3

Inhibitor Selection Strategies

The objective of corrosion inhibition is to provide an appropriate level of corro-

sion control for the required lifetime of an asset. The selection of a corrosion
inhibition package and its introduction into the field is a process that can be
divided into a series of activities. Some of these activities may form part of the
front end engineering design process, some could be included in the procurement
stage of a project, whilst with an existing field operation the selection process may
be part of an upgrade or periodic audit of the facility.
The development of an inhibition strategy requires that consideration must
be given to the design, procurement and installation of injection equipment as
well as operation and maintenance aspects. The strategy adopted by an operating
company will often be site specific and will depend on the age, history, location,
criticality to business plans and past experience of personnel.
The major activities in the development of any inhibitor selection strategy are
summarised as:

1. Planning - - defining the problem to be resolved and the objectives of the

inhibition programme. This involves obtaining the information necessary
to design and operate the inhibition system, including any previous field
experience.

2. Corrosivity and Hydrodynamic Assessments - - use of field chemical data,

corrosion prediction models, hydrodynamic modelling, guidelines and field
experience. Most corrosion prediction models are appropriate for single phase
aqueous systems and stratified flow conditions but are not necessarily appli-
cable to disturbed flow conditions (such as slug flow or flow downstream of
valves).

3. Inhibition Risks - - need to address issues concerned with high CO2/H2S

concentrations, high temperatures and unusual brines. Inhibitor efficiency and
availability, monitoring and inspection requirements must be considered.

4. Inhibitor Selection Process - - the aim is to choose the best inhibitor, in

terms of performance, economics, business needs, etc. Downstream and
compatibility issues must also be addressed.

5. Inhibitor System Design - - this includes design of the injection system,

including secondary containment, identification of the monitoring needs
and selection of the monitoring method(s). These require adequate specifi-
cation to enable the contractor to purchase appropriate equipment and
instrumentation.
22 The Use of Corrosion Inhibitors in Oil and Gas Production
6. Operation and Maintenance Issues - - these include the identification of
personnel with responsibility for day-to-day operation of the inhibition
system, and the training of personnel. Consideration must be given to possible
problems that may be encountered and to the identification of ways to solve
them. The development of reliability and maintenance management strategies,
particularly for high risk systems, must also be addressed.

7. Performance Evaluation - - checks on the inhibitor system performance and

reliability, including dosage and equipment.

The activities should form part of a strategy, as illustrated in the flow model
shown in Fig. 5. In this model, the activities are presented in chronological order,
although in reality this is an iterative process with feedback loops to several
intermediate stages.

!
±

System

I [ ~rattons &
J! - - ~1 Maintenance
I

Fig. 5 Example of corrosion inhibition strategy flow model.

 Inhibitor Selection Strategies 23
Regardless of the type of equipment to be protected, or the severity of the
environment, or of the location, careful planning of the inhibition programme is
critical to its success.

3.1. P l a n n i n g for the Use of Inhibitors

In new developments/projects it is usually the financial/technical risks associated

with the use of C-Mn steel plus inhibition compared with the use of a corrosion
resistant alloy (the major life cycle cost) that is the main issue. Initial studies asso-
ciated with front end engineering typically address corrosivity and associated
hydrodynamic concerns in order to come to the corrosion control decision (Fig. 5).
Initial front end engineering studies do not normally involve inhibitor evaluations
or materials testing, these are undertaken later in the design process.
Table 3 provides an example of the operating information needed for both the
selection of the corrosion control options and for the planning, inhibitor selection
and design of the inhibition programme.
Variations of these parameters over the life of the project should be considered
(management of change). Additional information, such as inspection reports,
bacterial analyses, and pig debris analyses, if available, should also be used to
determine the type of corrosion (e.g. general or localised), and rate of attack.
This information is used to define the corrosivity of the environment,
the current condition of the equipment, the expected corrosion rates and,
consequently, the requirements on the inhibition system.
Corrosion inhibitors are generally not effective against microbial or oxygen-
induced corrosion, which may be encountered in oil production systems and
pipelines. Similarly, the efficacy of corrosion inhibitors may be seriously com-
promised by the presence of mineral scales. Thus, scale inhibition, bacterial
and oxygen programmes may have to be implemented in addition to corrosion
inhibition. Compatibility of the various treatment chemicals must also be
assessed.

