Zdenko Augustinovic

DONG E&P MicrobesOilfield Enemies or Allies?

Hoersholm, Denmark

ystein Birketveit
M-I SWACO
Bergen, Norway
Microbes have a long history in the oil and gas industry. New molecular analysis
Kayli Clements
Mike Freeman methods, coupled with increased knowledge of microbe identity and chemistry, have
M-I SWACO
Houston, Texas, USA led to advances in combating microbiologically influenced corrosion and reservoir
damage. Scientists are also using these advances to develop new methods for
Santosh Gopi
M-I SWACO microbiologically enhanced oil recovery and bioremediation.
Accra, Ghana

Thomas Ishoey
Glori Energy, Inc.
Houston, Texas We live in a natural world of extremes in size and
scale. Topographical extremes range from moun-
Graham Jackson tains to deserts to ocean trenches. These extremes
Husky Energy Inc. include a place so small that we cannot directly
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
view it: the unseen world of microbes.
Microbes are the most abundant life form on
Gregory Kubala
Sugar Land, Texas the planetno other life form approaches them
in terms of numbers, diversity or habitat.
Jan Larsen Microbes were the first link in the evolutionary
Maersk Oil chain and are an essential part of the Earths
Copenhagen, Denmark biota.1 Microbes catalyze important transforma-
tions in the biosphere, produce key components
Brian W.G. Marcotte of the atmosphere and represent a large fraction
Titan Oil Recovery, Inc. of the genetic diversity on this planet. The num-
Los Angeles, California, USA ber of microbial cells on Earth has been esti-
mated at 4 to 6 1030 cells, and this aggregate
Jan Scheie
mass contains 350 to 550 1015 g of carbon.
M-I SWACO
Stavanger, Norway Microbes are distributed everywhere, including
places that are hotter, colder, drier and deeper
Torben Lund Skovhus than humans can tolerate. This wide distribution
Danish Technological Institute suggests that oil exploration and production
Aarhus, Denmark operations must always contend with microbes.
Microbes have a long history in the oil field.
Egil Sunde Analysis of produced water from shallow reser-
Statoil voirs in the 1930s and 1940s showed abundant
Stavanger, Norway populations.2 Despite these findings, scientists at
the time believed that temperature, pressure and
Oilfield Review Summer 2012: 24, no. 2.
Copyright 2012 Schlumberger. salinity in most reservoirs were too hostile for
For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Sonny Espey,
M-I SWACO, Houston; and Dietmar Schumacher, 1. Whitman WB, Coleman DC and Wiebe WJ: Prokaryotes:
Geo-Microbial Technologies Inc., Ochelata, Oklahoma, USA. The Unseen Majority, Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences 95, no. 12 (June 9, 1998): 65786583.
AERO is a registered trademark of Glori Energy, Inc.
2. Bass C and Lapin-Scott H: The Bad Guys and the Good
Guys in Petroleum Microbiology, Oilfield Review 9, no. 1
(Spring 1997): 1725.
microbes to thrive. Initiation of North Sea oil and
gas production in the 1960s, however, demon-
strated that early assumptions were incorrect.
Microbes in these reservoirs not only lived in
extreme conditions, they produced hydrogen sul-
fide [H2S]. Souring, or increases in H2S, resulted
from injection of sulfate-rich seawater in North
Sea reservoirs and ultimately led to corrosion of
both surface and downhole equipment. Formation
plugging by biomass during waterflood operations
was another early negative effect of microbes.3
However, not all of the early production-
related experiences with microbes were nega-
tive. Some operators found that injection of
sugar-based materials that resident microbes
could use as food caused an increase in oil pro-
duction, although results were often temporary
and inconsistent.4 In the past several decades,
much of the oilfield research on microbes focused
on short-term strategies to either mitigate nega-
tive effects or enhance positive onesbut that
work was based on a partial understanding of
microbiological mechanisms.
The ability to control and harness microbes is
key to some of the major advances in microbial
oilfield science. This progress has been aided
by new analytical methods that give a more
complete picture of microbe identity, quantity,
3. Chang CK: Water Quality Considerations in Malaysias
First Waterflood, Journal of Petroleum Technology 37,
no. 9 (September 1985): 16891698.
4. Rassenfoss S: From Bacteria to Barrels: Microbiology
Having an Impact on Oil Fields, Journal of Petroleum
Technology 63, no. 11 (November 2011): 3238.

4 Oilfield Review
behavior and function. Advances include simple
chemicals added to injection water that provide
environmentally safe control of reservoir souring
and associated corrosion as well as new direc-
tions for microbiologically enhanced oil recovery This article focuses on microbes in the oil field positive characteristics. Case studies from Canada
(MEOR). Other progress includes bioremediation and describes techniques for their analysis and for and the US demonstrate how these techniques are
research that allows safe disposal of oilfield solid controlling their negative effects and harnessing employed in production environments.
waste into ordinary soil.

Summer 2012 5
 Bacteria Archaea Eucarya The Microbial World
Biological classification systems have evolved in
Entamoeba Slime Animals
tandem with methods for microbe detection. In
Green molds
filamentous the early 1800s, what was not a mineral or plant
Spirochetes Methanosarcina
Gram- Fungi was considered an animal. The discovery that
Proteobacteria positive Methanobacterium Halophiles bacteria could be considered either plant or ani-
bacteria Plants
Cyanobacteria
Methanococcus mal led to reformulations of the biological classi-
Thermococcus Ciliates fication system for living organisms that continue
Planctomyces to the present era. Proposed more than 30 years
Thermoproteus Flagellates
Pyrodictium
ago, todays accepted classification into three pri-
Bacteroides Trichomonads mary domains has its roots in molecular analysis
Thermotoga Microsporidia methods, including genome sequencing.5 The
three domains are bacteria, archaea and eucarya
Aquifex Diplomonads
(left). Bacteria and archaeacollectively called
prokaryotesare the organisms that affect the
oil field (below left).
> Tree of life. Life on Earth is divided into three primary domainsbacteria (left, blue), archaea Fossils of prokaryotic organisms that lived
(middle, pink) and eucarya (right, green). This classification encompasses the entire realm of living 3.5 billion years ago have been found in Western
organisms, from the proteobacteria that contain the digestive disease salmonella to the more familiar Australia and South Africa; for 2 billion years
plants and animals. Branch order and length are based on genetic sequencing.
they were the only form of life on Earth. Larger
and more-complex eucaryotic cells did not
appear until much laterabout 1.5 to 2 billion
years ago. The archaea and bacteria that consti-
tute the prokaryotes differ from the cells in com-
plex eucaryotic organisms such as plants and
animals. Prokaryotic cells have no compartmen-
Plasma Cell wall Capsule talized nucleus, and each cell is capable of inde-
membrane pendent existence.6 Unlike plants and animals,
Cytoplasm
prokaryotes are not typically thought of as organ-
Ribosome isms able to interact with their environment, but
Plasmid that view may be changing. Researchers have
shown that many bacteria have cell to cell com-
munication through signaling molecules called
autoinducers. This signaling is called quorum
sensing and allows the microbes to monitor and
respond to their surroundings.7
Prokaryotes are found everywhere on Earth
and thrive in extreme habitats. From hot springs,
Flagellum arid deserts and ocean depths to polar caps and
underground formations, these single-cell organ-
10 3 isms withstand conditions that humans cannot.8
Eukaryotes These microbes may remain dormant for thou-
Nucleoid 10 4
sands of years but can reactivate rapidlyoften
10 5
Prokaryotes in days or weeks. Their wide distribution in a vari-
10 6 ety of habitats and conditions means that
Size, m

