PROGRAM AREA OVERVIEW --

12. OIL, Tar Sands, and Oil Shale TECHNOLOGIES

The DOE seeks innovative methods and concepts that will contribute to more efficient and economic processes for the recovery and utilization of oil, tar sands, and oil shale. Much of the known reserves of oil in the U.S. cannot be recovered by conventional means, and advanced technologies will be required for extraction. With respect to oil, new technology approaches are needed for drilling and refining. For tar sands and oil shale, new technology is needed to cleanly extract and treat the organic material. Grant applications are sought only in the following subtopics:

a. Lost Circulation Material in Drilling—When drilling for oil and gas, it often happens that the drill pipe gets stuck in the borehole; millions of dollars a year are expensed due to stuck pipe. A common reason for a stuck drill pipe is a condition called “lost circulation,” which occurs when the pressure in the borehole exceeds the rock formation pressure. Usually these formations are very porous, and at the moment of lost circulation, drilling fluid is forced into the rock. In extreme circumstances, hundreds of barrels of drilling fluid can be forced into the rock, which can often cause permanent fractures. In addition to the pipe sticking to the borehole wall, the adverse effects of lost circulation include the creation of a fractured weak rock zone that constantly causes drilling problems, the loss of expensive drilling fluid, and borehole cave-ins. Another dangerous effect is that, due to the loss of hydrostatic pressure in the borehole, a high pressure zone may cause flow into the borehole, resulting in a “kick” or “blowout.” Although numerous commercial products, circulated into the borehole through the drill pipe, exist to plug the porous lost circulation zones, grant applications are sought to develop new or improved methods of plugging lost circulation rock formations because methods and techniques are insufficient to properly perform the job.

b. Small Bore “Microhole” Drilling—"Microhole" technologies, which use portable drilling rigs with a smaller footprint and lower environmental impact, are being developed to benefit the small driller. Some specific advantages of microhole drilling are: (1) equipment is smaller (microdrilling systems could occupy a space roughly 1/20th that of a typical rig) and weighs less (less than one tenth as much) than conventional systems, reducing equipment costs (by up to 90 percent) and manpower to operate equipment; (2) materials required for drilling and well completion are reduced; (3) the use of coiled tubing saves time and money because it requires fewer trips in and out of the wellbore, compared to conventional drilling techniques; (4) volumes of drilling fluids and cuttings can be reduced by one-fifth, reducing disposal costs; and (5) drill rigs and associated equipment have smaller footprints, reducing environmental impact and making the system particularly advantageous when operating in environmentally sensitive areas. When holes this small are used for exploration – for example, to locate the best prospects for producing natural gas from coal beds – it may be possible to reduce drilling costs by a third or more. When used for field development, microholes may be less than half as expensive as conventional wells. Grant applications are sought to develop innovative production and completion equipment, based on microhole technologies, in drilled wells that use coiled tubing. Of particular interest are approaches that provide for a high penetration rate for downhole drilling systems suitable for coiled tubing-drilling.

c. Oil Refining Capacity—Refinery capacity is an increasing concern for the U.S., and recent gasoline prices have brought this issue into focus for the consumer. In introducing his energy policy, President Bush noted that the refining industry is operating at capacity:

“We are not just short of oil, we’re short of the refineries that turn oil into fuel. So while the rest of our economy is functioning at 82 percent of capacity, our refineries are gasping at 96 percent capacity. A single accident, a single shutdown can send prices of gasoline and heating oil spiraling all over the country. The major reason for dramatic increase in gasoline prices today is the lack of refining capacity.”

Because of the historical low return on investment, most of the research in refining has focused on problem solving and trouble-shooting. Relatively little research has addressed new refining technology, especially with regard to the heavy, sour crude oil found in the Western Hemisphere, which requires more intensive processing. It is important that our refineries be able to use the heavy oil from these secure sources. This subtopic focuses on innovative approaches to petroleum conversion processes that could lead to a step-change in refining, rather than the process optimization that is now being done by industry. Only those projects that would lead to a step-change in the ability to refine heavy crude oil will be considered.