3.2. Corrosivity A s s e s s m e n t s

Assessments at the concept/early design stages of a new development are usually

desktop studies aimed at clarification of the major corrosion issues.

3.2.1. Fluid Chemistries

Major sources of error in the assessments of new developments can be the initial
chemical analyses obtained during the drilling of the wells and are often due to
problems of sampling (loss of pressure in the sample bomb, contamination from
drilling fluids, etc.). Even the reworking of partially depleted fields by installation
of water injection can be compromised if adequate records of the previous
production chemistry are not available.
Chemical analysis of the water phase, particularly the bicarbonate content, is
required to assess the pH of the produced fluids. The p H value has a crucial effect
24 The Use of Corrosion Inhibitors in Oil and Gas Production
Table 3. Operating information neededfor facility design decisions and the inhibition programme
Parameter C o m m o n units or comments

Total pressure bar

Temperature °C
maximum, range
Flow rates:
Oil m3d 1
Gas m3d 1
Water mSd 1
Sand production: kgd 1
Gas composition
CO2, H2S, 02 mole %
Water composition:
Full cation and anion mg L-1
Analysis
pH
Volatile organic acids Type and concentration
Hydrocarbon phase
oil or condensate ASTM boiling point
viscosity cP or °API
Equipment to be protected Downhole, surface, pipelines, onshore, offshore
Age and condition New-old, clean-dirty
Corrosion allowance Proposed or remaining (mm)
Estimated corrosion rate mmy i.
Environmental concerns Regulations, HSE policy
Accessibility to area Possibility of repairs and monitoring
Pigging capabilities Only for pipelines and some gathering lines/flowlines
Business risk Consequences of failure to business strategy

on the corrosivity of C O 2 systems. There are several modelling programs, includ-

ing some commercially available, that determine the p H from the chemical data.
Some models allow for waters saturated in calcium salts but others assume that
the precipitation of calcium carbonate will give a lower p H value.
The chloride ion concentration is important for the overall system as at higher
temperatures this will influence the risk of pitting and stress corrosion cracking of
critical items fabricated from CRA materials.
Values of the h y d r o c a r b o n contents, fluid densities and viscosities will be
n e e d e d to assess the emulsion tendency and the likelihood of water d r o p - o u t in
oil lines. Software p r o g r a m s are available that attempt to predict the likelihood of
oil w e t t i n g / w a t e r wetting which is d e p e n d e n t on the oil properties.

3.2.2. H y d r o d y n a m i c C o n s i d e r a t i o n s
General process or flow simulation models, such as Twophase, Olga, Pipesim or
H y s y m , can be used to determine flow characteristics.
 Inhibitor Selection Strategies 25
The primary aim of hydrodynamic studies for pipelines is to assess likely flow
patterns (stratified or slugging), pressure drops, water hold-up and water conden-
sation rate. Some of this information is also required to provide input data for the
corrosion prediction study, in particular the velocities or fluid to wall shear
stresses that are a key input parameter for most corrosion models. This requires
that the flow characteristics or type of flow patterns anticipated throughout the
lifetime of the pipe have to be assessed and the shear stress range determined.
Particular concerns are the development of slugging flow, that can adversely
affect inhibitor performance, and sand particle impact, that may cause erosion.

