工程工艺

低温催化蒸解处理油基钻屑的参数优化

  • 黄尧奇 ,
  • 夏玉峰
展开
  • 伟创力科技股份有限公司,北京 100012
黄尧奇(1996—),男,博士,从事油气田废水处理方面的研究。地址:北京市朝阳区北苑东路19号院5号楼,邮政编码:100012。E-mail:hyqtest@126.com

收稿日期: 2024-07-22

  网络出版日期: 2025-04-01

Parameter optimization for low-temperature catalytic pyrolysis in oil-based drilling cuttings treatment

  • HUANG Yaoqi ,
  • XIA Yufeng
Expand
  • Welltrailing Technology Co., Ltd., Beijing 100012, China

Received date: 2024-07-22

  Online published: 2025-04-01

摘要

废弃油基钻屑是油气田开采过程中最严重的环境污染物之一,是具有产量大、含油率高、成分复杂且极难妥善处理等特点的危险废物。在离心分离、溶剂萃取、表面活性剂热洗、热解法等诸多方法中,通过热解去除挥发性和半挥发性污染物(如碳氢化合物)的热处理方法,因其处理时间短、去除效率高而广受欢迎和使用。然而,常规热解处理技术温度高、能耗高,对物料选择性较高,容易产生结焦,导致处理效率低下。在常规热解技术的基础上,通过添加催化剂和防结焦剂对油基钻屑进行预处理,可以极大地降低热解所需的温度。通过研究CA、CB、CC(CA为催化剂A,CB为催化剂B,CC为催化剂C)这3种不同催化剂分别在温度为200、250、300 ℃时对油基钻屑中油分去除效果,并将效果较好的CA和CC进行复配,发现其复配比例为2∶1时可以显著提高处理效果。通过对防结焦剂JA、JB、JC(JA为焦化剂A,JB为焦化剂B,JC为焦化剂C)的筛选发现,JB可有效地降低固相残渣粘连在反应釜内壁上。通过使用中心复合设计(CCD)和响应面方法(RSM),可以在减少实验数量的前提下保证结果的准确性。由响应面(RSM)模型结果可知,最佳的处理参数为:在处理300 g 油基钻屑时,复配催化剂的添加比例为4.417%(复配比例为CA∶CC=2∶1),反应温度为285.43 ℃,反应时间为97.17 min时,油基钻屑的含油率由14.76%降低至0.20%。通过分析油基钻屑在最佳处理参数处理后的产物,参照中华人民共和国四川省地方标准《天然气开采含油污泥综合利用后剩余固相利用处置标准》(DB51/T 2850—2021),发现固相残渣中的重金属及其他指标均得到有效去除。去除后的固相残渣可用于铺垫井场,实现了油基钻屑的有效去除及废物利用。

本文引用格式

黄尧奇 , 夏玉峰 . 低温催化蒸解处理油基钻屑的参数优化[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2025 , 15(2) : 324 -331 . DOI: 10.13809/j.cnki.cn32-1825/te.2025.02.017

