Hydrates: State of the Art Inside and Outside Flowlines

Sloan, E. Dendy; Koh, Carolyn A.; Sum, Amadeu K.; Ballard, A.L.; Shoup, G.J.; McMullen, Norm; Creek, Jefferson L.; Palermo, Thierry

doi:10.2118/118534-jpt

Cited by 57 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Methane gas forms type I hydrates, which have cubic crystal structure and a lattice parameter of 1.2 nm. In two types of cavities, the large cavity is tetrakaidecahedron and the small cavity is pentagonal dodecahedron. − …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methane Hydrate Uptake of MCM-41 Mesoporous Molecular Sieves with Preadsorbed Water

Liu

Xie

et al. 2018

J. Chem. Eng. Data

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ordered meosoporous molecular sieves of MCM-41 were prepared by adjusting the pH with acetic acid. The synthesized samples were evaluated by 77 K nitrogen-adsorption data. The sample synthesized by a onetime pH adjustment has the same good characters as that synthesized by a three-times pH adjustment. The morphology and crystal structure of the calcined MCM-41 materials were examined with XRD and TEM, in which the ordered channel structure was confirmed. The sorption equilibrium isotherms of wet samples showed a sharp rise, because the large amount methane hydrate had been formed in the MCM-41 samples' porous space. The methane sorption amount of the mesoporous MCM-41 sample with preadsorbed water reached 10.87 mmol at R w = 2.0, which was 2.97 times that of the dry mesoporous MCM-41 sample. The comparative methane sorption capacities of the three ordered mesoporous materials (MCM-41, SBA-15, and large-pore MCM-41) by preadsorbtion of the same water mass (R w = 2.0) are almost identical, and no previous articles have reported similar results for the mesoporous materials. However, the methane hydrate formation pressures of the three samples are different due to the pore diameter effect.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methane Hydrate Uptake of MCM-41 Mesoporous Molecular Sieves with Preadsorbed Water

Liu

Xie

et al. 2018

J. Chem. Eng. Data

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This would cause flow assurance issues, and may create operational and safety contingencies that may lead to huge economic losses, potential environmental risk due to pollution, and safety hazards to operational personnel in the case of pipeline rupture [1][2][3][4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gas Hydrate Growth Kinetics: A Parametric Study

Meindinyo

Svartaas

2016

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gas hydrate growth kinetics was studied at a pressure of 90 bars to investigate the effect of temperature, initial water content, stirring rate, and reactor size in stirred semi-batch autoclave reactors. The mixing energy during hydrate growth was estimated by logging the power consumed. The theoretical model by Garcia-Ochoa and Gomez for estimation of the mass transfer parameters in stirred tanks has been used to evaluate the dispersion parameters of the system. The mean bubble size, impeller power input per unit volume, and impeller Reynold's number/tip velocity were used for analyzing observed trends from the gas hydrate growth data. The growth behavior was analyzed based on the gas consumption and the growth rate per unit initial water content. The results showed that the growth rate strongly depended on the flow pattern in the cell, the gas-liquid mass transfer characteristics, and the mixing efficiency from stirring. Scale-up effects indicate that maintaining the growth rate per unit volume of reactants upon scale-up with geometric similarity does not depend only on gas dispersion in the liquid phase but may rather be a function of the specific thermal conductance, and heat and mass transfer limitations created by the limit to the degree of the liquid phase dispersion is batched and semi-batched stirred tank reactors.

show abstract

“…That is to say, guest molecules and host molecules do not bond chemically [27]. When all the cages are formed by the water molecules (host), they are made of 85% water and 15% gases [26]. Very small guest molecules such as hydrogen and helium with diameters less than 3.8 Å and large molecules such as pentane, hexane, and larger paraffin hydrocarbon with a diameter larger than 7 Å do not form gas hydrates.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laboratory evaluation of caricaceae plant as a locally sourced surfactant for gas hydrate inhibition in a laboratory mini flow loop

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The oil and gas business is serious business and involves millions of dollars so whatever mitigates flow assurance is taken seriously. One of such things is natural gas hydrates. Hydrates are crystalline solids formed when water under low temperatures and high pressures encapsulated natural gases (C1–C4). They form blockages and impede the flow of gas which can lead to the loss of millions of dollars and at times lead to personnel death. Mitigation of gas hydrates has always been with chemicals especially for areas like deep offshore where accessibility is difficult. The chemicals that are in use currently are generally synthetic, expensive and hazardous to lives and environment hence the need for readily available locally sourced materials that are eco-friendly. This study considers and screens a locally sourced surfactant from the plant family caricaceae’ Extract (CE) as a gas hydrate inhibitor in a locally fabricated 39.4-inch mini flow loop of ½ inch internal diameter (ID) which mimics the offshore environment. Various pressure plots (pressure versus time, initial and final pressure versus time and change in pressure versus time) show that the CE performed better than MEG with percentage volumes of gas left in the system for 0.01–0.05 wt% of the extract having values that ranged from 76.7 to 87.33, while volume left for MEG ranged between 70 and 74.67% (1–5 wt%). The CE performed better in small doses compared to those of MEG, in all weight percentages of study. Furthermore, the inhibition capacities which show the level of performance of the inhibitors was also used as a measure of inhibition for both inhibitors. The CE inhibited systems had values of 69.3, 80.7, 78.07, 79.82, and 83.3%, while that of the MEG inhibited system was 60.53, 55.26, 73.68, 72.81, and 66.67% for the various weight percentages considered. The CE should be developed as gas hydrate inhibitors due to its effectiveness and eco-friendliness.

show abstract

Hydrates: State of the Art Inside and Outside Flowlines

Cited by 57 publications

References 5 publications

Methane Hydrate Uptake of MCM-41 Mesoporous Molecular Sieves with Preadsorbed Water

Methane Hydrate Uptake of MCM-41 Mesoporous Molecular Sieves with Preadsorbed Water

Gas Hydrate Growth Kinetics: A Parametric Study

Laboratory evaluation of caricaceae plant as a locally sourced surfactant for gas hydrate inhibition in a laboratory mini flow loop

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About