3.2.3. Predictive M o d e l s
Prediction of the anticipated corrosion rates in a system is the first step in assess-
ing corrosion inhibitor risks and monitoring requirements. A number of models
are available, both in the public domain and commercially [30]. The models differ
considerably in how they predict the effect of protective corrosion films and the
effect of oil wetting on CO2 corrosion, and this can lead to large differences in
prediction between the various models. Several of the models are based on the
initial studies of de Waard and Milliams [31] and later modified to include fluid
velocity [32]. Some models use the fluid-to-wall shear stress rather than liquid
velocity as the flow parameter [33]. The effect of organic acids, particularly acetic
acid and acetates can also be considered [34]. BP has reported on severe pitting
and weld corrosion in the Wytch Farm gathering line due to the presence of ac-
etates [35]. Additionally, de Waard and Smith addressed the combined effect of
CO2 and H2S and the protective effect of iron sulphide films [36].
Any assessment should compare the results from at least two of the predictive
models and attempt to define the likely spread of data. Consideration must be
given to the assumptions in the models, for example, with respect to the effects of
protective corrosion films and oil/water wetting. Also, care must be taken to
avoid the extrapolation of data from the models to conditions for which they are
not valid.
The models of CO2 corrosion widely employed by the industry use essentially
the same databases but employ different algorithms to define corrosion rates.
This accounts for apparent differences between the models at lower temperatures,
for example below 30°C. At the higher temperature range, above 100°C, where
iron carbonate scaling may influence the corrosion rate, there are differences in
opinion as to whether the scales provide protection, particularly under high flow
conditions (see, for example, Ref. 3 for further details on scaling effects).
The effect of H2S on CO 2 corrosion is twofold: the increase in hydrogen ion
concentration should, in principle, increase the corrosion rate but the production
of protective iron sulphide films may decrease overall general corrosion. BP in its
Cassandra version of the 1995 de Waard-Milliams model suggests increased
corrosion whilst Smith and de Waard assume protective film formation. These
two extremes could, therefore, be indicative of what may occur with a loss of film
and pitting compared with a fully protective film. This is analogous to the situa-
tion with higher temperature protective iron carbonate scaling and CO2 corrosion
when loss of scale leads to 'mesa corrosion'. The requirement of inhibition in both
26 The Use of Corrosion Inhibitors in Oil and Gas Production
these situations, erosion-corrosion and pitting, is therefore not only to lower the
general rate of corrosion but also particularly to provide protection in localised
areas of attack.
The use of shear stress [37] rather than velocity allows comparisons to be made
between flow conditions in the field (stratified or slugging) and in laboratory tests
using pipe electrode, rotating cylinder electrode and jet impingement apparatus.
The approach uses appropriate correlations that describe the momentum
transfer/pressure drop with the Reynolds number flow parameter and also the
dynamic similarity between mass and momentum transfer processes [38].
All models provide a single deterministic value of the corrosion rate but the use
of a probabilistic approach shows that this statistical average can encompass
higher anticipated values. For example, a corrosion rate of around 1 mm y-1 could
reach a maximum of 4.5 mm y-] (see Fig. 6).
For the successful management of corrosion in production systems, the corro-
sion risk assessment should allow for the range of corrosion rates described above
and also the sensitivity of corrosion inhibition to various parameters in order to
assess the likely probability of success from any proposed inhibition programme
as indicated below.

3.3. Inhibition Risks

The use of inhibition to control corrosion presents a risk to future operation.

Typical corrosion inhibitor risk categories are illustrated in the tables shown in
Appendix 1. Corrosion inhibition is also less effective in old, corroded and pitted
pipelines/facilities and in systems that contain large amounts of debris. Dosages
may have to be increased or the system cleaned; in some cases a scale inhibition
programme may have to be implemented in addition to the corrosion inhibition

Forecast: Predicted Corrosion Rates

20,000 Trials Frequency Chart 313 Outliers
113 ,2260

,085 _lh,
.057 IIII l,,
.028 lilil i II=,_ 565

.000
0.00
,111111 ! IIIllli,,,,,..._..
1.13 2.25 3.39 4,50
.0

mm y-1

Fig. 6 Typical outcome of a probabilistic approach [3].

 Inhibitor Selection Strategies 27
programme. The inhibitor may not perform as anticipated in the field or there
may be poor management of the dosage leading to lower than required inhibitor
availability.
Corrosion inhibitor risks are typically associated with:

• maximum expected uninhibited corrosion rate (prediction criteria adopted);

• required inhibitor efficiency (selection process employed);

• required inhibitor availability (field management procedures);

• risks of erosion corrosion (flow regime and velocities);

• risks of pitting/under deposit corrosion (cleaning and monitoring);

• risks of microbiological corrosion (monitoring/treating);

• temperature that may cause loss of inhibitor performance and scaling;

• precorrosion (old or new system);

• available corrosion allowance and required life (business concerns);

• access for repairs and replacements (design/maintenance issues).