Refineries are increasingly being forced to start with poorer quality, heavier crudes due to decreasing volumes of higher quality, light crudes. The U.S. has 105 billion barrels of heavy oil; yet, only about 4 billion barrels have been produced. There are also extensive reserves of heavy oil in the rest of the hemisphere. Being able to easily process heavy crude oil or the higher boiling cuts of the less heavy crudes would give refineries more flexibility in their choice of feedstock. Therefore, grant applications are sought for innovative chemical or physical refining processes that could enhance the use of domestic and Western Hemisphere heavy, sour crude oil.

Another issue with oil refining is that EPA regulations are requiring lower sulfur levels in both gasoline and diesel. Although desulfurization processes/catalysts are available, they result in a lower octane product. Because octane levels are critical to gasoline performance, it would be highly beneficial to have a process to remove sulfur without reducing octane. Therefore, grant applications are sought for new processes/catalysts that would economically remove sulfur from gasoline without octane loss.

d. Tar Sands and Oil Shale Development—The U.S. has a huge resource in tar/oil sands, 40 – 76 billion barrels. However, these sands must be rigorously treated for conversion into an upgraded crude oil before they can be used by refineries to produce gasoline and diesel fuels. While conventional crude oil flows naturally or is pumped from the ground, oil sands must be mined or recovered in situ. Oil sands recovery processes include extraction and separation systems to remove the bitumen from sand and water. The resulting bitumen and syncrude produced is high in naphthenic acids, chlorides, and nitrogen levels. These constituents pose problems in both corrosion control and catalyst poisoning which can limit their acceptability in a refinery. Grant applications are sought to develop:

(1) A cost-effective, environmentally benign separation process to extract bitumen from oil sands (with very low fines carryover) and leave clean sand that rapidly dewaters or dries to a solid mass, permitting the rapid re-vegetation of mined areas in months rather than decades. If a water-based bitumen extraction system is used, it should have low organics carryover and should not flocculate the clays. If an organic-based system is used, it should rapidly coagulate and drain without excessive volatiles that would exceed air quality standards for the area. In addition, the organic bitumen phase (with or without an organic diluent) should have minimal fines carryover for water washing (desalting) and further processing/upgrading to liquid fuels or asphalt.

(2) A process to remove chlorides and/or nitrogen from either the oil sand bitumen or the refined syncrude.

(3) An economical process to remove and treat the naphthenic acids in the water generated by the extraction or upgrading of bitumen.

The U.S. also has billions of barrels of oil shale (the "shale" is usually a relatively hard rock). In 2004, U.S. DOE published two summaries of The Strategic Significance of America’s Oil Shale Resource, Vol. I, Assessment of Strategic Issues, and Vol. II, Oil Shale Resource Technology and Economics.” These two volumes summarize the world’s oil shale industry and challenges. Grant applications are sought to develop:

(1) Cost-effective, environmentally low-impact separation processes to extract kerogen, the organic material in oil shale, with high yield. Any process should have very low fines carryover into the organic phase and should leave clean “spent shale” that rapidly dewaters, thus permitting rapid re-vegetation of mined areas (in months rather than decades). Also, the system should not leave hot molten spent shale for surface disposal. If an organic/gaseous-based surface extraction system (super-critical extraction) is used, the organic phase must be free of fines, and the processed shale/sands must rapidly consolidate and have low organics carryover. Also, if the extraction system yields a fines-free organic phase, the processed shale/sands must rapidly consolidate with a low organics carryover.

(2) Processes to upgrade the kerogen phase (with or without a diluent) for transport to processing/upgrading. The organic product must have minimum fines carryover for pipeline transport.

(3) Cost-effective, environmentally benign processing/upgrading technology for conversion of kerogen or diluted kerogen to marketable transportation fuels that are fungible with petroleum based transportation fuels. The processing/upgrading can be in combination with the extraction step, wherein separate streams are recovered from the extraction and transported individually for further processing/upgrading and conversion to marketable transportation fuels. Also, the processing/upgrading should use the entire kerogen stream and extract select components before processing/refining into marketable transportation fuels.

References:

Subtopic a: Lost Circulation Material in Drilling

1. Gockel, J. F., et al., “Lost Circulation: A Solution Based on the Problem,” presented at 1987 Society of Petroleum Engineers/International Association of Drilling Contractors (SPE/IADC) Drilling Conference, New Orleans, LA, March 15-18, 1987. (SPE Paper No. 16082) (Available at www.spe.org. Guest registration required.)

