The effects of drilling fluids and environment protection from pollutants using some models

  • Jalal Seyedmohammadi
Original Article


Among the problems faced by the oil industry the environmental pollution caused by drilling oil wells is, due to the increasing energy demand, heavy reliance on oil share drilling operations are important and vital. The drilling process uses drilling fluids and generates waste fluids and cuttings. Drilling fluids used in drilling operations are including water based drilling fluids (WBF), oil based fluids (OBF) and synthetic based fluids (SBF). The wastes generated in the largest volumes during drilling oil and gas wells are drilling fluids and cuttings. There are several options to manage drilling wastes: discharge, down-hole injection and onshore disposal. In many regions of the world, some types of drilling fluids and drill cuttings may be discharged to the sea if they meet certain environmental requirements. Drilling fluids have operational properties including: maintaining pressure, removing cuttings from the borehole, cooling and lubricating and etc. One of the most particular activities in the industrial world is oil drilling industry like any other industrial activity in the waste and wast returns to the environmental and a plan for processing, refining, and there not delete it Long-term adverse effects of climate on the environment will be lasting. Some of fluids have negative impacts on workforce skin and environment for example base oils/solvents type OBF. In general, SBF have substantially lower environmental impacts than OBF. For preventing of fluids dangerous effects Health, safety and environmental (HSE) experts must be managed their impacts in drilling projects. Also the use of isotherms and kinetics models when using the sorbent to remove pollutants such as heavy metals contained in the fluid and drilling mud to describe the adsorption process was very efficient and the Langmuir and Freundlich models usually have better performance for removing of pollutants into environment protection.