Operating companies address inhibition risks differently depending on the

type and age of equipment, location, types of fluids, constraints and experience.
There is increasing emphasis worldwide for organisations to adopt a risk based
approach to facility integrity and corrosion management in a similar manner to
the management of safety, health and environment (SHE) issues, see Section 7.
The aim for corrosion inhibitor risks should be to categorise systems as either
high, medium, low or use a ranking, for example 1-5, see, for example, Appendix
1. This then allows discussions and actions to be agreed on for the inspection and
monitoring, the frequency of data gathering, and the necessary management pro-
cedures. Low risk systems would require minimum inhibitor treatment and moni-
toring but a high risk system could require high dose rates, >95 % availability,
and virtually continuous monitoring.

3.4. Inhibitor Selection Process

Inhibitor selection is one of the most important steps in the application of an

inhibition programme. Selection should not be confused with testing. Testing
(an important aspect of selection in some systems) is only one of several stages in
the selection process.
Several factors should be considered during the selection of corrosion
inhibitors for a particular application, including the following.
28 The Use of Corrosion Inhibitors in Oil and Gas Production
• Key factors that affect performance:

(1) inhibitor efficiency or reduction in corrosion rates;

(2) solubility and oil/water partitioning behaviour;

(3) optimum concentration (corrosion rate versus concentration and cost);

(4) film stability (flow conditions, temperature).

• Compatibility of the corrosion inhibitor with:

(1) the production fluids;

(2) other chemicals;

(3) downstream processing of produced fluids (e.g. oil/water separation);

(4) all materials in the injection and production systems (such as elastomers,
seals, liners);

(5) the environment (environmental 'friendliness' on disposal/export).

• Cost (life cycle)

• Local availability of products a n d / o r services from suppliers

• Commercial issues (contracts, preferred supplier agreements)

• Other issues (for example, joint venture interests, past experience, ongoing
practices, potential for future tie-ins).

The relative importance of these factors will be project specific (oil properties - -
API gravity, Total Acid Number (TAN), etc.), although generally the most
important criteria are performance and compatibility.
The correct approach to inhibitor selection will depend upon the intended
application and should be analysed on a case by case basis. Laboratory perfor-
mance testing is not always required. For example, operational experience and a
database of laboratory test results may be sufficient to determine the performance
of inhibitors in low corrosivity environments for which there is field experience,
such as oil/water pipelines. The higher the potential corrosivity and inhibitor risks,
the more stringent the testing requirements and selection criteria. Compatibility
testing is recommended in all cases. Figure 7 summarises the type of approach that
may be adopted.

3.4.1. Performance Evaluation

A few operators select products based upon supplier data for inhibitors that have
worked well elsewhere and use them until poor performance or problems are
 Inhibitor Selection Strategies 29

Fig. 7 Typical inhibitor selection process.

detected. Others use a portfolio of pre-selected products and then undertake

field tests. These selection methods can be high-risk, trial and error strategies that
rely on effective field monitoring. Some preliminary testing is wise, if not in the
laboratory then by a side stream device in the field.
The following methods have advantages and limitations, particularly as m a n y
of the aspects of inhibition are not always fully evaluated before application in the
field:

• model predictions;

• vendor recommendations;

• previous industry experience and practice;

• laboratory testing;

• field testing.
30 The Use of Corrosion Inhibitors in Oil and Gas Production
Vendor recommendations.
Suppliers will normally recommend one or two products from the large number
of corrosion inhibitor packages in their range. A supplier may carry out tests
using conditions, and possibly fluids, supplied by the oil company before sub-
mitting a product for approval. Recommendations on candidate packages should
be accompanied with the following information:

• expected uninhibited and inhibited corrosion rates in the proposed

application;

• recommended concentration and application method;

• laboratory test data;

• practical method for quantitative determination of the inhibitor in field fluids,

if required;

• physical and chemical properties of the product(s);

• information on environmental acceptability, toxicity and biodegradability;

• oil/water partitioning data, if appropriate;

• compatibility with non-metallic components such as elastomers.

