SPE DISTINGUISHED LECTURER SERIES

is funded principally
through a grant of the

SPE FOUNDATION
The Society gratefully acknowledges
those companies that support the program
by allowing their professionals
to participate as Lecturers.

And special thanks to The American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical,

and Petroleum Engineers (AIME) for their contribution to the program.
Oilfield Scale:
A New Integrated Approach
to Tackle an Old Foe

Dr Eric J. Mackay
Flow Assurance and Scale Team (FAST)
Institute of Petroleum Engineering
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, Scotland
Eric.Mackay@pet.hw.ac.uk

Society of Petroleum Engineers

Distinguished Lecturer 2007-08 Lecture Season
 Outline
1) The Old Foe
a) Definition of scale Formation Injection Water
Water (Ba) (SO4)
b) Problems caused
c) Common oilfield scales

d) Mechanisms of scale formation

Ba2+ + SO42- BaSO4(s)
2) The New Approach
a) The new challenges
b) Proactive rather than reactive scale management
c) Effect of reservoir processes

3) Conclusions

Slide 3 of 40
 Outline
1) The Old Foe
a) Definition of scale Formation Injection Water
Water (Ba) (SO4)
b) Problems caused
c) Common oilfield scales

d) Mechanisms of scale formation

Ba2+ + SO42- BaSO4(s)
2) The New Approach
a) The new challenges
b) Proactive rather than reactive scale management
c) Effect of reservoir processes

3) Conclusions

Slide 4 of 40
 1a) Definition of Scale
Scale is any crystalline
deposit (salt) resulting from
the precipitation of mineral
compounds present in water

Oilfield scales typically

consist of one or more types
of inorganic deposit along
with other debris (organic
precipitates, sand, corrosion
products, etc.)
Slide 5 of 40
 1b) Problems Caused
Scale deposits
z formation damage (near wellbore)
z blockages in perforations or gravel pack
z restrict/block flow lines
z safety valve & choke failure
z pump wear
z corrosion underneath deposits
z some scales are radioactive (NORM)
Suspended particles
z plug formation & filtration equipment
z reduce oil/water separator efficiency

Slide 6 of 40
 Examples - Formation Damage
scale crystals block
pore throats

quartz grains

Slide 7 of 40
Examples - Flow Restrictions

Slide 8 of 40
Examples - Facilities

separator
scaled up

and after
cleaning Slide 9 of 40
 SPE 87459
1c) Common Oilfield Scales
Name Formula Specific Solubility
Gravity cold water other
(mg/l)
Common Scales
barium sulphate BaSO4 4.50 2.2 60 mg/l in 3% HCl
calcium carbonate CaCO3 2.71 14 acid soluble
strontium sulphate SrSO4 3.96 113 slightly acid soluble
calcium sulphate CaSO4 2.96 2,090 acid soluble
calcium sulphate CaSO4.2H2O 2.32 2,410 acid soluble
sodium chloride NaCl 2.16 357,000 (insoluble in HCl)
Sand Grains
silicon dioxide SiO2 2.65 insoluble HF soluble
Some Other Scales
Iron Scales: Fe2O3, FeS, FeCO3
Exotic Scales: ZnS, PbS
Slide 10 of 40
 1d) Mechanisms of Scale Formation
Carbonate scales precipitate due to P (and/or T)
z wellbore & production facilities

Ca2+(aq) + 2HCO-3(aq) = CaCO3(s) + CO2(aq) + H2O(l)

Sulphate scales form due to mixing of incompatible brines

z injected (SO4) & formation (Ba, Sr and/or Ca)
z near wellbore area, wellbore & production facilities

Ba2+(aq) (Sr2+or Ca2+) + SO42-(aq) = BaSO4(s) (SrSO4 or CaSO4)