Viruses
microbes are always present during E&P activi-
10 7
ties. Some microbes are indigenous to reservoirs,
10 8 Proteins while others may be introduced during drilling,
10 9 workover or waterflood. These single-cell life
Small molecules
forms have an innate tendency to cling to rock
10 10 Atoms
and metal surfaces and may assemble into
> Bacteria. The bacterial cell is enclosed by a capsule, cell wall and plasma membrane. The interior of masses called biofilms. Microbe-generated bio-
the cell is filled with cytoplasm, a homogeneous, gel-like substance. The primary interior component is films provide a safe harbor for growth and may
the nucleoid, which contains the chromosome material. Plasmids, containing deoxyribonucleic acid
(DNA), and ribosomes, containing ribonucleic acid (RNA), are other essential interior components. eventually lead to serious problems in both
Although not all bacteria are motile, many use a whip-like flagellum to move in aqueous media. equipment and reservoirs (next page).
Bacteria and other prokaryotes range in size from 105 to 106 m.

6 Oilfield Review
 Biofilm
Microbes

Metal or rock surface

A B C D E
> Biofilm formation. The growth of biofilms is a stepwise process that begins with the transport of microbes to a metal or
rock surface (A). The microbes absorb organic molecules from their surroundings to form a film (B) composed of
exopolymerssugarsthat allow the microbes to stay attached to the surface as well as to each other (C). As the biofilm
expands (D), its size gives the interior microbes protection from biocides. Eventually, when the biofilm grows to a certain
size, some microbes are released (E) to form new areas of growth.

New methods for enumeration and identifi-
cation of bacteria and archaea have led scien-
tists to a better understanding of microbial
behavior and chemistry. Their efforts, in turn,
have led to more accurate identification of prob-
lems caused by microbes as well as better means
for their solution. Taken together, these meth-
ods give the operator tools to control microbes
in places where their effects are harmful and to
exploit their positive characteristics.
Enemy and Ally
Although microbes and humans have existed as
both enemy and ally for ages, the roles of
microbes in those relationships have been recog-
5. Woese CR and Fox GE: Phylogenetic Structure of the
Prokaryotic Domain: The Primary Kingdoms,
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 74,
no. 11 (November 1, 1977): 50885090.
Woese CR, Kandler O and Wheelis ML: Towards a
Natural System of Organisms: Proposal for the Domains
Archaea, Bacteria and Eucarya, Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences 87, no. 12 (June 1, 1990):
45764579.
Todar K: Todars Online Textbook of Bacteriology,
http://www.textbookofbacteriology.net (accessed
May 24, 2012).
6. Although the bacteria and archaea that make up the
prokaryotes are similar in size and structure, their
genome structures and metabolism differ.
7. Taga ME and Bassler BL: Chemical Communication
Among Bacteria, Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences 100, supplement 2 (November 25, 2003):
1454914554.
nized only in the recent past. In the fight against
infectious diseases, bacteria were identified
about 150 years ago as one of the culprits.9 As
industrial allies, microbes played a key role in the
leaching of copper from mine drainage water,
a practice in the Mediterranean region about
1000 BCE, but their role in the process was
unknown until the 1950s.10
The bulk of experience with microbes in oil
and gas exploration and production has occurred
in the past 75 years. One of the early encounters
with microbes in a production environment
occurred in the late 1950s during waterflooding.11
Microbes produce high molecular weight polysac-
charides that deposit on the sandface and other
8. Bass and Lapin-Scott, reference 2.
Danish scientists have discovered microbes living in
undisturbed sediments that are more than 86 million
years old. The microbes consume oxygen in quantities
too small to be directly measured. For more: Bhanoo SN:
Deep-Sea Microbes That Barely Breathe, The New
York Times (May 21, 2012), http://www.nytimes.
com/2012/05/22/science/deep-sea-microbes-that-barely-
breathe.html (accessed May 22, 2012).
9. Santer M: Joseph Lister: First Use of a Bacterium as a
Model Organism to Illustrate the Cause of Infectious
Disease of Humans, Notes & Records of the Royal
Society 64, no. 1 (March 2010): 5965.
10. Brierley CL: Microbial Mining, Scientific American 247,
no. 2 (1982): 4250.
formation surfaces as a biofilm.12 This biofilm is
the glue that holds the microbes together. Given
the right conditions, the microbes will continue
to grow, divide and plug rock pores, thus decreas-
ing the effectiveness of water injection in displac-
ing oil. As a result, early water quality control
methods included membrane filtration and the
use of strong oxidizing agents as biocides.13 Later
waterflood control applications employed nonox-
idizing biocides.
Shortly after operators learned to manage
microbe plugging during waterflooding, they
encountered another significant problem
microbiologically influenced corrosion (MIC)
corrosion caused by microbial action.14 This type
11. Lee D, Lowe D and Grant P: Microbiology in the Oil
Patch: A Review, paper 96-109, presented at the Annual
Technical Meeting of The Petroleum Society, Calgary,
June 1012, 1996.
12. Polysaccharides are long carbohydrate molecules
composed of repeating units and are common sources
of energy for bacteria. For more: Todar, reference 5.
13. Mitchell RW and Bowyer PM: Water Injection
Methods, paper SPE 10028, presented at the SPE
International Petroleum Exhibition and Technical
Symposium, Beijing, March 1724, 1982.
14. The literature on microbes associated with oilfield
environments uses numerous acronyms for microbe-
driven processes such as MIC or MEOR. It is not
uncommon to encounter both microbial and
microbiologically as the initial term in these acronyms,
depending on the referencethe terms are essentially
equivalent.