Vendors should be provided with sufficient information about the proposed

application, as summarised previously in Table 3, Section 3.1. Factors such as
changing production conditions, sand production, other treatment chemicals and
environmental concerns should also be provided.

Previous experience.
Previous successful experience with a particular product can be a strong argu-
ment for its repeated use. However, products that perform well in one field
may not be effective in another due to differences in conditions, velocities, sand
production, or differences in water cut/water chemistry. The conditions of use
and selection criteria adopted by other operators need to be thoroughly reviewed
before the same product is selected for a new application.

Laboratory testing.
Laboratory testing is an effective means of selecting a product from available
products but does not reflect all the field conditions and verification in the field is
often required. Products selected using well designed and executed tests [2,4,37]
usually perform well in practice.
Many types of corrosion inhibitor test are used routinely for selection work
in oil industry laboratories. The bubble test, flow loop test and others are fully
described elsewhere [2,4]. The more sophisticated methods try to simulate field
 Inhibitor Selection Strategies 31
conditions as closely as possible by reproducing many aspects of composition,
temperature, pressure and hydrodynamics. Other methods sacrifice some realism
for speed and convenience. Ultimately, however, all tests are approximations
of the actual system. The main advantages and disadvantages of typical test
methods are described in Section 4.
The main parameters required for the test programme are brine composition,
gas composition, temperature, wall shear stress (flow) and compatibility with
other oilfield chemicals. Where possible, a sample of uninhibited oil from the field
should be provided for inclusion in the tests. The tests should cover the expected
variation in each parameter during the life of the field. Brine composition, for
example, can change due to sea water breakthrough in a reservoir with water
injection.
Most screening tests, such as bubble tests and flow loop tests, concentrate on
using a water phase and so water soluble inhibitors may arguably be favoured.
This could cause problems because an entirely water soluble product is not suit-
able for deployment in a low water cut crude oil system; it would be difficult to
deliver to all the water wet areas of the pipewalls. To address this concern all
products in a selection process should first be qualitatively checked for their solu-
bility in brine and in crude oil by means of a solubility test. Corrosion inhibitors
must be soluble or dispersible in both brine and organic phases in order to
proceed to the next stage of testing.
High H2S situations, particularly those containing active sulphur, are amongst
the most difficult to inhibit. For example, in Canada some wells produce >30%
H2S in the gas and require several hundred ppm of corrosion inhibitor [39].
Effective field performance is the overriding objective. Laboratory testing is
only ever an approximation of real conditions and while it will eliminate unsuit-
able products it cannot guarantee to identify the best ones. Laboratory tests are
also not adequate for fully optimising dosage rates.
Field testing requires the development and approval of an agreed programme
with well defined aims and an agreed monitoring plan. An important factor is
the management of the test programme. Agreed procedures, key performance
indicators and the roles and responsibilities of participants must be established
and the results discussed promptly. The technical aspects of field testing will be
considered in Section 4.

3.4.2. Inhibitor Compatibility

Compatibility between two components implies freedom from detrimental effects
on each others' performance. Corrosion inhibitors should be compatible with:

• the injection system - - materials of construction, pumps, valves, seals;

• other treatment chemicals - - scale inhibitors, biocides, hydrate control

chemicals, wax or asphaltene inhibitors, oxygen scavengers;

• downstream processing - - separation of oil/water, condensate stabilisation,

water disposal, crude refining;
32 The Use of Corrosion Inhibitors in Oil and Gas Production
• the natural environment -- low toxicity, environmentally 'benign' as defined
by relevant regulations.