Drilling Drilling fluids Environment protection Waste management 


  1. Abdelwahab O, Amin NK, El-Ashtoukhy ESZ (2013) Removal of zinc ions from aqueous solution using a cation exchange resin. Chem Eng Res Des 91(1):165–173. doi: 10.1016/j.cherd.2012.07.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahlam M, Nida M, Ahmad L (2012) Kinetic, equilibrium and thermodynamic studies of the biosorption of heavy metals byceratoniasiliqua bark. Am J Chem 2(6):335–342. doi: 10.5923/j.chemistry.20120206.07 Google Scholar
  3. ASME (2005) Drilling fluids processing handbook, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Shale Shaker Committee, Gulf Publishing Company, Burlington
  4. Bernier R, Garland E, Glickman A, Jones F, Mairs H, Melton R, Ray J, Smith J, Thomas D, Campbell J (2003) Environmental aspects of the use and disposal of non-aqueous drilling fluids associated with offshore oil & gas operations. International association of oil and gas producers. Report No: 342.
  5. Bowmer CT, Gimeno S, Foekema EM, Kaag N (1993) An environmental evaluation of cleaned drill cuttings using a long term model ecosystem bioassay E&P forum joint study—the physical and biological effects of processed oily drill cuttings (summary report), E&P forum report no. 2.61/202 April 1996.
  6. Brandsma MG, McKelvie S (1994) Modeling North Sea oil-based mud cuttings discharges to assess environmental loading: an E&P forum study. Offshore Technol Conf 12–20. doi: 10.4043/7395-MS
  7. Broni-Bediako E, Amorin R (2010) Effects of drilling fluid exposure to oil and gas workers presented with major areas of exposure and exposure indicators. Res J Appl Sci Eng Technol 2(8):710–719
  8. Burke CJ, Veil JA (1995) Potential environmental benefits from regulatory consideration of synthetic drilling muds. U.S. Department of Energy, 35p.
  9. Candler JE, Hoskin S, Churan M, Lai CW (1995) Seafloor monitoring for synthetic-based mud discharged in the Western Gulf of Mexico.Soc Pet Eng 27–46. doi: 10.2118/29694-MS
  10. Cheung WH, McKay G, Ng J (2003) Equilibrium studies for the sorption of lead from effluents using chitosan. Chemosphere 52:1021–1030. doi: 10.1016/S0045-6535(03)00223-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chuanqiang Z, Xiangxiang G, Jie H, Rong G (2016) Removal of Pb(II) and Zn (II) from aqueous solutions by raw crab shell: acomparative study. Water Environ Fed 88:374–383. doi: 10.2175/106143016X14504669768174 Google Scholar
  12. Dalmazzone Ch, Blanchet D, Lamoureux S, Dutrieux E, Durrieu J, Camps R, Galgani F (2004) Impact of drilling activities in warm sea: recolonization capacities of seabed. Oil Gas Sci Technol Rev IFP 59:625–647. doi: 10.2516/ogst:2004045
  13. Dirce P, Eder CL, Sandra M, Jandyra MG (2005) Heavy metals contribution of non-aqueous fluids used in offshore oil drilling. Fuel 84:53–61. doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2004.08.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ellis JI, Fraser G, Russell J (2012) Discharged drilling waste from oil and gas platforms and its effects on benthic communities. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 456:285–352. doi: 10.3354/meps09622 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Friedheim JE, Pantermuehl RM (1993) Superior performance with minimal environmental impact: a novel nonaqueous drilling fluid. Soc Pet Eng 83–97. doi: 10.2118/25753-MS
  16. Gakwisiri C, Raut N, Al-Saadi A, Al-Aisri S, Al-Ajmi A (2012) A critical review of removal of zinc from wastewater. Lect Notes Eng Comput Sci 2197(1):627–630.
  17. Gerente C, Lee V, Cloirec P, McKay G (2007) Application of chitosan for the removal of metals from wastewaters by adsorption mechanisms and models review. Critical Rev Environ Sci Technol 37:41–127.
  18. Haider M, Vakili M, Dahlan I (2014) Waste material adsorbents for Zinc removal from wastewater: a comprehensive review. Int J Chem Eng 2014:1–13. doi: 10.1155/2014/347912 Google Scholar
  19. Hamoutene D, Payne JF, Andrews C, Wells J, Guiney J (2004) Effect of a synthetic drilling fluid (IPAR) on antioxidant enzymes and peroxisome proliferation in the American Lobster, Homarsusamericanus. Canadian technical report of fisheries and aquatic sciences no. 2554, 18pp.
  20. HWU (2009) Drilling Engineering, Lecture Material, Institute of Petroleum Engineering–Heriot Watt University, Edinburg, UK (Unpublished), pp 38–363.
  21. Ho YS, Mckay G (2002) Application of kinetic models to the sorption of copper(II) on to peat. Adsorp Sci Technol 20(8):797–815.
  22. Ho YS, John DA, Forster CF (1995) Batch nickel removal from aqueous solution by sphagnum moss peat. Water Res 29(5): 1327–1332.,%201327