Abstract

Waste oil-based drill cuttings are one of the most severe environmental pollutants generated during oil and gas field exploitation. They are hazardous wastes characterized by high production volume, elevated oil content, complex composition, and extreme difficulty in proper disposal. Among various methods such as centrifugal separation, solvent extraction, surfactant hot washing, pyrolysis, etc., the thermal treatment method that removes volatile and semi-volatile pollutants (such as hydrocarbons) by pyrolysis is widely favored due to its short processing time and high removal efficiency. However, conventional pyrolysis methods operate at high temperatures, consume significant energy, and exhibit high material selectivity, which makes them prone to coking and ultimately results in low treatment efficiency. Based on conventional pyrolysis techniques, the required pyrolysis temperature can be significantly lowered by adding catalysts and anti-coking agents to pretreat oil-based drill cuttings. The removal efficiency of oil in oil-based drill cuttings was studied using three different catalysts, CA, CB, and CC (representing catalysts A, B, and C), at temperatures of 200, 250, and 300 ℃. The CA and CC catalysts with superior performance were then compounded, and it was found that a compounding ratio of 2∶1 (CA∶CC) significantly improves the treatment effect. Screening of anti-coking agents JA, JB, and JC (representing coking agents A, B, and C) revealed that JB effectively reduces the adhesion of solid residues on the inner wall of the reactor. Utilizing central composite design (CCD) and response surface methodology (RSM) ensures the accuracy of the results while reducing the number of required experiments. The response surface methodology (RSM) model results indicate that the optimal treatment parameters are as follows: for 300 g of oil-based drill cuttings, a composite catalyst addition ratio of 4.417% (with a CA∶CC atio of 2∶1), a reaction temperature of 285.43 ℃, and a reaction time of 97.17 min, under which the oil content of the drill cuttings is reduced from 14.76% to 0.20%. Analysis of the products after treating the oil-based drill cuttings under the optimal conditions, in reference to the Sichuan Provincial Local Standard of the People’s Republic of China “Standard for the Utilization and Disposal of Residual Solid Phases after Comprehensive Utilization of Oily Sludge in Natural Gas Exploitation: DB51/T 2850-2021”, revealed that the heavy metals and other key indicators in the solid phase residues are effectively removed. The resulting solid residue, once treated, can be repurposed to pave the well site, thereby achieving both effective removal of oil-based drill cuttings and waste utilization.