Some neat/concentrated corrosion inhibitors corrode metals [40] and only per-
form as corrosion inhibitors when they are diluted to a low concentration in a
process liquid. Because of this effect it is necessary to check the compatibility
of neat corrosion inhibitor with the material used to fabricate the storage and
delivery system. The use of 316 stainless steel or higher alloys/plastic materials
is preferred. The stainless steel injection quill must also be designed, and aligned
in the field so as to avoid any neat inhibitor coming in contact with carbon steel
pipe prior to mixing. In some cases a length of CRA pipe material may be inserted
downstream of the injection point. This must also be considered when batch
treating a C-Mn steel line with neat or partially diluted (ca. 20% v / v ) corrosion
inhibitor.
Lined C-steel storage vessels and delivery piping can be used as a compromise
between stainless steel and carbon steel. Nevertheless, lining materials themselves
have their own limitations and can also be attacked by certain corrosion
inhibitors. Compatibility tests are again necessary. The elastomer materials
used as seals in pumpheads must also be considered. The major chemical factors
determining the effect of corrosion inhibitors on elastomers will be:

• amine content, e.g. amines affect both nitriles and fluroelastomers;

• acidity/alkalinity, e.g. acids affect nitriles, alkalis affect fluroelastomers;

• solvent package, e.g. methanol swells some fluroelastomers, aromatics swell

nitriles.

There is a range of alternative materials (e.g. perfluoropolymers, etc.) which may

be more effective. Unfortunately, with elastomer seals there is often a trade off
between chemical resistance and useful mechanical properties. In general, pump
seals see neat chemicals at relatively low temperature, while production seals see
mostly dilute chemicals at somewhat higher temperature. If there is any doubt
regarding the performance of a seal, testing should be carried out with particular
inhibitors to demonstrate that the seal can function under the appropriate
conditions.

Compatibility with other oilfield chemicals.

Once a corrosion inhibitor is injected it must be compatible with the other oilfield
chemicals present in the system such as demulsifiers, scale inhibitors, anti-foams,
wax inhibitors etc., and vice versa. To simplify the selection procedure the best
approach is to decide which function has the highest priority (corrosion inhibi-
tion, scale inhibition, demulsification), choose the best chemical for that function,
and then find compatible chemicals for the other functions. For example, if scale
inhibition is the priority and a scale inhibitor has been selected then this should
be included at an appropriate concentration in all the corrosion inhibitor selection
 Inhibitor Selection Strategies 33
tests. Chemical suppliers are not always given correct details about other chemi-
cals and this can cause problems even though corrosion inhibitor performance
tends to be robust towards other oilfield chemicals. On the other hand, demulsi-
tiers and scale inhibitors are often adversely affected by corrosion inhibitors.
Because of this some of the corrosion inhibitor may be added downstream of the
water separation train.
Co-mingled fluids can give rise to compatibility issues that become extremely
complicated when fluids from different installations are co-mingled in shared
pipeline facilities. All contributors should have to notify the system operator
well in advance of any potential changes in chemical type or dose rate (see also
corrosion management issues Chapter 7).
Incompatibilities between different chemicals can become all too evident when
they mix in the same injection line, usually accidentally. Neat corrosion inhibitor
injected into a line previously used to dose wax inhibitor or scale inhibitor with-
out adequate flushing with a solvent or water can cause blockages. Blockages are
of particular concern in inaccessible umbilicals and flexibles leading to subsea
wellheads because repairs can be difficult or impossible. Sometimes the blockage
is not due to products mixing, but to a carrier solvent (e.g. methanol) forming a
viscous gel with the corrosion inhibitor or even dissolving some polymer tubing.
One way of avoiding compatibility problems between different products is to
use combined products. Combined scale and corrosion inhibitors are available
from a number of suppliers. Many of these are simply mixtures of compatible,
individual products although some multifunctional, single component products
are being assessed [41,42].
Combined products have the advantage of enabling one storage tank, one
pump, and one injection line to be used for both scale and corrosion control. This
is especially attractive for minimum facilities installations. On the negative side,
there is some loss of flexibility in this approach. If the combined product is being
dosed at a particular rate and then there is a sudden need to increase the concen-
tration of scale inhibitor, this can only be done by also putting in additional
corrosion inhibitor, which may not be needed. The product could be reformulated
to meet the new balance between scale and corrosion inhibition but realistically
this is likely to take several months.