Summer 2012 7
 Nini
Siri
Cecilie

Water injection

32 km

9 km
m
13 k
Stine

Oil storage
Water injection
Gas lift
Multiphase
Oil
Umbilical

> Microbiologically influenced corrosion (MIC). Operated by DONG E&P, the Siri platform (center) is located in the North Sea 220 km [137 mi] west of the
Danish coast and is flanked by the smaller Cecilie (left) and Nini (right) satellite platforms. Five fieldsSiri, Nini, Nini East, Cecilie and Stineproduce from
reservoirs 1,800 to 2,200 m [5,900 to 7,220 ft] below sea level. Seafloor lines between the three structures and wells carry oil and gas, gas for lift, and
injection water for pressure support. In 2007, a 25.4-cm [10-in.] water injection line ruptured (inset) 3 km [2 mi] from the Siri platform. Subsequent
investigation revealed that the MIC deposit at the rupture site was a mixture of iron sulfide and other corrosion by-products plus microbes and polysaccharide
slime. These deposits allow sulfate-reducing prokaryotes (SRPs) and other troublesome microbes to grow protected from biocides. (Adapted with
permission from DONG E&P.)

of corrosion can occur anywhere in the produc-
tion environmentin downhole tubulars, in top-
side equipment and in pipelines. This type of
corrosion can cause ruptures that seriously
impede operations (above). Reports in the 1980s
showed that sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB)
were the cause of MIC.15 SRB typically live in an
anaerobic, aqueous environment and use organic
acids and hydrogen from decomposing biomass
15. Cord-Ruwisch R, Kleinitz W and Widdel F: Sulfate-
Reducing Bacteria and Their Activities in Oil
Production, Journal of Petroleum Technology 39, no. 1
(January 1987): 97106.
16. Lee et al, reference 11.
as nutrients, oxidizing the nutrients while reduc-
ing the sulfate in the water to H2S. The role of
SRB in initiating MIC is complex and involves not
only biofilms that trap corrosive microbial waste
products but also electrochemical reactions at
the metal surface. Early explanations pointed
toward an SRB produced enzyme that removes
cathodic hydrogen from steel, which causes rapid
pitting of the surface.16
17. Campbell S, Duggleby A and Johnson A: Conventional
Application of Biocides May Lead to Bacterial Cell Injury
Rather Than Bacterial Kill Within a Biofilm, paper
NACE 11234, presented at the NACE Corrosion Annual
Conference and Exposition, Houston, March 1317, 2011.
MIC is a common occurrence in the oil field,
and to control it, operators usually treat injected
and produced water to mitigate microbial action.
Complete sterilization of the water is impossible,
and microbe control strategies have usually been
directed toward disinfectionthat is, reduction of
microbe numbers to acceptable levels by killing a
large portion of the population with a biocide.
18. Maxwell S and Campbell S: Monitoring the Mitigation
of MIC Risk in Pipelines, paper NACE 06662, presented
at the NACE Corrosion Annual Conference and Exposition,
San Diego, California, USA, March 1216, 2006.
19. Eckert R and Skovhus TL: Using Molecular
Microbiological Methods to Investigate MIC in the Oil
and Gas Industry, Materials Performance 50, no. 8
(August 2011): 5054.

8 Oilfield Review
 If the biocide is a strong oxidizing agent such
as chlorine, it is added to the injection water con-
tinuously. Nonoxidizing biocides, typically used
in current operations, are added intermittently
(right). Each batch of biocide kills a portion of
the microbe population, but the survivors may
recover between doses. Recent research has
shown biocides may not be as effective as previ-
ously thoughtthey may only injure or inhibit
but not kill microbes.17
Although biocides can be effective in combat-
ing MIC, there are reports of equipment failure in
spite of treatment, and examination of these inci-
dents revealed that the biocide application was
erratic and haphazard.18 Until recently, unlike
with common corrosive agents, there were no
effective tools to predict and quantify the risk of
corrosion influenced by microbes. The juncture
of genome-based test methods and the inadequa-
cies of biocides and their risks has led to a new
approach in managing MIC in production envi-
ronments. This approach uses molecular micro-
biological methods (MMMs) and represents a
fundamental change in assessing microbe
effects.19 These methodsfluorescence in situ
hybridization (FISH), quantitative polymerase
chain reaction (qPCR) and a microbe staining
technique using a fluorescent stain known as
4,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI)allow
scientists to gain a more complete understanding
of identities, quantities and behaviors of the
microbes involved in MIC.
To appreciate the significance of these meth-
ods, it is important to understand how microbes
were handled in the laboratory prior to the intro-
duction of MMMs. Traditional microbiological
methods for identification and enumeration
relied on serial dilution and cultivation in nutri-
ent media for relatively long periodsoften up to
30 days. Even after these long periods, less than
10% of the viable microbes could be cultured. It is
no surprise that laboratory results based on tradi-
tional serial dilution and culturing methods did
not correlate well with field results.
In contrast, results from application of FISH,
DAPI and qPCR techniques reveal nearly com-
plete identities and distribution of the microbes
of interest in oil production systems. These new
methods utilize a combination of microscopy,
analysis of cell genetic material and enzymatic
reactions to give a complete enumeration of
microbes present in the sample (right). In addi-
tion, the results are available in days rather than
weeks. These methods permit scientists to more
completely understand the chemistry of MIC on a
Summer 2012
5 1,000
4 800
Biocide, ppm
Sulfide, ppm
3 Biocide 600
2 400
Sulfide
1 200
0 0
Start Stop 1 2 3
Biocide Time, d
> Biocide treatment. Offshore topside equipment is commonly treated with
biocides to prevent MIC and precipitation of iron sulfide from produced
H2S. In the North Sea, engineers treated a reclaimed oil sump tank with
glutaraldehyde to obtain data showing how the biocide and H2S
concentrations changed with time. The sump tank effluent was analyzed
for residual glutaraldehyde and sulfide as a marker for H2S. Data from the
study show expected results after biocide treatment. As the high
concentration of biocide kills troublesome microbes, the sulfide
concentration drops sharply. At the highest concentration of biocide, the
sulfide concentration reaches a minimum. Both trends reverse as the
biocide is flushed from the system. Biocide is reapplied when the sulfide
returns to a threshold level.
Microbe Characterization and Relative Proportions
MPN: most probable number
FISH: flourescence in situ
hybridization
DAPI: 4,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole
qPCR: quantitative polymerase
Dead chain reaction
Active
Inactive
> Molecular microbiological methods. These laboratory methods allow characterization and determination of
the relative proportions of microbes present in oil production systems. Traditional microbe culturing using serial
dilution produces the most probable number (MPN) of microbes, which may represent only a small fraction of
the total number actually present. In contrast, MMMs represent a trio of new methodsFISH, DAPI and
qPCRthat divide the microbe population into organisms that are active, inactive and dead. FISH analysis
involves staining and microscopy to examine living, or active, microbes. The fluorescent stain, DAPI, binds to
DNA and quantifies both active and inactive microbes. The qPCR method employs an enzymatic reaction that
gives additional information on all the microbial groups. When these methods are used together, scientists
obtain a complete enumeration and characterization of the microbes in a sample. (Adapted with permission
from DTI Oil & Gas, Danish Technological Institute.)
9
 showed high corrosion rates in the carbon steel outlet.27 New research relies on data that show
Water
H2S Sulfate- water outlet piping. The pipe showed severe the amount of H2S produced is consistent with
reducing
prokaryotes metal pitting and scaling, and scientists deter- production only in the immediate vicinity of the
SO42 mined that MIC was the cause (next page).21 The wellbore but not throughout the formation.
S2
FeS CO2 microbes responsible for corrosion problems at Scientists have concluded that elevated levels of
H+ CH4 Halfdan field are not the only varieties that can heavy metals, water-soluble hydrocarbons and
Fe 2+
e H2 Methanogens cause MIC in production systems. Acid-producing microbe activity by-products inhibit microbe
bacteria (APB) are microbes that produce growth in the reservoir. Another result of this
Fe0 Metal organic acids under certain conditions. These research is a model showing how H2S produced
acids can cause the pH to drop enough to create in the vicinity of the wellbore moves through
Net reactions conditions favorable to corrosion on metal the reservoir. Early theories relied on a simple