Concentration of salts due to dehydration

z wellbore & production facilities

Slide 11 of 40
 Outline
1) The Old Foe
a) Definition of scale Formation Injection Water
Water (Ba) (SO4)
b) Problems caused
c) Common oilfield scales

d) Mechanisms of scale formation

Ba2+ + SO42- BaSO4(s)
2) The New Approach
a) The new challenges
b) Proactive rather than reactive scale management
c) Effect of reservoir processes

3) Conclusions

Slide 12 of 40
 2a) The New Challenges

Deepwater and other harsh environments

z Low temperature and high pressure
z Long residence times
z Access to well difficult
z Compatibility with other production chemicals

Inhibitor placement
z Complex wells (eg deviated, multiple pay zones)

Well value & scale management costs

Slide 13 of 40
 Access to Well

Subsea wells
z difficult to monitor
brine chemistry
z deferred oil during
squeezes
z well interventions
expensive (rig hire)
z squeeze
campaigns and/or
pre-emptive
squeezes

Slide 14 of 40
 Inhibitor Placement in Complex Wells
Where is scaling brine
being produced?
Ptubing head

Can we get inhibitor

where needed?
z wellbore friction Pcomp 1 Fault
z pressure zones
(layers / fault blocks) Presv 1
z damaged zones
Shale

Options: Pcomp N
z Bullhead
z bullhead + divertor
Presv N
z Coiled Tubing from rig
z Inhibitor in proppant /
gravel pack / rat hole
Slide 15 of 40
Well Value & Scale Management Costs

Deepwater wells costing US$10-100 million (eg GOM)

Interval Control Valves (ICVs) costing US$0.51 million

each to install
z good for inhibitor placement control
z susceptible to scale damage

Rig hire for treatments US$100-400 thousand / day

z necessary if using CT
z deepwater may require 1-2 weeks / treatment
z cf. other typical treatment costs of US$50-150 thousand /
treatment

Sulphate Reduction Plant (SRP), installation and

operation may cost US$20-100 million

Slide 16 of 40
 Number of SRP per Year and Total
Capacity
11
No of SRP plants
10 5,000,000
Cumulative Capacity (BWPD)

Cumulative Capacity (BWPD)

9
No of SRP plants per year

8 4,000,000
7
6 3,000,000
5
4 2,000,000
3
2 1,000,000
1
0 0
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
Year
Slide 17 of 40
2b) Proactive Rather Than Reactive
Scale Management

Scale management considered during CAPEX

Absolute must:
good quality brine samples and analysis
Predict
z water production history and profiles well by well
z brine chemistry evolution during well life cycle
z impact of reservoir interactions on brine chemistry
z ability to perform bullhead squeezes:
flow lines from surface facilities
correct placement
Monitor and review strategy during OPEX

Slide 18 of 40
2c) Effect of Reservoir Processes

EXAMPLE 1 Management of waterflood leading

to extended brine mixing at producers
(increased scale risk)
EXAMPLE 2 In situ mixing and BaSO4
precipitation leading to barium stripping
(reduced scale risk)
EXAMPLE 3 Ion exchange and CaSO4
precipitation leading to sulphate stripping
(reduced scale risk)

Slide 19 of 40
EXAMPLE 1
SPE 80252
Extended Brine Mixing at Producers

Slide 20 of 40
EXAMPLE 1
SPE 80252
Extended Brine Mixing at Producers

This well has been

treated > 220 times!
Field M (streamline model)
Slide 21 of 40
 EXAMPLE 2
SPE 60193
Barium Stripping (Field A)
Barium (mg/l)

Dilution line

% injection water Slide 22 of 40

EXAMPLE 2
SPE 94052
Barium Stripping (Theory)

Injection water (containing SO4) mixes

with formation water (containing Ba)
leading to BaSO4 precipitation in the
reservoir
Minimal impact on permeability in the
reservoir
Reduces BaSO4 scaling tendency at
production wells

Slide 23 of 40
EXAMPLE 2

Barium Stripping (Theory)

Ba2+ SO42-
(hot) Rock

FW

1) Formation water (FW): [Ba2+] but negligible [SO42-]