3.5. D e s i g n Implications with Inhibition Systems

3.5.1. General Design Considerations

Inhibition systems may be designed by the operating unit, the operating unit's
main contractor, the inhibitor supplier or a specialist contractor. In all cases a clear
functional specification must be provided that meets the requirements and reflects
best industry practice. Important aspects are:

(1) Control and operability of the system

Ensure size of system will meet future requirements; pumps should be sized
to provide >50% excess capacity to meet upset/changing conditions.
34 The Use of Corrosion Inhibitors in Oil and Gas Production
Address human factors - - clear design, easy access.

Consider automation of operation.

(2) Inhibition system reliability

Ensure online availability is achievable, pumps should be piped in parallel - -

one running, one standby.

Provide appropriate safeguards and backups, particularly with high risk

inhibition systems.

(3) Monitoring of inhibition effectiveness

Define data collection and data storage requirements.

Consider the use of automatic data analysis.

(4) Safety and environmental aspects

Address toxicity, flammability and flash point of products and solvents.

Consider disposal of waste streams.

Ensure safe release of inhibitors to the environment, particularly offshore,

by proper installation of equipment, provision of ventilation and personnel
protection.

3.5.2. Inhibition System Components

Typical corrosion inhibitor systems comprise:

• the injection system;

• monitoring system;

• data acquisition system.

These will be considered in more detail in Chapter 5.

3.5.3. Inhibitor Availability Requirements

Inhibitor injection systems should be considered to be critical items, as they
are required for continuous operation. The required availability risks depend on
several factors, including:

• expected corrosivity (predicted or measured);

• available corrosion allowance and life;

 Inhibitor Selection Strategies 35
• consequences of failure of protected equipment;

• inspection/monitoring frequency.

Several operators believe that online availability of >99% is an achievable target.

For most normal applications about 90% is required but in some highly corrosive
conditions >95% may be needed. The cost of designing and purchasing reliable
injection equipment and having in place a suitable management strategy is
minimal compared to the financial increased risk from inadequate inhibition.

3.6. Key Points on Selection

Inhibitor selection, as part of a control strategy, requires careful planning with

assessment of risks associated with corrosion and inhibition. Each application
must be considered on its own merits.

The choice between batch and continuous treatments depends on the produc-
tion environment, fluid compositions and throughput. In general, systems
containing high concentrations of water will use continuous injection. Compa-
nies therefore tend to evolve a strategy for continuous injection of corrosion
inhibitors over several years as water cuts increase.

Batch treatment tends to be suitable when the application is non-severe, when

continuous treatment is technically difficult (e.g. downhole in gas wells, or at
remote locations) or when batch and continuous treatment are used together
for severe or upset conditions.

A batch or continuous inhibitor that performs well in one field may be ineffi-
cient in another under different conditions. Therefore, it is wise to check the
performance beforehand in laboratory tests.

Selection must address likely inhibitor effectiveness, optimum concentration,

solubility and partitioning behaviour, life cycle costs and future needs.

Generally a shortlist of products is narrowed down through a series of

solubility tests, static and dynamic corrosion tests, and water/oil partitioning
tests.

A full corrosion inhibitor selection programme in the laboratory is an efficient

way to choose a product. However, laboratory testing is only ever an approxi-
mation of the real conditions and so the best products must then be assessed
in the field.

Compatibility with production fluids, other chemicals, downstream process-

ing, and materials in the injection and production system environment must
be established.
36 The Use of Corrosion Inhibitors in Oil and Gas Production
Due to the m a n y components in proprietary corrosion inhibitor packages and
also measurement artefacts, partitioning should be regarded as a qualitative
concept - - as in 'preferentially water soluble' or 'preferentially oil soluble' - -
rather than a numerical constant to be used for extrapolating to different
conditions.

The main purpose of a partitioning test is to estimate the inhibitor dose rate
required on total fluids.

It is essential to check the compatibility of a corrosion inhibitor with every

material, lining, seal, and oilfield chemical with which it is likely to come into
contact. Incompatibilities of any sort can cause serious operational problems.

A clear functional specification must be provided for the design of the

inhibition system that comprises the injection system, monitoring and data
acquisition system, safety and environmental aspects.

The dose rate determined in the lab should be introduced in the field and then
gradually reduced or increased to an o p t i m u m value using field monitoring.