 

surfaces such as those of submersible pumping
4Fe0 + 3H2S + SO42 + 2H+ 4FeS + 4H2O





n plished by biocide disinfection that may aid in
4Fe0 + 4H2S + CO2 4FeS + 2H2O + CH4
> Corrosion reactions. A complex set of reactions
underlies the production of MIC on a metal
surface. These reactions are strongly influenced
by sulfate-reducing prokaryotic and methanogenic
respiration (blue and red paths, top). This set of
reactions is best illustrated by listing the net
reactions for sulfate reduction and CH4 production
(bottom). In the net sulfate reduction reaction, iron
[Fe], H2S and the sulfate ion [SO42] combine to
give FeS and water. In the net CH4 production
reaction, Fe, H2S and carbon dioxide [CO2]
combine to give FeS, water and CH4. (Adapted
from Larsen et al, reference 20.)
metal surface. By using MMMs, scientists discov-
ered that corrosion involves not only SRB but also
other microbes that contribute to H2S and meth-
ane [CH4] production (above).20
This complexity in MIC is illustrated by recent
laboratory work on topside equipment in the
Danish sector of the North Sea. In 2008, a pro-
duced water separator in the Halfdan field
20. Larsen J, Rasmussen K, Pedersen H, Srensen K,
Lundgaard T and Skovhus TL: Consortia of MIC
Bacteria and Archaea Causing Pitting Corrosion in Top
Side Oil Production Facilities, paper NACE 10252,
presented at the NACE Corrosion Annual Conference and
Exposition, San Antonio, Texas, USA, March 1418, 2010.
21. Skovhus TL, Holmkvist L, Andersen K, Pedersen H and
Larsen J: MIC Risk Assessment of the Halfdan Oil
Export Spool, paper SPE 155080, presented at the
SPE International Conference and Exhibition on Oilfield
Corrosion, Aberdeen, May 2829, 2012.
22. Adams DL: Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion of
Electrical-Submersible-Pumping-System Components
Associated With Acid-Producing Bacteria and
Sulfate-Reducing Bacteria: Case Histories, paper
SPE 136756, presented at the SPE Latin American and
Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference, Lima,
Peru, December 13, 2010.
23. Bagchi D, Periera AP, Chu J, Smith JP and Scheie J:
Successful Mitigation of Microbiologically Influenced
Corrosion in Waterflood Pipelines and Process
Equipment, in Blackwood DJ (ed): Proceedings of
Corrosion Asia 2000. Singapore: Corrosion Association
Singapore (2000): 5565.
10
mixing-zone model that predicted rapid H2S
components.22 Control of APB is typically accom-
reservoir pore volumes must be displaced before
control of SRB as well.23
New Theories and Solutions
The H2S produced during MIC in the wellbore
and reservoir by sulfate-reducing prokaryotes
(SRPs) contributes to reservoir souring.24 There
are new and effective ways to control souring, but
souring is not a new problem for producers. Some
reservoirs are sour as a result of high levels of H2S
that have been present over geologic time frames.
Many reservoirs are sour, however, as a conse-
quence of seawater injection for secondary recov-
ery.25 The SRPs that live near the wellbore and in
the reservoir have simple needs for growththey
require sulfate, carbon and nutrients. Seawater
is rich in sulfate, and reservoir formation water
usually contains abundant short-chain fatty acids
that supply the carbon and other nutrients.26 Add
a suitable temperature regime, inject seawater
and the end result is inevitablesouring.
Exactly how and to what extent souring
occurs have been recently challenged, and the
picture may not entail simple microbe growth
from water injector all the way to produced water
24. Larsen J, Srenson K, Hjris K and Skovhus TL:
Significance of Troublesome Sulfate-Reducing
Prokaryotes (SRP) in Oil Field Systems, paper
NACE 09389, presented at the NACE Corrosion Annual
Conference and Exposition, Atlanta, Georgia, USA,
March 2226, 2009.
25. Kuijvenhoven C, Bostock A, Chappell D, Noirot JC and
Khan A: Use of Nitrate to Mitigate Reservoir Souring in
Bonga Deepwater Development Offshore Nigeria,
paper SPE 92795, presented at the SPE International
Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, Houston,
February 24, 2005.
26. Bass and Lapin-Scott, reference 2.
27. Sunde E and Torsvik T: Microbial Control of Hydrogen
Sulfide Production in Oil Reservoirs, in Ollivier B
and Magot M (eds): Petroleum Microbiology.
Washington, DC: ASM Press (2005): 201214.
28. Youssef N, Elshahed MS and McInerney MJ: Microbial
Processes in Oil Fields: Culprits, Problems, and
Opportunities, in Laskin AI, Sariaslani S and Gadd GM
(eds): Advances in Applied Microbiology, vol. 66.
Burlington, Vermont, USA: Elsevier (2009): 141251.
breakthrough. Data show the oppositeseveral
H2S breakthrough. This newer model assumes
that most of the H2S generation takes place in a
biofilm near the injector and that the reservoir is
merely a zone for transport and adsorption.
Regardless of how it occurs, souring creates
many problems for the industry, including corro-
sion of pipelines and topside equipment, reser-
voir plugging from sulfides, health risks from H2S
toxicity and increased refining costs.28 The effects
of souring are serious enough that oilfield pro-
ducers have investigated several ways to control
it. These include biocides, nanofiltration to
remove sulfate and manipulation of injection
water salinity levels to inhibit microbe growth.
Because processes such as nanofiltration have
high capital costs, biocides have usually been the
first choice for controlling microbial growth to
prevent souring.
New methods employed for control of reser-
voir souring have helped scientists further under-
stand microbial identities and their chemistry
during secondary recovery. Although earlier inves-
tigations into souring focused almost exclusively
on SRB, seawater and reservoir formations con-
29. SRB use anaerobic respiration while NRB use anoxic
respiration.
30. Thorstenson T, Bdtker G, Lilleb B-LP, Torsvik T,
Sunde E and Beeder J: Biocide Replacement by
Nitrate in Sea Water Injection Systems, paper
NACE 02033, presented at the NACE Corrosion Annual
Conference and Exposition, Denver, April 711, 2002.
31. Rassenfoss, reference 4.
32. Zahner RL, Tapper SJ, Marcotte BWG and Govreau BR:
What Has Been Learned from a Hundred MEOR
Applications, paper SPE 145054, presented at the
SPE Enhanced Oil Recovery Conference, Kuala Lumpur,
July 1921, 2011.
33. Brisbane PG and Ladd JN: The Role of Microorganisms
in Petroleum Exploration, Annual Review of
Microbiology 19 (October 1965): 351364.
34. Tucker J and Hitzman D: Detailed Microbial Surveys
Help Improve Reservoir Characterization, Oil & Gas
Journal 92, no. 23 (June 6, 1994): 6568.
Oilfield Review
tain several other species of microbes, including out, but it also distributes the nutrients through- nutrients stimulate microbes that outcompete
nitrate-reducing bacteria (NRB). SRB and NRB out the system. Data show that MEOR can SRPs for food and thereby depress SRP growth.
can live and thrive in the wellbore and formation, enhance recovery in reservoirs with a wide These trials demonstrate that MEOR processes
provided they have a sufficient carbon source range of oil densitiesfrom 16 to 41 degree API can economically free up oil trapped in mature
such as short-chain fatty acids. gravity and with reservoir temperatures as high fields. Although most work to date has been on
On the molecular level, SRB reduce the sul- as 93C [200F] and salinities as high as mature, noneconomic wells, there is potential
fate to sulfide, and NRB reduce the nitrate to 142,000 parts per million (ppm) total dissolved for application of MEOR at an earlier stage in
nitrogen.29 SRB and NRB compete for food, and solids. It is also possible to apply MEOR to dual- the life of a producing reservoir.
where it is limited, that competition is intense. In porosity reservoirs if the added nutrients are In addition to using microbes to stimulate pro-
the wellbore and reservoir, if oxygen is absent, able to penetrate the matrix and not bypass the duction and mitigate reservoir souring and corro-
introduction of nitrate, via injection water, favors formation via high-permeability streaks. In sion, scientists are using them in exploration via
NRB growth over SRB growth. Nitrate, in the some cases, MEOR treatment may reduce reser- biomonitoring.33 In one application of biomonitor-
form of calcium nitrate [Ca(NO3)2], is added to voir souring in addition to stimulating produc- ing, a grid of shallow soil samples was analyzed for
injection water to prevent souring.30 This form of tion. Scientists theorize that the added specific microbes.34 Elevated amounts of the target
nitrate may be used in place of biocide and has
minimal health and environmental impacts.
Although nitrate may not completely eliminate
the need for biocides, it can reduce the amount of
other chemicals needed.31 Using their increased
knowledge of SRB and NRB microbe species and
chemistry, scientists have improved treatment
techniques for souringthe same is true for
microbiologically enhanced oil recovery.
Operators have employed MEOR for decades. Water separator pipe
Much of the past work relied on trial and error
and produced mixed results. A more complete
understanding of microbe behavior and chemistry
is resulting in a resurgence of MEOR field trials.
These trials have two common objectivesiden-
tify the indigenous microbes in the formation and 2 to 3 cm of corrosion scale Inner
surface
design formulas for nutrient injection to
stimulate their growth; that is, find the helpful
microbes and feed them what they like. Outer solids Pitting corrosion
Inner solids
Just as there are many types of indigenous
microbes, there are several mechanisms
microbes employ that may stimulate oil produc-
tion from mature wells. First, natural microbe
metabolic processes produce downhole gases Pipe metal
that may increase pressure and decrease oil vis-
cosity. Second, microbes produce surfactants
that decrease the surface tension between oil
and water. In addition, biomass and polymers
from microbes selectively plug oil-depleted areas
in the reservoir, diverting fluids into oil-rich
zones. Successful MEOR projects typically
depend on a combination of these mechanisms
rather than any single one.
After reviewing MEOR field trial results, sci- > Halfdan corrosion. Visual examination of a cross section of the produced-
entists have made important observations water separator pipe (top) revealed a 2- to 3-cm [0.8- to 1.2-in.] layer of
corrosion scale (middle). The scale had an orange outer layer and a black
regarding its application.32 Although MEOR tech-
inner layer adjacent to the metal (bottom). Scientists observed areas of
nology has been used in both oil-producing and severe pitting corrosion at various points on the inner layer. Laboratory
water injection wells, it probably has the best studies, including examination by the new MMMs, showed that the outer
chance of success in reservoirs with active water scale layer was composed of salts, iron oxides and decomposed biomass
primarily SRB and sulfate-reducing archaea (SRA). The inner scale layer
injection programs for secondary recovery. Not was composed of salts, iron sulfides and decomposed biomass that had
only does the water provide the energy to push oil high levels of methanogens. (Adapted from Skovhus et al, reference 21.)

