environment and would contribute to corrosion. The study of water samples from light oil field showed that biocide, tetrakis hydroxymethyl phosphonium sulphate (THPS) could be the source of sulfate in some of these facility waters. Souring by acetate-utilizing SRB was inhibited by the presence of light oil, so in light oil producing operations once oil is removed from the water with sulfate there is a potential of souring and microbially-influenced corrosion. ii Acknowledgement I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. Gerrit Voordouw who gave me an opportunity to join his research team and learn from the immense knowledge that he has. He gave me great research project to work on, he not only guided me through my research, but also been a great support in my personal life. I will always miss his guidance, his stories and his jokes (man of superb one liner). I would also like to thank my committee members, Dr. Lisa Gieg and Dr. Casey Hubert for their support and suggestions. I would also like to thank Dr. Thomas Jack for his expert advice on corrosion aspects. I would like to thank members of Voordouw and Gieg labs. Special thanks to Johanna Voordouw for helping me out with my sample and for being the lab mother. Special thanks to Yin Shen for helping me with MPNs and reagent that I borrow and never return. Special thanks to Rhonda Clark for helping me with everything. Special thanks to Dr. Daniel Park for his effort in starting up my research project. Finally, I wish to thank my parent for their support, love and faith, they were always there. I would like to thank my brother, Parag, friends; Navreet, Roshan, Tijan, Annie, Akshay, Subu and others who stood by me and helped to finish this wonderful journey. This work was funded by NSERC, Alberta innovates, University of Calgary and all our industrial sponsors. The samples were provided by Oil search Ltd., Baker Hughes and Enbridge Inc. iii Table of Contents Abstract …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ii Acknowledgement ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. iii Table of Contents ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. iv List of Tables …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. viii List of Figures ………………………….………………………………………………………………………………………………. x List of Symbols, Abbreviations and Nomenclature …………………………………………………………………. xii CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 1 1.1 Alberta Oil & Gas Industry and Light oil reserves ……………………………………………………………….. 1 1.2 Pipelines an important mode of oil transportation ……………………………………………………………. 2 1.3 Corrosion in oil transporting pipeline ………………………………………………………………………………… 3 1.4 Microbially influenced corrosion ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 3 1.5 Light oil and Diluent (composition) ……………………………………………………………………………………. 4 1.6 Light oil toxicity …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 7 1.7 Sulfate Reducing Bacteria (SRB) ……………………………………………………………………………………….… 8 1.8 Methanogens …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 10 1.9 Microbial life in light hydrocarbon transporting pipeline …………………………………………………. 11 1.10 Souring and Biocorrosion in light oil producing oil fields ……………………………………………. 12 1.11 Light oil toxicity on acetate utilizing SRB ……………………………………………………………………. 13 1.12 Objective ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 14 CHAPTER TWO: METHODS AND METERIALS …………………………................................................. 16 2.1 Molecular methods …………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 16 2.1.1 DNA extraction ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 16 2.1.2 Modified skim milk DNA extraction …………………………………………………………………………. 17 2.1.3 Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) …………………………………………………………………………….. 17 2.2 Analytical methods ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 19 2.2.1 Sulfide Analysis ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 19 2.2.2 Volatile fatty acid analysis ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 20 2.2.3 Inorganic anion analysis …………………………………………………………………………………………… 21 2.2.4 Ammonium ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 21 2.2.5 Methane analysis …………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 22 2.2.6 Light oil composition analysis (GCMS) ……………………………………………………………………… 23 2.2.7 pH and conductivity determination …………………………………………………………………………. 23 2.3 Microbial counts and most probable number ………………………………………………………………….. 24 iv 2.4 Corrosion Analysis ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 24 2.4.1 Coupons and beads treatment ………………………………………………………………………………… 24 2.4.2 Weight loss method ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 25 2.4.3 Linear polarization resistance method …………………………………………………………………….. 26 CHAPTER THREE: MIC IN DILUENT TRANSPORTING PIPELINE ………………………………………………. 27 3.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 27 3.2 Materials and methods ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 28 3.2.1 Field samples …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 28 3.2.2 Sample handling ………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 29 3.2.3 Water chemistry ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 29 3.2.4 Microbial counts ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 31 3.2.5 Corrosion rate measurements ………………………………………………………………………………... 31 3.2.6 Methanogenesis ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 31 3.2.7 Community analysis by pyrosequencing ………………………………………………………………….. 32 3.3. Results ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 32 3.3.1 Water chemistry ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 32 3.3.2 Microbial counts ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 33 3.3.3 Corrosion rates by LPR …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 33 3.3.4 Methane production during incubation of samples …………………………………………………. 36 3.3.5 Weight loss corrosion rates of samples incubated in methane incubations …………….. 36 3.3.6 Community composition …………………………………………………………………………………………. 39 3.4 Discussion ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 40 CHAPTER FOUR: POTENTIAL OF BIOCORROSION AND SOURING IN A LIGHT OIL PRODUCING FIELD IN PAPUA NEW GUINEA …………………………………………………………………………………………… 43 4.1 Introduction and samples received ………………………………………………………………………………….. 43 4.2 Materials and methods ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 49 4.2.1 Sample handling ………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 49 4.2.2 Water chemistry ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 49 4.2.3 Most probable numbers (MPNs) ……………………………………………………………………………… 49 4.2.4 Corrosion rate measurements …………………………………………………………………………………. 49 4.2.5 Methanogenesis and acetogenesis ………………………………………………………………………….. 50 4.2.6 Microbial community composition ………………………………………………………………………….. 51 4.3 Results and discussion ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 51 4.3.1 Water chemistry ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 51 v 4.3.2 MPN ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 52 4.3.3 Corrosion rates ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 53 4.3.4 Methanogenesis and acetogenesis ………………………………………………………………………….. 57 4.3.5 Microbial community compositions ………………………………………………………………………… 60 4.4 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 64 CHAPTER FIVE: IS THPS A POSSIBLE SOURCE OF SULFATE FOR THE GROWTH OF SRB IN OIL PROCESSING FACILITIES IN PAPUA NEW GUINEA? ……………………………………………………………….. 67 5.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 67 5.2 Material and methods ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 72 5.2.1 Sample handling ………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 72 5.2.2 Water chemistry ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 72 5.2.3 Most probable numbers (MPNs) of SRB and APB …………………………………………………….. 72 5.2.4 Corrosion rate measurements …………………………………………………………………………………. 72 5.2.5 Methanogenesis ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 73 5.2.6 Microbial community analyses ………………………………………………………………………………… 73 5.3 Results …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….