Basil Perdicakis, January 27, 2011

SAGD Water Disposal Options, Associated Impacts, and Strategies to Improve Environmental Footprint

Statoil Canada•

Kai Kos Dehseh (KKD) Lease•

Leismer site currently producing bitumen with wells on circulation and semi SAGD mode.

•

Leismer Project -> ERCB approval for 40,000 BPD.

•

Corner Project -> ERCB approval for 40,000 BPD.

•

Full field KKD development -> AENV regional EIA deemed complete for 220,000 BPD.

•

Leismer CPF is about a 2 hour drive SE of Fort McMurray.

Corner

Leismer

Hangingstone

Thornbury

Outline1.

Discussion of options for SAGD disposal water handling.2.

Impacts associated with different disposal water recovery schemes.3.

Strategies for improving the environmental footprint associated with SAGD water recycling systems.−

Improving ZLD operation:•

Organics mitigation in waste waters.•

Improved waste management (solidification/encapsulation).−

Reducing environmental impacts of Make-Up Water Processing.

Generic Water Use for SAGD•

Typical layout for a generic WLS based SAGD water plant illustrated below. •

Basis is 100 bbl of Bitumen @ SOR = 3.0 with 90% recovery on a PW basis.•

30 bbls of water lost to reservoir (10% reservoir retention). −

Requires facilities coordination with reservoir groups to reduce

going forward (~ 50% of overall water losses).

•

27 bbls of blowdown from the steam separator are used to purge soluble salts and organics extracted from the reservoir.

•

57 bbl of water required to produce 100 bbl of bitumen.

What are the options and trade-offs involved

in processing and reducing the blowdown

volumes?57 bblMake-up Water

Basis: Steam:Oil Ratio – 3:1Reservoir Retention – 10%

OTSGOTSG 300 bblSteamSteam

SeparatorSteam

SeparatorReservoir Production

Treatment

ProducedWater

Treatment

270 bblProduced Water

343 bblRecycled Water

400 bblSG Feedwater

73 bblWater

100 bblBitumen

30 bbl Retention

27 bbl Blowdown

% Recycle (Steam & BD Basis) = 84%

WLSSludge

Process Options to Reduce Make Up Water Demand

PW

OTSG Steam

BFW/PW TankDrum Boiler Steam

BFW/PW Tank

Dryer (ZLD)

truck-out (RLD)

DWT Disposal well

Salt cavern

MUW

OTSG Steam

disposal

well

settled solids

solid waste to landfill

PW/BFW/Steammake up waterdisposal water

Legend

•

Typically multiple options available in early design phases often with limited hydrogeological data.

•

Different chemistries between WLS and PW evaporator blowdown.

SAGD Disposal Water and Waste HandlingDisposal Wells•

Typically Class 1b (ERCB Directive 51) for SAGD PW liquid wastes. •

Disposal Pipelines > 50 km likely to be cost prohibitive.•

Balance between costs of matching chemistry of disposal water with formation water to minimize plugging and lifecycle costs of drilling for new disposal wells.

Landfills•

Currently used for long term disposal of dewatered WLS sludge and ZLD solids. •

Land area to dispose of 1 m3

of waste is about 0.16 m2.•

325,000 m3 landfill cell can take ~ 1 year to construct at a cost of ~ 1 million CAD.−

~ 50 year life for a 20,000 BPD SAGD Plant using WLS.•

Class II landfills typically used for disposal of non-hazardous waste. −

Cost impact for disposal in third party class I landfill due to waste contamination is significant.

•

~ 0.5 m3

of leachate per m2

of uncapped landfill area per year.•

Risks: liner failure, trucking accidents and impacts, public perception, long-term liability.

SAGD Disposal Water and Waste HandlingDisposal Water Treatment (DWT) •

Typically neutralization with HCl or H2

SO4

followed by solid-liquid separation (centrifuge, filter press).

•

Have had reliability issues in SAGD application.•

Similar technologies could also be used to replace dryer operations in a ZLD operation to recover additional water as opposed to vapourizing water.

Drying•

Many types of industrial dryers (gas fired rotary, drum, spray, vacuum).•

Challenging application in SAGD due to unique nature of feed slurry.

Trucking •

High OPEX, low CAPEX. Typically short term solution for start-up or smaller facilities.

SAGD Disposal Water and Waste HandlingSalt Caverns•

Man made sub-surface cavities created in salt formations. ~ 25 in operation in AB. •

Used to replace disposal water treatment facilities in SAGD applications. −

Gravity separation of concentrated slurry effected, typically with downstream disposal of treated water.

•

Typically require > 100 m thick formations allowing for ~ 250,000 m3

of storage.•

1 cavern can take several years to construct at a cost of several million CAD.•

~ 10 m3

of water required for every 1 m3

of cavern storage. •

For economic considerations only, typically want salt caverns within 5 to 10 km of source water and disposal zones and within 50 km of CPF.

Outline1.

Discussion of options for SAGD disposal water handling.2.

Impacts associated with different disposal water recovery schemes.3.

Strategies for improving the environmental footprint associated with SAGD water recycling systems.