2. Canson, B. E., “Lost Circulation: Treatments for Naturally Fractured, Vugular or Cavernous Formations,” presented at the SPE/IADC 1985 Drilling Conference, New Orleans, LA, March 6-8, 1985. (SPE Paper No. 13440) (Available at www.spe.org. Guest registration required.)

3. Sanders, W. W., “Lost Circulation: Assessment and Planning Program: Evolving Strategy to Control Severe Losses in Deepwater Projects,” presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, February 19-21, 2003. (SPE paper No. 79836) (Available at www.spe.org. Guest registration required.)

4. Society of Petroleum Engineers, http://www.spe.org/spe/jsp/homepage

Subtopic b: Small Bore “Microhole” Drilling

5. Albright, J., Roadmap for a 5,000-Ft. Microborehole, U. S. DOE National Petroleum Technology Office, undated. (Full text available at: http://www.npto.doe.gov/news/micholRoadmapRep.pdf)

6. Microdrill Initiative: Initial Market Evaluation, prepared by Spears and Associates, Inc. for U.S. DOE, April 23, 2003. (Full text available at: http://www.npto.doe.gov/news/micholSpearsMarEvalRep.PDF)

7. Micrhole Initiative: [April 2003] Workshop Summary, prepared by Spears and Associates, Inc. for U.S. DOE, June 19, 2003. (Full text available at: http://www.npto.doe.gov/news/micholWorkshopReport.PDF)

8. Microhole Systems R&D, U.S. DOE Office of Fossil Energy, http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/oilgas/microhole/

9. Coiled Tubing and DOE/NETL’s (National Energy Technology Laboratory) Technology Development Program, U.S. DOE Office of Fossil Energy, http://www.icota.com/publications/Lunch%20Learn/NETL-ICOTA%20Luncheon%201-15-04%20Final.pdf

Subtopic c: Oil Refining Capacity

10. “Strict Environmental Regulations Compel Petroleum Refiners to Opt for Sophisticated Catalytic Processes,” Frost & Sullivan, July 7, 2004. (Full text available at: http://www.frost.com/prod/servlet/press-release.pag?docid=20230869)

11. Ingram, C. W., Improved Catalysts for the Heavy Oil Upgrading Based on Zeolite Y Nanoparticles Encapsulated in Stable Nanoporous Host, Project abstract, undated. (Available at: http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/proceedings/03/ucr-hbcu/abstracts/Ingram_a.pdf)

12. Heavy Oil Upgrading with Water via Super Critical Partial Oxidation, Research Proposal, Petroleum Technology Alliance Canada, 1998. (At: http://www.ptac.org/cho/chop9803.html)

13. Colyar, J. J., “Improvements of Ebullated-Bed Technology for Upgrading Heavy Oils,” Oil & Gas Science and Technology, 55(4):397-406, French Institute of Petroleum, 2000. (Abstract available at: http://www.editionstechnip.com/Sources/Liste_IfpFiche.asp?Cle=55040397&Annee=2000)

14. Afyturtlu, A., Investigation of Mixed Metal Sorbent/Catalysts for the Simultaneous Removal of Sulfur and Nitrogen Oxides, Technical Progress Report, Hampton, VA: Hampton University, March 1997. (Full text available at: http://www.netl.doe.gov/cctc/resourcespdfsmisc/fgd/topic002.pdf)

Subtopic d: Tar Sands and Oil Shale Development

15. Oil Sands, Alberta [Canada] Department of Energy, http://www.energy.gov.ab.ca/com/Sands/default.htm

16. Sexton, M., Tar Sands: A Brief Overview, University of Alaska, Fairbanks Department of Physics, Spring 2002. (Available at: http://ffden-2.phys.uaf.edu/102spring2002_Web_projects/M.Sexton/

17. Survey of Energy Resources: Oil Shale, World Energy Council, http://www.worldenergy.org/wec-geis/publications/reports/ser/shale/shale.asp

18. Maldem M. and Mohan, S., Oil Shale, Pennsylvania State University, http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/p/c/pcm131/oilshales1.htm

19. Sinor, J. E., Oil Shale Experience, from J. E. Sinor’s personal library, University of Kentucky, undated. (Available at: http://edj.net/sinor/qshaleexp.html)

Return to the Complete List of Topics.