Summer 2012 11
 Smoothed Microbial Concentrations Contoured Microbial Concentrations

High

Presence of
butane-utilizing
microbes Low

Relative
microbe
concentration

0 km 1 0 km 1

0 mi 1 0 mi 1

> Microbial surveys. Soil samples in Osage County, Oklahoma, USA, were analyzed to detect the
abundance of butane-utilizing microbes. More than 1,200 samples were analyzed from a grid
measuring 3.5 mi [5.6 km] by 7.5 mi [12.1 km] (left). The orange circles indicate samples with the
highest 30% of the microbe concentration; the size of the circle is proportional to concentration. The
smoothed data are contoured to provide a more informative picture of the microbe distribution (right).
The strongest microbial anomaly (purple) corresponds to structural data from a 3D seismic survey
covering the same grid area. Several years after the microbial survey was conducted, an operator
drilled and completed a producing oil well at the microseepage anomaly. (Adapted with permission
from Geo-Microbial Technologies Inc.)

microbes indicated microseepage of oil and
gas from underground formations (above).
Operators use this type of data to rank drilling
prospects, characterize heterogeneities and iden-
tify bypassed oil.
Controlling and Harnessing Microbes
Armed with these new insights on microbe
behavior and chemistry, producers are putting
this knowledge to work in the oil field. Statoil is
using nitrate to control corrosion and H2S at its
Gullfaks platforms in the North Sea.35
The Statoil Gullfaks field is located 175 km
[109 mi] northwest of Bergen, Norway. Discovered
in 1979, this field produces about 30,000 m3/d
[189,000 bbl/d] of oil from three large plat-
formsGullfaks A, B and C.36 The platforms
started production in the late 1980s and cur-
rently use seawater injection for pressure sup-
port. The seawater intake depth for Gullfaks A
and B is 70 m [230 ft] below the surface; the
Gullfaks C intake depth is at 120 m [394 ft].
Injection water volumes vary from 30,000 m3/d
[189,000 bbl/d] to 70,000 m3/d [440,000 bbl/d];
the pressure downstream of the pumps is about
20 MPa [2,900 psi]. Injection water undergoes
vacuum deaeration to remove oxygen, and the
final water temperature downstream of the
deaerator is 25C [77F].
Although Statoil employed stringent filtration
and biocides to control injected water quality at
Gullfaks, those approaches were not entirely
effective. In the early 1990s, Gullfaks A experi-
enced high H2S levels in produced gas and water.
The high H2S levels, coupled with laboratory data
that showed rapid increases in the Gullfaks SRB
population from 1994 to 1996, gave Statoil reason
to rethink the microbe control strategy.37 A suc-
cessful application of nitrate added to injected
seawater at Statoils Veslefrikk platform in early
1999 provided engineers with the confidence to
use it at Gullfaks.38