Balancing Competing Objectives•

As produced water recycling technology evolves it is expected to

help reduce the environmental footprint of in-situ thermal recovery of heavy oil. This means reducing:

−

Make-up water usage

−

Wastewater disposal

−

Energy Consumption (GHG emissions)

−

Landfill volumes

−

Land disturbance associated with MUW and disposal water pipelines

−

Production of difficult-to-manage residues

Key Points with existing technologies:

•

With existing technologies, increased reuse of PW and decreased use of fresh make-up water are at the expense of increased energy consumption and/or landfill volumes.

•

Lack of disposal well availability results in increased energy consumption and landfill volumes.

•

Local hydrogeology plays critical role in determining best option for specific projects (no single magic bullet for all projects).

Environmental Impacts of Make-up Water Sourcing

30 bblMake-up Water Basis: Steam:Oil Ratio – 3:1

Reservoir Retention – 10%PW = 3500 TDS

OTSGOTSG 300 bblSteamSteam

SeparatorSteam

SeparatorReservoir Production

Treatment

ZLD System(evap-cryst-

dryer)

270 bblProduced Water

400 bblSG Feedwater

100 bblBitumen

30 bbl Retention

Solids

Make-up Water

Disposal well

RO

w RO w/o RO w RO w/o RO w RO w/o RO30 - 0 0 0 0

0 - 40 30 60 3090% - 87% 90% 80% 90%1.00 - 1.00 1.16 1.02 2.59- - 75% - 50% -- - 1 - 2.5 -RO Energy (kW-h/m3)

Brackish Water Use% Recycle

Solids (relative basis)RO % Recovery

Environmental Impact

Fresh Water Use

50,0005,0000MUW TDS (ppm) ZLD water

losses neglected for simplicity

Summary of Statoil Waste Management Study

Notes:

- Pipeline impact subject to hydrogeological conditions for each project.

- Economics also impacted by project hydrogeological conditions.

Scheme PW Treatment Disposal Water Processing Solids

Disposal Water1 Pipelines Energy Reliability

1 WLS/AF/IX disposal well 0.52 1.002 WLS/AF/IX Evap2 + DWT3 + disposal well 0.53 0.233 WLS/AF/IX Evap + salt cavern + disposal well 0.51 0.354 WLS/AF/IX Evap + Xtal4 + Dryer (ZLD) 1.00 0.005 Evap DWT + disposal well 0.10 0.406 Evap Xtal + salt cavern + disposal well 0.03 0.387 Evap Xtal + dryer (ZLD) 0.31 0.00

1 Includes water used for salt cavern washing.2 Evap = Evaporator3 DWT = Disposal water treatment4 Xtal = Crystallizer

Relative Impacts of 7 Water Treatment Schemes

(Normalized Scale: 0 to 1)

Environmental Trade-Offs in a ZLD System

-

GHG emissions for ZLD case are ~ 5% of overall SAGD facility GHG emissions.-

Basis: 12% reservoir loss, SOR = 3.0, MUW > 5,000 ppm TDS, Lime and MgO derived from carbonate sources, lifecycle GHG emissions shown (power from Alberta grid).

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

82% 87% 88% 88%

Produced Water Recycle %

Rel

ativ

e W

ater

Use

and

Env

ironm

enta

l Im

pact

s

Makeup Water Disposal Water Landfill Energy GHG

WLS/AF/IX

+Evap +Xtal

+Dryer (ZLD)

Outline1.

Discussion of options for SAGD disposal water handling.2.

Impacts associated with different disposal water recovery schemes.3. Strategies for improving the environmental footprint associated with SAGD

water recycling systems.−

Improving ZLD operation.•

Organics mitigation in waste waters•

Improved waste management (solidification/encapsulation)−

Reducing environmental impacts of Make-Up Water Processing.

Mandate - what we’re committed to do

•

Improve oil sands industry reputation by demonstrating and communicating environmental and social and economic performance and technological advancements

Vision – what success looks like

•

Achieving world class environmental, social and economic performance in developing this world scale resource

Mission – our reason for being

•

Lead the oil sands industry in the responsible development of Alberta’s bitumen resource by taking demonstrable action to improve the environmental, social and economic performance

OSLI Vision:Achieving world-class environmental, social and economic performance in developing this world-scale oil sands resource.

OSLI is complementary to industry groups such as CAPP and the Oil Sands Developers Group. We are a leadership group with a “laser focus”

on performance improvement.

OSLI Structure

Steering CommitteeCoordinating CommitteeFour active working groups:

•

Land Stewardship

•

Water Management−

Improved Waste Management−

Desalination−

6 other projects•

Technology Breakthrough

•

Sustainable Communities

Supported by:•

Intellectual Property Working Group

•

Communications Working Group

•

Stakeholder Engagement Working Group

The member companies allocated$10 million to OSLIin 2010.

16

Improved Waste Management•

Trend is towards higher produced water recycle rates to conserve

water and comply with ERCB directives.

•

This implies waste stream changes (more concentrated brine and/or dry salt).