Slide 24 of 40
EXAMPLE 2

Barium Stripping (Theory)

Ba2+ SO42-
(cold) (hot) Rock

IW FW

2) Waterflood: SO42- rich injection water

displaces Ba2+ rich FW
Slide 25 of 40
EXAMPLE 2

Barium Stripping (Theory)

Ba2+ SO42- BaSO4

(cold) (hot) Rock

IW FW

3) Reaction: In mixing zone Ba2+ + SO42- BaSO4

Slide 26 of 40
EXAMPLE 2

Barium Stripping (Theory)

900 3000
Ba
800 Ba (mixing)
2500
SO4
700
SO4 (mixing)
600 2000

[SO4] (mg/l)
[Ba] (mg/l)

500
1500
400 Large reduction in
300 1000 [Ba]
Small reduction in
200 [SO4]
500
100 (SO4 in excess)
Typical behaviour
0 0
observed in many
0 20 40 60 80 100
fields
seawater fraction (%)
Slide 27 of 40
EXAMPLE 2

Barium Stripping (Model & Field Data)

90
Field A - actual
80
Field A - dilution line
Field A - modelled
barium concentration (ppm)

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0 20 40 60 80 100
% seawater
Slide 28 of 40
EXAMPLE 3
SPE 100516
Sulphate Stripping (Theory)

Injection water (with high Mg/Ca ratio) mixes

with formation water (with low Mg/Ca ratio)
leading to Mg and Ca exchange with rock to
re-equilibrate
Increase in Ca in Injection water leads to
CaSO4 precipitation in hotter zones in
reservoir
Minimal impact on permeability in the
reservoir
Reduces BaSO4 scaling tendency at
production wells

Slide 29 of 40
EXAMPLE 3

Ion Exchange
Rock: 0.038

FW: 0.077
C C Mg
= 0.50
Mg

C C Ca
Ca IW: 3.2

Gyda FW (mg/l) IW (mg/l)

CCa Ca in solution 30,185 426

CMg Mg in solution 2,325 1,368
Ca Ca on rock
Mg Mg on rock Slide 30 of 40
EXAMPLE 3

Sulphate Stripping (Theory)

Ba2+ SO42- Ca2+ Mg2+

(hot) Rock

FW

1) Formation water: [Ca2+] and [Mg2+] in equilibrium with rock

Slide 31 of 40
EXAMPLE 3

Sulphate Stripping (Theory)

Ba2+ SO42- Ca2+ Mg2+
(cold) (hot) Rock

IW FW

2) Waterflood: [Ca2+] and [Mg2+] no longer in equilibrium

Slide 32 of 40
EXAMPLE 3

Sulphate Stripping (Theory)

Ba2+ SO42- Ca2+ Mg2+
(cold) (hot) Rock

IW FW

3) Reaction 1: Ca2+ and Mg2+ ion exchange with rock

Slide 33 of 40
EXAMPLE 3

Sulphate Stripping (Theory)

Ba2+ SO42- Ca2+ Mg2+ CaSO4
(cold) (hot) Rock

IW FW

4) Reaction 2: In hotter zones Ca2+ + SO42- CaSO4

Slide 34 of 40
EXAMPLE 3

Modelling Prediction: [Ca] and [Mg]

35,000 3,500
Ca
30,000 3,000 Ca (mixing)
Mg
25,000 2,500 Mg (mixing)

[Mg] (mg/l)
[Ca] (mg/l)

20,000 2,000

15,000 1,500

10,000 1,000 Large reduction

in [Mg]
5,000 500 No apparent
change in [Ca]
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100
seawater fraction (%)
Slide 35 of 40
EXAMPLE 3

Observed Field Data: [Ca] and [Mg]

40000 8000 Ca
Ca (mixing)
35000 7000 Mgl
30000 6000 Mg (mixing)

[Mg] (mg/l)
[Ca] (mg/l)