参考文献

[1] 吕柏林, 马鹏, 卢迎波, 等. 风城浅层超稠油油藏原位催化改质降黏技术[J]. 石油钻采工艺, 2023, 45(5): 632-637.
  Bailin LYU, MA Peng, LU Yingbo, et al. In-situ catalytic modification and viscosity reduction technology in shallow ultra-heavy oil reservoirs in Fengcheng[J]. Oil Drilling & Production Technology, 2023, 45(5): 632-637.
[2] 王广财, 刘万成, 陈向明, 等. 深层页岩油水平井复合盐弱凝胶钻井液技术[J]. 石油钻采工艺, 2023, 45(6): 675-682.
  WANG Guangcai, LIU Wancheng, CHEN Xiangming, et al. Technology of compound salt weak gel drilling fluid for long horizontal wells in deep shale oil reservoirs[J]. Oil Drilling & Production Technology, 2023, 45(6): 675-682.
[3] 徐贵勤, 谢水祥, 任雯, 等. 废弃聚磺钻井液固相资源化绿色处理剂[J]. 石油钻采工艺, 2023, 45(6): 683-689.
  XU Guiqin, XIE Shuixiang, REN Wen, et al. Green treatment agent for waste polysulfonate drilling fluid solid phase resourceful utilization[J]. Oil Drilling & Production Technology, 2023, 45(6): 683-689.
[4] BALL A S, STEWART R J, SCHLIEPHAKE K. A review of the current options for the treatment and safe disposal of drill cuttings[J]. Waste Management & Research, 2012, 30 (5): 457-473.
[5] XIA Z, YANG H, SUN J, et al. Co-pyrolysis of waste polyvinyl chloride and oil-based drilling cuttings: pyrolysis process and product characteristics analysis[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2021 318: 128521.
[6] JIANG G B, YU J L, JIANG H S, et al. Physicochemical characteristics of oil-based cuttings from pretreatment in shale gas well sites[J]. Journal of Environmental Science & Health Part A, 2020.
[7] CHEN Z, LI D, TONG K, et al. Static decontamination of oil-based drill cuttings with pressurized hot water using response surface methodology[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2019, 26 (7): 7216-7227.
[8] 孙静文, 许毓, 刘晓辉, 等. 油基钻屑处理及资源回收技术进展[J]. 石油石化节能, 2016, 6(1): 30-33.
  SUN Jingwen, XU Yu, LIU Xiaohui, et al. Progress in oil-based drill cuttings treatment and resource recovery technology[J]. Energy Conservation and Measurement in Petroleum & Petrochemical Industry, 2016, 6(1): 30-33.
[9] POYAI T, GETWECH C, DHANASIN P, et al. Solvent-based washing as a treatment alternative for onshore petroleum drill cuttings in Thailand[J]. Science of The Total Environment, 2020, 718: 137384.
[10] JIANG G, LI J, ZHAO L, et al. Insights into the deoiling efficiency of oil-based cuttings by surfactant-free microemulsions[J]. Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering, 2022, 10: 107306.
[11] 林丽丽. 咪唑类离子液体的制备及其协同溶剂处理油基钻屑的研究[D]. 成都: 西南石油大学, 2022.
  LIN Lili. Preparation of imidazolium ionic liquids and their synergistic solvent treatment of oil-based drill cuttings[D]. Chengdu: Southwest Petroleum University, 2022.
[12] CHANG S H. Utilization of green organic solvents in solvent extraction and liquid membrane for sustainable wastewater treatment and resource recovery-a review[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2020, 27(26): 32371-32388.
[13] KHAN M K, CAHYADI H S, KIM S M, et al. Efficient oil recovery from highly stable toxic oily sludge using supercritical water[J]. Fuel, 2019, 235: 460-472.
[14] YAN P, LU M, GUAN Y, et al. Remediation of oil-based drill cuttings through a biosurfactant-based washing followed by a biodegradation treatment[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2011, 102: 10252-10259.
[15] PETRI I, PEREIRA M S, DOS SANTOS J M, et al. Microwave remediation of oil well drill cuttings. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 2015, 134: 23-29.
[16] ABNISA F, ALABA P A. Recovery of liquid fuel from fossil-based solid wastes via pyrolysis technique: a review[J]. Journal Of Environmental Chemical Engineering, 2021, 9: 106593.
[17] 胡端义, 黎亮, 郑澜, 等. 间歇式热脱附炉炉膛结焦原因探讨和对策分析[J]. 油气田环境保护, 2023, 33(5): 37-40.
  HU Duanyi, LI Liang, ZHENG Lan, et al. Discussion on the Causes of Coking in the Furnace Chamber of Intermittent Hot Phase Desorption Furnace and Countermeasure Analysis[J]. Environmental Protection of Oil & Gas Fields, 2023, 33(5): 37-40.
[18] HU G, LIU H, CHEN C, et al. Low-temperature thermal desorption and secure landfill for oil-based drill cuttings management: pollution control, human health risk, and probabilistic cost assessment[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2021, 410: 124570.
[19] LYU Q, WANG L, JIANG J, et al. Catalytic pyrolysis of oil-based drill cuttings over metal oxides: the product properties and environmental risk assessment of heavy metals in char[J]. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2022, 159: 354-361.
[20] FALCIGLIA P P, GIUSTRA M G, VAGLIASINDI F G A. Low-temperature thermal desorption of diesel polluted soil: influence of temperature and soil texture on contaminant removal kinetics[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2011, 185: 392-400.