12 Oilfield Review
 In late 1999, Statoil switched from biocide to
Gullfaks field
nitrate to treat the injected seawater for reser-
NORWAY
voir microbe control at the Gullfaks B and C plat-
forms.39 Nitrate was added to the injection water
at 30 to 40 ppm as a 45 weight percent solution of ort

N
h Se
Ca(NO3)2. At both platforms, scientists observed a
decreases in SRB counts about one month after
the start of nitrate injection. Decreases in the 1.2 25
Nitrate added, Gullfaks B
SRB population were accompanied by increases 1.0 UK 0 km 200
Corrosion rate 20
in the NRB counts. These changes in microbe dis- 0 mi 200
SRB activity

Corrosion rate, mm/yr

tribution are consistent with how these two 0.8

g H2S/cm2/d
SRB activity,
15
microbe groups compete for nutrients. As nitrate
0.6
injection continued, the changes in microbe dis-
10
tribution led to major changes in the corrosion 0.4
rate (right). Engineers also noted decreases in
5
H2S levels in the produced water at Gullfaks 0.2

(below right). Tangible benefits for Statoil 0 0

include reduction of H2S in the produced water in April May February February
1994 1997 2000 2003
most parts of the field and a 50% decrease in cor-
Date
rosion rates on metal coupons in the seawater
> Gullfaks microbe activity. Before nitrate was used in injection water at Gullfaks B, enrichment
injection system.
cultures from water and biofilm showed a stable and diverse SRB population. Although at lower
Nitrate controls certain undesirable aspects concentrations, NRB were also present (not shown) and used the same carbon sources as nutrients.
of microbe behavior, but MEOR does the oppo- After nitrate addition, SRB activity significantly decreased and NRB numbers in the biofilm increased
siteit exploits microbes positive characteris- by three orders of magnitude (not shown). Corrosion measurements on carbon steel coupons in the
water injection system showed similar trends. Beginning in early 1994, corrosion rates at Gullfaks B
tics. The rationale for bringing microbes into the
rose, peaking shortly before nitrate addition was started. After nitrate addition, corrosion rates
oil recovery process is simpleabout 80% of the trended downward and were reduced by at least half. (Adapted from Sunde et al, reference 35.)
oil currently produced is from fields discovered in
the early 1970s. More than 50% of the oil in these
fields remains trapped and cannot be economi-
cally recovered.40 In the last few years, scientists
have developed MEOR processes that use new
analytical technology to selectively identify and 10
Nitrate added, Gullfaks C
exploit beneficial microbes living in oil reser-
voirs. These MEOR processes have given opera- 8

tors a new tool to inexpensively free oil trapped

in mature reservoirs. Husky Energy Inc. used this 6 Predicted H2S
Measured H2S
H2S, mg
water, L

approach in a pilot oil recovery project in Canada.

35. Sunde E, Lilleb B-LP, Bdtker G, Torsvik T and 4
Thorstenson T: H2S Inhibition by Nitrate Injection on the
Gullfaks Field, paper NACE 04760, presented at the
NACE Corrosion Annual Conference and Exposition, 2
New Orleans, March 28April 1, 2004.
36. Hesjedal A: Introduction to the Gullfaks Field,
http://www.ipt.ntnu.no/~tpg5200/intro/gullfaks_ 0
introduksjon.html (accessed May 24, 2012). Nov July Feb Oct
37. Statoil collected samples of injection water downstream 1997 1999 2001 2002
of the vacuum deaerator using a bioprobe. Bioprobes Date
allow collection of samples from a biofilm that deposits
> Gullfaks H2S production. Statoil engineers measured H2S in the produced
on a metal surface within the probe. These instruments
are commonly used in oil and gas systems to detect water before and after nitrate addition. At Gullfaks C, produced water H2S
corrosion-causing organisms. levels were slowly increasing prior to introduction of nitrate. After nitrate
38. Thorstenson et al, reference 30. addition, H2S levels fell significantly but only after a delay. This delay is a result
39. Statoil started nitrate injection at Gullfaks B in of the time it takes H2S to equilibrate in the reservoir. Statoil scientists estimate
October 1999 and about a month later at Gullfaks C. that several pore volumes must be displaced in the reservoir before a new or
40. Marcotte B, Govreau B and Davis CP: MEOR Finds Oil reequilibrated H2S value is observed in the producers. Statoil researchers
Where It Has Already Been Discovered, E&P, have also developed a reservoir souring modelpredicted H2S values are
(November 4, 2009), http://www.epmag.com/
shown for Gullfaks C. The predicted values indicate levels that would have
Exploration-Wildcats-Stepouts/MEOR-finds-oil-it
already-discovered_47917 (accessed July 15, 2012). been experienced had there been no nitrate addition. (Adapted from Sunde et
al, reference 35.)

Summer 2012 13
 The Husky pilot MEOR project is located
within a field in the southwest corner of
Saskatchewan, Canada (left).41 This field, discov-
ered in 1952, has a reservoir depth of about
1,200 m [3,940 ft] and an average temperature of
Well A
Saskatchewan 47C [117 F]. Current production from the field
Pilot area
is 60 m3/d [380 bbl/d] of 22 to 24 degree API
gravity oil and 4,250 m3/d [150 Mcf/d] of gas.
MEOR pilot Well E Husky began waterflooding in 1967, and current
C A N A D A
water injection is 1,300 m3/d [8,200 bbl/d]. In
Well C 2010, cumulative oil production from this field
U N I T E D S T A T E S reached 3.3 million m3 [21 million bbl] since
Well D discoveryestimated to be about 29% of the
original oil in place (OOIP).
Injector B Husky teamed with Titan Oil Recovery to
investigate the feasibility of using MEOR to
recover crude oil trapped in this field. The Titan
technology is simpleidentify and quantify
Water injector 0 km 1 microbes that are indigenous to the reservoir.42
Producing well 0 mi 1 Using these data plus results from other field
tests, Titan engineers formulated a nutrient mix-
ture to release in the reservoir by way of the
> Husky-Titan pilot location. The pilot area encompassed four producing
water injection system. The engineers theorized
wells and one water injector in the Saskatchewan, Canada, field. Nutrient
that the injected nutrients would stimulate
injection was carried out in two steps. Husky first used Well A to confirm
the laboratory-derived nutrient formula by batch treating the well. The changes in certain species of resident microbes,
operator next used Injector B to deliver the nutrients while production was allowing the microbes to affect the interfaces
monitored at nearby Wells C, D and E. (Adapted from Town et al, reference 41.) between oil, water and rock to release small
droplets of oil into the active flow channels.
Husky applied the Titan process in two
stepsbatch nutrient treatment of a single well
Nutrient Injections at Injector B followed by water injection to spread nutrients to
Treatment Treatment Treatment nearby wells. For the single-well treatment,
1 2 3 Husky injected 1.3 m3 [8.2 bbl] of nutrients and
100
14 13 m3 [82 bbl] of injection water through the
95
wellbore, then shut in the well for a week. When
12 90
the well was returned to production, results were
Oil production 85 encouragingoil production increased from 1.2
10
Oil production, m3/d