  23. Jain R, Weiss S, Franzen C, Farges F (2015) Adsorption of zinc bybiogenic elemental selenium nano particles. Chem Eng J 260:855–863. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2014.09.057 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. John A (2002) Drilling waste management: past, present, and future. Soc Pet Eng 38–45. doi: 10.2118/77388-MS
  25. John N, Jerome S (2015) Supervisory control for underbalanced drilling operations. Int Fed Autom Control 120–127. doi: 10.1016/j.ifacol.2015.08.019
  26. Józef N, Agata P, Monika R (2016) Biosorption of Ni(II), Pb(II) and Zn(II) on calcium alginate beads: equilibrium, kinetic and mechanism studies. Polish J Chem Technol 18(3):81–87. doi: 10.1515/pjct-2016-0052 Google Scholar
  27. Khodja M, Khodja-Saber M, Canselier JP, Cohaut N, Bergaya F (2010) Drilling fluid technology: performances and environmental considerations products and services; from R&D to final solutions, pp 17–257.
  28. McMordie WC (1980) Oil base drilling fluids. Symposium on research on environmental fate and effect of drilling fluids and cuttings. Lake Buena Vista, Florida, USAGoogle Scholar
  29. Melton HR, Smith JP, Martin CR, Nedwed TJ, Mairs HL, Raught DL (2000) Offshore discharge of drilling fluids and cuttings; a scientific perspective on public policy. Rio Oil and Gas Conference. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
  30. Neff JM, Bothner MH, Maciolek NJ, Grassle JF (1989) Impacts of exploratory drilling for oil and gas on the benthic environment of Georges Bank. Marine Environ Res 27:77–114. doi: 10.1016/0141-1136(89)90002-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Obianuju I (2014) Contributions of petroleum drilling mud to environmental pollution: assessment of heavy metals and polyaromatic hydrocarbons in oil based petroleum drilling mud. MS Thesis, University of Higher Education, University of Nigeria, JanuaryGoogle Scholar
  32. Ogeleka DF, Tudararo-Aherobo LE (2013) Assessment of the toxic effects of oil-based drilling mud (drilling waste) on Brackish water shrimp (Palaemonetes africanus). Bull Environ Pharmacol Life Sci 2(8):113–117.
  33. OGP and IPIECA (2009) Drilling fluids and health risk management-a guide for drilling personnel, managers and health professionals in the oil and gas industry. International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (OGP), International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association, No. 342, pp 117–396.
  34. Patricia NM, Wellimgton S, Meiry GF, Herve M (2013) Adsorptionof zinc from aqueous solutions using modified Brazilian gray clay. Am J Anal Chem 4:510–519. doi: 10.4236/ajac.2013.49065 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Peresich RL, Burrell BR, Prentice GM (1991) Development and field trial of a biodegradable invert emulsion fluid. Soc Pet Eng 48–56. doi: 10.2118/21935-MS
  36. Peter TR, Arthur MB, Paul RK (1997) The effects of drilling muds on marine invertebrate larvae and adults. Environ Toxic Chem 16:1218–1228. doi: 10.1002/etc.5620160617 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Raziyeh Z (2017) Removal of Cr(VI) ions from aqueous solutions using nickel ferrite nanoparticles: kinetic and equilibrium study. Res Center Environ Pollut 6(1): 17–25.
  38. Reddad Z, Gerenie C (2002) Adsorption of several metal ions onto a low-cost biosorbent: kinetic and equilibrium studies. Environ Sci Technol 36(9):2067–2073.
  39. SayedurRahman Md, Kathiresan V (2015) Heavy metal adsorption onto kappaphycus sp. from aqueous solutions: the use of error functions for validation of isotherm and kinetics models. Biomed Res Int doi: 10.1155/2015/126298 Google Scholar
  40. Sina D, Iraj N, Mozhgan K, Fatemeh FG, Tayebeh N, Farzaneh K, Marjan P, Mehrnoosh A, Reza S (2016) Self-purification of marine environments for heavy metals: a study on removal of lead(II) and copper(II) by cuttlebone. Water Sci Technol 75:1–8. doi: 10.2166/wst.2016.533 Google Scholar
  41. Torgeir B, John S, Hans JB (1999) Managing the environmental effects of the norwegian oil and gas industry. from conflict to consensus 38:525–530. Mar Pollut Bull doi: 10.1016/S0025-326X(99)00004-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wan Ngah WS, Teong LC, Hanafiah MAKM (2011) Adsorption ofdyes and heavy metal ions by chitosan composites: a review. Carbohydr Polym 83:1446–1456. doi: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2010.11.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wills J (2000) Muddied waters—a survey of offshore oilfield drilling wastes and disposal techniques to reduce the ecological impact of sea dumping. Ekologicheskaya Vahkta Sakhalina, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia 139 pp.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of HSE Engineering, Abadan Faculty of Petroleum Engineering (Shahid Tondgooyan)Petroleum University of TechnologyAbadanIran

Personalised recommendations