[21] XIA Z, YANG H, SUN J, et al. Co-pyrolysis of waste polyvinyl chloride and oil-based drilling cuttings: pyrolysis process and product characteristics analysis[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2021, 318: 128521.
[22] YANG H, LIU Y, BAI G, et al. Study on the co-pyrolysis characteristics of oil-based drill cuttings and lees[J]. Biomass Bioenergy, 2022, 160: 106436.
[23] ZHANG X Y, YAO A G. Pilot experiment of oily cuttings thermal desorption and heating characteristics study[J]. Journal of Petroleum Exploration and Production Technology, 2019, 9(2): 1263-1270.
[24] LIN X S, SHI Y M, ZHENG Y, et al. Analysis of the catalytic pyrolysis of shale gas oil-based drill cuttings via TG-MS[J]. Journal of Chemical Technology & Biotechnology, 2023, 10: 2546-2553.
[25] CHENG C, GUO Q H, DING L, et al. Upgradation of coconut waste shell to value-added hydrochar via hydrothermal carbonization: Parametric optimization using response surface methodology[J]. Applied Energy, 2022, 327: 120136.
[26] MKEL M. Experimental design and response surface methodology in energy applications: A tutorial review[J]. Energy Conversion and Management, 2017, 151: 630-640.
[27] RAHEEM A, WAKG W A, YAP Y T, et al. Optimization of the microalgae Chlorella vulgaris for syngas production using central composite design[J]. Rsc Advances, 2015, 5(88): 71805-71815.
[28] YUSUP S, KHAN Z, AHMAD M M, et al. Optimization of hydrogen production in in-situ catalytic adsorption (ICA) steam gasification based on Response Surface Methodology[J]. Biomass Bioenergy, 2014, 60: 98-107.
[29] HU G J, LI J B, ZHANG X Y, et al. Investigation of waste biomass co-pyrolysis with petroleum sludge using a response surface methodology[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2017, 192: 234-242.
[30] KAMALI A, HEIDARI S, GOLZARY A, et al. Optimized catalytic pyrolysis of refinery waste sludge to yield clean high quality oil products[J]. Fuel, 2022, 328: 125292.
[31] IDRIS R, CHENG T C, ASIK J A, et al. Optimization studies of microwave-induced co-pyrolysis of empty fruit bunches/waste truck tire using response surface methodology[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, 244: 118649.
[32] ZHUANG X Z, GAN Z Y, CHEN D Y, et al. A new insight into high quality syngas production from co-pyrolysis of light bio-oil leached bamboo and heavy bio-oil using response surface methodology[J]. Fuel, 2022, 324: 124721.
[33] VAN N T T, GASPILLO P, THANH H G T, NHI N H T, et al. Cellulose from the banana stem: optimization of extraction by response surface methodology (RSM) and characterization[J]. Heliyon, 2022, 8: 11845.
[34] HASANZADEH R, MOJAVER P, AZDAST T, et al. Developing gasification process of polyethylene waste by utilization of response surface methodology as a machine learning technique and multi-objective optimizer approach[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2023, 48: 5873-5886.
[35] FAVIER L, SIMION A I, HLIHOR R M, et al. Intensification of the photodegradation efficiency of an emergent water pollutant through process conditions optimization by means of response surface methodology[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2023, 328: 116928.
[36] LU H, ZHANG L W, XIA X L, et al. Optimization of pulse bi-directional electrolysis in-situ synthesis of tungsten carbide by response surface methodology[J]. International Journal of Refractory Metals and Hard Materials, 2023, 111: 106063.
[37] LV Q W, WANG L A, MA S D, et al. Pyrolysis of oil-based drill cuttings from shale gas field: Kinetic, thermodynamic, and product properties[J]. Fuel, 2022, 323(124332): 1-11.
[38] HU G J, LI J B, ZHANG X Y, et al. Investigation of waste biomass co-pyrolysis with petroleum sludge using a response surface methodology[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2017, 192: 234-242.
[39] CHEN X, CHEN Y, YANG H, et al. Catalytic fast pyrolysis of biomass: Selective deoxygenation to balance the quality and yield of bio-oil[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2019, 273: 153-158.
[40] 黄维巍. 涪陵页岩气开发油基钻屑[D]. 武汉: 武汉理工大学, 2017.
  HUANG Weiwei. Oil-based drill cuttings from Fuling shale gas development[D]. Wuhan: Wuhan University of Technology, 2017.
[41] TANG B, XU Y X, SONG X F, et al. Numerical study on the relationship between high sharpness and configurations of the vortex finder of a hydrocyclone by central composite design[J]. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2015, 278: 504-516.
[42] ZHUANG X, GAN Z, CEN K, et al. Upgrading biochar by co-pyrolysis of heavy bio-oil and apricot shell using response surface methodology[J]. Fuel, 2022, 310: 122447.
[43] AHMADI S, MOHAMMADI L, IGWEGBE C A, et al. Application of response surface methodology in the degradation of Reactive Blue 19 using H2O2/MgO nanoparticles advanced oxidation process[J]. International Journal of Industrial Chemistry, 2018, 9: 241-253.
文章导航

/