Water cut
80
to 4.1 m3/d [7.5 to 25.8 bbl/d] and water cut
Water cut, %

8 decreased from 94% to 80%. Because these results

75
showed that the nutrients were appropriate for
6 70 the reservoir and its resident microbes, Husky
65 shifted its focus to the water injector for treating
4
nearby wells in the pilot area.
60
2
Starting in early 2008 and using procedures
55 similar to treatment of the single well, Husky
0 50 injected the custom nutrient via the water
Jan Aug Feb Sep Mar
2007 2007 2008 2008 2009 injector in the pilot area. After three weeks, the
Date closest producing well showed a significant
> Husky-Titan pilot results. From early 2007 until the beginning of 2008, oil oil production increase and a corresponding
production at Well C in the Saskatchewan MEOR pilot was reasonably decrease in water cut (left). After an appropriate
steady, between 2 and 4 m3/d [13 and 25 bbl/d]. The water cut for the same interval to allow underground transit of nutri-
period was about 95%. After the first and subsequent nutrient injections at
Injector B, oil production at Well C increased to 7 to 9 m3/d [44 to 57 bbl/d]. ents, engineers observed these positive results at
For the same period, water cut fell to about 88%. Because Well C was not
treated directly, the pilot confirmed response through the reservoir from
injector to producer. (Adapted from Town et al, reference 41.)

14 Oilfield Review
other wells in the pilot area. In addition, engi- Rock grain Microbes
neers used the same treatment in wells and
injectors outside the pilot area, achieving posi- Oil trapped Oil released
in pore into pore
tive results, which confirmed the response from
injector to producer. Water
Success with microbe stimulation to enhance
oil production from a mature waterflood was also
seen at a field in Kansas, USA.43 The Stirrup field, Flow path
discovered in 1985, is located in the southwest
corner of Kansas. The reservoir depth is about
5,200 ft [1,600 m], and current production is
490 bbl/d [78 m3/d] of 38 to 41 degree API gravity
oil. The initial reservoir pressure was 1,650 psi
[11.4 MPa] and had declined to less than 100 psi
[0.69 MPa] at the start of waterflood in 2003.
Primary recovery from the Stirrup field was cal-
culated at 19.1 million bbl [3.04 million m3] of oil, Microbes reduce Microbes affect
and waterflood is estimated to add another oil-water tension. preferential flow.
2.8 million bbl [0.44 million m3], for an ultimate
recovery of about 15% of the OOIP. In mid-2010,
Glori Energy, in collaboration with Statoil, tested
the AERO activated environment for recovery of
oil technology in the Stirrup field to see if there
was potential to boost recovery based on micro-
bial stimulation (right).
Detailed characterization of the existing
microbe population using both traditional and
genome-based techniques was the first step in
implementing the AERO technology at Stirrup.
Once Glori Energy had characterized the indig-
enous microbe population, engineers devel-
oped a custom nutrient formulation and micro-
bial inoculant.
Glori Energy started the AERO technology
pilot at Stirrup in May 2010 by continuously
injecting the custom nutrient using two of the Microbes disperse. New water flow
water injectors. The initial test pattern for the paths open.
pilot included two injectors and five producing > AERO technology. Glori Energy has theorized that the AERO technology stimulates oil production in
wells. After several months of operation, it was four steps. The microbes in the reservoir use existing oil as a carbon source to produce surfactants
clear that water from one of the injectors was not that reduce the oil-water surface tension, helping to release trapped oil (top left). The microbes then
multiply and block some existing water flow paths, thereby forcing the opening of new flow paths that
entering the test pattern, so that injector was move trapped oil out of the reservoir (top right). When some of the trapped oil has been released and the
withdrawn from the pilot. Some of the five test local carbon source depleted, the microbes disperse and former water flow paths reopen (bottom left). If
wells experienced similar problems when follow- the stimulated microbes are active and have sufficient nutrients, the process is continuously repeated
until trapped oil is brought to the surface and production increases (bottom right). (Adapted with
up work showed that injectors not included in the
permission from Glori Energy.)
test pattern program were influencing perfor-
mance. Since this field does not have a dedicated
system for separation and testing, evaluation can
be made only on a well-by-well basis. Stirrup
Well 12-2 demonstrated the predominant response.
Analysis of the data from Well 12-2 suggests that

41. Town K, Sheehy AJ and Govreau BR: MEOR Success in
Southern Saskatchewan, paper SPE 124319, presented
at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
New Orleans, October 47, 2009.
42. Analysis for resident microbes is typically carried out on
produced water samples.
43. Bauer BG, ODell RJ, Marinello SA, Babcock J, Ishoey T
and Sunde E: Field Experience from a Biotechnology
Approach to Water Flood Improvement, paper SPE
144205, presented at the SPE Enhanced Oil Recovery
Conference, Kuala Lumpur, July 1921, 2011.

Summer 2012 15
the AERO treatment, when properly applied, is posed of in a safe and environmentally responsi-
capable of significantly boosting ultimate recov- ble manner. Microbes are currently playing an
ery (below). important role in disposal of these waste streams,
particularly in the realm of solid waste. Two solid
Microbes on the Surface waste streams that arise from oil and gas produc-
While many microbe applications are designed tion may be amenable to bioremediation: hydro-
for the subsurface, others contribute to shallow carbon-impacted soil and drilling waste.
and surficial processes such as the management During the last 100 years, some production
of oilfield waste or remediation of production facilities have experienced contaminated soils
from oil sands and spills. because of leaks or uncontrolled discharges of
Oil and gas production generates a variety of crude oil and other liquids. Natural weathering
vapor, liquid and solid waste that not only must can significantly reduce the hydrocarbon con-
meet governmental regulations but also be dis- centration in soil but does not eliminate it.
100
Estimated increase
50,000 to 55,000 bbl
Before AERO nutrient addition
95
After AERO nutrient addition
90
Water cut, %
Although researchers have shown that heavily
weathered, highmolecular weight hydrocar-
bons are essentially nonbiodegradable, these
same hydrocarbons can be rendered less detri-
mental by treatment with a mixture of nutrients
and cultured microbes.44 Currently, bioremedia-
tion is usually the preferred method for dealing
with crude oilimpacted soil.45 Because not all
crude oils respond to bioremediation in the
same way, engineers have developed predictive
models to allow quick assessment of ex situ bio-
remediation without resorting to time-consum-
ing laboratory trials.
Drilling waste, a by-product of oilfield opera-
tions, is mostly nonhazardous, although the vol-
umes of such waste are significant for both marine
and onshore operations. For example, a midsize
operator in the Gulf of Mexico may routinely gen-
erate 250 tonUS [227,000 kg] of waste monthly.46
Some operators dispose of water-base drilling
wastes from marine operations directly to the
ocean. Although harm to the ecosystem from this
type of disposal has not been demonstrated, it
remains a controversial practice.47
As in marine environments, onshore drilling
generates a significant volume of waste. A 509-m