•

Lessons learned in industry with regards to first generation ZLD

technology:

−

high energy consumption/GHG production

−

mechanical issues with solids handling

−

Viscosity issues arising from high levels of dissolved organics

−

Perpetual care of a highly soluble residue in a landfill

•

Goal: To improve reliability of ZLD operations while also reducing waste liability

•

Approach: Seek and evaluate alternative methods of managing evaporator/ crystallizer wastes to mitigate adverse impacts of ZLD technology

Improved Waste Management

Return Condensate

Dry Salt

Crystallizer

Saturated brineTOC

~ 5X ppmEvaporator

ZLD Feed

TOC ~ X ppm

Steam

Exhaust

Gas fired rotary dryer

Gas

•

Current industry standard for treating OTSG blowdown from WLS PW

Treatment

Dryer FeedTOC ~ 10X ppm

1.) Develop processes to reduce build-up of dissolved organics in waste.

2.) Develop alternatives to drying.

Improved Waste Management

Return Condensate

Crystallizer

Saturated brineTOC

~ 5X ppmEvaporator

ZLD Feed

TOC ~ X ppm

Steam•

Also studying pH adjustment in other parts of the SAGD process.

Salty Solids Organic Rich Solids

pH Adjustment

•

pH adjustment for organics precipitation followed by suitable solid liquid separation process

Improved Waste Management –

pH Adjustment

Improved Waste Management –

pH Adjustment

Improved Waste Management –

pH Adjustment

Improved Waste Management

Return Condensate

Crystallizer

Saturated brineTOC

~ 5X ppmEvaporator

ZLD Feed

TOC ~ X ppm

Steam•

Also studying solidification options in other parts of the SAGD process.

Solid Waste

•

Alternatives to Drying –

solidification/encapsulation of waste

Solidification agents

Improved Waste Management

Return Condensate

Crystallizer

Saturated brineTOC

~ 16,000 ppm

Evaporator

ZLD Feed

TOC ~ 3,200 ppm

Steam•

Also studying solidification options in other parts of the SAGD process.

Solid Waste Solid Waste

pH Adjustment

•

Alternatives to Drying –

solidification/encapsulation of waste

(SAs) (SAs)

Improved Waste Management Develop alternatives to drying:

•

Degrees of success:

−

Achieve landfill criteria (pass paint filter test; no free liquid).

−

Achieve physical strength properties (bearing strength).

−

Resist leaching (TCLP, salt dissolution).

−

Produce a beneficial product.

•

Solidification testing program initiated with technology vendor:

−

Work commenced on water originating from OTSG blowdown.

−

Different additives and ratios of additives tested.

−

If sufficient bearing strength achieved, leaching tests performed.

Improved Waste Management Solidification of waste: ZLD waste + solidification agents = improved waste

Mixing Strength TestingDried Block

Improved Waste Management Example of leaching test.

-

Test below is a control performed on 60% NaCl solution.

-

Solidified waste of sufficient bearing strength is submerged in deionized water.

-

Conductivity of water monitored versus time.

Con

duct

ivity

For this set of additives tested significant leaching occurred. Samples lost 2-3% of weight after 5 days of submersion.

Improved Waste Management –

Next StepsDissolved organics removal:

•

Develop better understanding of high concentrations of simple organic acids in comparison to naphthenic acids in feed.

•

Test different technologies for effecting liquid solids separation.

•

Determine possible destinations for waste streams.

•

Test blowdown from PW evaporators.

Solidification/encapsulation:

•

Optimize solidification parameters and test new solidification agents.

•

Develop better understanding of the role of organics.

•

Further reduce long term leachability of final end product.

•

Process development. Refine processing schemes with and without

pH adjustment.

•

Determine overall economic and environmental benefits.

Desalination Technologies

–

Reverse Osmosis

MRT

3600

PFlowPower

R

F

TDSTDSR 1%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000

Feed TDS (mg/l)

Max

imum

The

oret

ical

Rec

over

y (%

)

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

Theo

retic

al P

ower

/Flo

w (k

W-h

/m3)

P_RO = 82 atm, TDS_max=105,000 ppmP_RO = 82 atm, TDS_max=80,000 ppmP_RO = 27 atm, TDS_max=52,000 ppmP_RO = 7 atm, TDS_max= 9,000 ppmS i 2

Solid lines –

refer to LHS axis. Dashed lines –

refer to RHS axis.

New Desalination Technologies•

Use exclusively or in combination with RO to reduce environmental impacts of make-up water sourcing.−

Reduced energy consumption.•

Note: Make-up water sourcing for high salinity water at 25% recycle begins to approach HP BFW pump energy requirements.

•

Some new technologies claim up to 80% reduction in energy compared to RO.

•

Use of low grade waste heat from SAGD facility.−

Increased water recovery as opposed to standalone RO, or use in place of MVC to treat RO reject.

•

Potential for reduced capital costs.

•

OSLI Desalination Project−

Consultant has completed Emerging Desalination Technologies Report.−

2-3 new technologies currently being evaluated in greater detail.

QUESTIONS ?