25000 5000

20000 4000
15000 3000

10000 2000 Large reduction

5000 1000 in [Mg]
0 0 No apparent
0 20 40 60 80 100 change in [Ca]
seawater fraction (%)

Slide 36 of 40
EXAMPLE 3

Modelling Prediction: [Ba] and [SO4]

900 3000
Ba
800 Ba (mixing)
2500
SO4
700
SO4 (mixing)
600 2000

[SO4] (mg/l)
[Ba] (mg/l)

500
1500
400

300 1000
Small reduction
200 in [Ba]
500 Large reduction
100
in [SO4]
0 0 (No SO4 at
0 20 40 60 80 100 < 40% SW)
seawater fraction (%)
Slide 37 of 40
EXAMPLE 3

Observed Field Data: [Ba] and [SO4]

Ba
300 3000 Ba (mixing)
SO4l
250 2500
SO4 (mixing)

200 2000

[SO4] (mg/l)
[Ba] (mg/l)

150 1500

100 1000
Small reduction
50 500 in [Ba]
0 0
Large reduction
0 20 40 60 80 100
in [SO4]
(No SO4 at
seawater fraction (%)
< 40% SW)
Slide 38 of 40
 3) Conclusions
Modelling tools may assist with understanding of where
scale is forming and what is best scale management option
z identify location and impact of scaling
z evaluate feasibility of chemical options
thus providing input for economic model.

Particularly important in deepwater & harsh environments,

where intervention may be difficult & expensive

But must be aware of uncertainties..

z reservoir description
z numerical errors
z changes to production schedule, etc.
so monitoring essential.

Slide 39 of 40
 Acknowledgements

Sponsors of Flow Assurance and Scale

Team (FAST) at Heriot-Watt University:

Slide 40 of 40
 Extra Slides

Barium stripping example (Field G)

Placement example (Field X)

Slide 41 of 40
EXAMPLE G
SPE 80252
Barium Stripping (Field G)

a) water saturation b) mixing zone

c) BaSO4
deposition (lb/ft3)
Field G (model)
Slide 42 of 40
EXAMPLE G

Barium Stripping (Field G)

250 3000
[Ba] at well when no
reactions in reservoir
2500

sulphate concentration (ppm)

200
barium concentration (ppm)

2000
150 Ba
Ba (no precip)
SO4 1500

100
SO4 (no precip)

[Ba] at well when 1000

reactions in reservoir
50
500

0 0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Field G (model) time (days)

Slide 43 of 40
EXAMPLE G

Barium Stripping (Field G)

250
Field B - observed
200 Filed B - dilution line
barium concentration (ppm

Field B - modelled
150
deep reservoir mixing
100

deep reservoir + well/near

50
well mixing
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
% seawater
Field G (model & field data)
Slide 44 of 40
EXAMPLE X
Impact of Reservoir Pressures on
Placement

Question for new subsea field under

development:

Can adequate placement be achieved

without using expensive rig
operations?

Slide 45 of 40
EXAMPLE X
SPE 87459
Placement (Field D)
production 500

400

300
prior to squeeze
flow rate (m3/d)

shut-in
200
INJ 1 bbl/m
INJ 5 bbl/m
100
INJ 10 bbl/m
1 year after squeeze
0
0 200 400 600 800
-100
injection
(squeeze) -200
well length (m)

Good placement along length of well during treatment (> 5 bbls/min)

Can squeeze this well
Slide 46 of 40
EXAMPLE X
SPE 87459
Placement (Field D)
production 100

0
0 200 400 600 800
-100
prior to squeeze
flow rate (m3/d)

shut-in
-200
INJ 1 bbl/m
INJ 5 bbl/m
-300
INJ 10 bbl/m
1 year after squeeze
-400

-500
injection
(squeeze) -600
well length (m)

Cannot place into toe of well by bullhead treatment, even at 10 bbl/min

Must use coiled tubing (from rig - cost), or sulphate removal
Slide 47 of 40