[1,670-ft], 61/2-in. hole produces 21 m3 [130 bbl] of

85
cuttings, and disposal of onshore cuttings pres-
ents a different challenge from that of marine
80 environments. Scientists are designing synthetic
AERO nutrient start drilling muds that, when added to soil, enhance
soil quality and stimulate more rapid bioremedia-
75
tion.48 In addition, engineers have developed a
standardized screening protocol for drill cut-
70 tings. This protocol compares rates of bioreme-
75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275
diation using greenhouse-scale models to
Cumulative production, 1,000 bbl
simulate field conditions (next page). Scientists
> AERO technology results. Data from the Stirrup Well 12-2 are plotted as at M-I SWACO, a Schlumberger company, use
water cut versus cumulative production from the well with approximate
results from the greenhouse simulations to pre-
trend lines drawn for periods both before and after nutrient injection. When
these trend lines are extrapolated to constant 95% water cut, they imply a dict the length of time for treatment, final condi-
50,000- to 55,000-bbl [7,950- to 8,740-m3] oil production increase as a result tion of the material following treatment, the
of the treatment. (Adapted with permission from Glori Energy.) capability of the material to comply with environ-
mental targets and the likelihood of technique
effectiveness.

44. Adams RH, Daz-Ramrez IJ, Guzmn-Osorio FJ and
Gutirrez-Rojas M: Biodegradation and Detoxification
of Soil Contaminated with Heavily Weathered
Hydrocarbons, presented at the 13th Annual
International Environmental Petroleum Conference,
San Antonio, Texas, October 1620, 2006.
45. Hoffman R, Bernier R, Smith S and McMillen S:
A Four-Step Biotreatability Protocol for Crude Oil
Impacted Soil, paper SPE 126982, presented at the
SPE International Conference on Health, Safety and
Environment in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production,
Rio de Janeiro, April 1214, 2010.
46. Louviere RJ and Reddoch JA: Onsite Disposal of
Rig-Generated Waste via Slurrification and Annular
Injection, paper SPE/IADC 25755, presented at the
SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam,
February 2225, 1993.
47. Neff JM: Composition, Environmental Fates and
Biological Effects of Water Based Drilling Muds and
Cuttings Discharged to the Marine Environment:
A Synthesis and Annotated Bibliography. Report
prepared for the Petroleum Environmental Research
Forum and API, January 2005, http://perf.org/pdf/
APIPERFreport.pdf (accessed August 2, 2012).
48. Curtis GW, Growcock FB, Candler JE, Rabke SP and
Getliff J: Can Synthetic-Based Muds Be Designed to
Enhance Soil Quality?, paper AADE 01-NC-HO-11,
presented at the AADE National Drilling Conference,
Houston, March 2729, 2001.
Clements K, Rabke S and Young S: Development of a
Standardized Screening Procedure for Bioremediation
of Drill Cuttings, presented at the 14th International
Petroleum Environmental Conference, Houston,
November 69, 2007.
49. Orwig J: Scientists Grow Bacteria to Improve Oil Sands
Remediation, EARTH 57, no. 4 (April 2012):18.
50. Phan CM, Allen B, Peters LB, Le TN and Tade MO:
Can Water Float on Oil?, Langmuir 28, no. 10
(March 13, 2012): 46094613.

16 Oilfield Review
 10
Total petroleum hydrocarbons, weight percent

4
Linear paraffins
Diesel oil
Mixed olefins
2

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Time, d
> Bioremediation. Scientists at M-I SWACO in Houston use a greenhouse to study bioremediation rates by composting tub-sized
samples of drill cuttings (right). These specialists have developed bioremediation protocols using 2.7- to 4.0-ft3 [0.08- to 0.1-m3] size
samples of a drill-cutting mix containing sand, bentonite clay, an additional nonswelling silica clay and water, followed by coating with
hydrocarbons at the 10 weight percent level. Typical soil amendments and nutrients are added to the resultant hydrocarbon-compost
mix before it is allowed to sit for long periods under greenhouse conditions. During this extended period, constant conditions for the
compost are maintained by introducing oxygen via periodic mixing and adding water and nutrients as required. Bioremediation as
measured by total petroleum hydrocarbons is plotted for three hydrocarbon proxies (left). These data show that after 30 days, linear
paraffins and mixed olefins have nearly completely dissipated, while diesel oil is significantly reduced but does not fall below about
1 weight percent. M-I SWACO uses this test to screen onsite remediation as well as to train field personnel to maintain optimal
compost conditions.

Microbe Frontiers
The ubiquity of microbe distribution on the
planet ensures that scientists associated with the
oil and gas industry have an abundance of oppor-
tunities ahead of them. These opportunities
include oil sands remediation and cleanup of
ocean oil spills.
Production of hydrocarbons from Canadian oil
sands has been successful in adding to the worlds
sources of petroleum, but such hydrocarbon pro-
duction is not without environmental cost. Tailings
ponds, which must be fenced off to protect wild-
life, are one consequence of oil sands production.
Biologists and engineers have found that certain
microbes thrive on potentially hazardous com-
pounds in that environment.49 These scientists
theorize that if the microbes could be cultured,
identified and grown into biofilms, they could be
reintroduced to shorten the current 20- to 30-year
compound breakdown time. Researchers are
making progress; by simulating tailings pond con-
ditions, they have reproduced 30% to 60% of the
microbes in the sludge and expect to have pilot
bioreactors running in a few years.
Drillers and producers in offshore operations
must take significant precautions to avoid spills
and must be prepared to deal with them if they
occur. Use of dispersants remains controversial
because the dispersants may have environmental
impacts. Researchers in Australia, studying the
physical chemistry of oil-water interactions, have
reported a seemingly contradictory finding that
may improve the odds in oil spill cleanup. These
researchers found that, given certain values of
interfacial tension, oil density and water droplet
volume, water droplets can float on an oil sur-
face.50 Acceleration of aerobic biodegradation of
spills is one application of this findingsmall
water droplets that float on the oil surface have
more contact with airborne oxygen, thus acceler-
ating the microbe-driven cleanup.
New analytical methods and scientists
increased understanding of microbes have led to
developments in controlling souring and corro-
sion and improving oil recovery from mature
wells. These advances are stimulating further
work in the use of microbes for bioremediation in
both onshore and offshore settings. Today, engi-
neers are bringing the negative characteristics of
microbes in the oil field under tighter control and
are increasingly able to harness their positive
aspects for improved hydrocarbon production
and solutions to environmental concerns. DA

Summer 2012 17