Energy, Water, Cost, and Greenhouse Gas Implications of Steam-Assisted Gravity Drainage Surface Facility Technologies

Abstract

This analysis explores the implications of technology options for steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) surface facilities on cost, energy, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and water consumption. Water integration in the form of distributed effluent treatment system design as well as heat integration considerations are the basis of this study. Cost savings are accomplished by sequentially employing water network optimization and energy integration techniques. Total annual cost savings of 2.7 to 7.8% are achieved at the surface facility through water integration. Additional operating cost savings of 9.2–10.2% are found due to heat integration. Of the technology options considered in this study, hot lime softening (HLS) with blowdown evaporation and hot lime softening with blowdown recycle are the most promising when considering the tradeoffs between energy, greenhouse gas emissions, and water consumption. However, these options are quite different (i.e., blowdown evaporation has lower water consumption but higher greenhouse gas emissions than blowdown recycle, whereas blowdown recycle has lower greenhouse gas emissions but higher water consumption than blowdown evaporation). Deciding between these options requires placing a value on these environmental externalities. The approach described in this work can be applied to inform decisions in the face of tradeoffs between a range of performance metrics. In addition, the analysis framework described in this paper can be adapted to consider new technology pathways as they become available.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16

Abbreviations

BAU:

Business as usual

BFD:

Block flow diagram

BFW:

Boiler feed water

CC:

Capital cost, composite curve

CPF:

Central processing facility

DO:

Dissolved oxygen

FWKO:

Free water knockout

GHG:

Greenhouse gas

HEN:

Heat exchanger network

HLS:

Hot lime softening

HP:

High pressure

IGF:

Induced gas flotation

MP:

Mathematical programming

NG:

Natural gas

OC:

Operating cost

ORF:

Oil removal filter

OTSG:

Once-through steam generator

PA:

Pinch analysis

PI:

Process integration

SAGD:

Steam-assisted gravity drainage

TDS:

Total dissolved solids

TH:

Total hardness

TOC:

Total organic carbon

TSS:

Total suspended solids

WAC:

weak acid cation exchanger

WN:

Water network

References

  1. Ahmetović E, Ibrić N, Kravanja Z, Grossmann IE (2015) Water and energy integration: a comprehensive literature review of non-isothermal water network synthesis. Comput Chem Eng 82:144–171. doi:10.1016/j.compchemeng.2015.06.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ahmetović E, Kravanja Z (2013) Simultaneous synthesis of process water and heat exchanger networks. Energy 57:236–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Allen EW (2008) Process water treatment in Canada’s oil sands industry: I. Target pollutants and treatment objectives. J Environ Eng Sci 7:123–138. doi:10.1139/S07-038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Alwi SRW, Ismail A, Manan ZA, Handani ZB (2011) A new graphical approach for simultaneous mass and energy minimisation. Appl Therm Eng 31:1021–1030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (1994) Consensus documents: feedwater, boiler water, steam, lay-up of boiler systems and water chemistry monitoring. ASME, US

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bridle M (2005) Treatment of SAGD produced waters without lime softening. Society of Petroleum Engineers. doi:10.2118/97686-MS

  7. Butler R (2001) Application of SAGD, related processes growing in Canada. J Can Pet Technol 99:74

    Google Scholar 

  8. CAPP (2015) 2015 CAPP crude oil forecast, markets & transportation (no. 2015–7). Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers. www.capp.ca/publications and statistics/publications/264673. Accessed 16 Dec 2015

  9. Carreon CE, Mahmoudkhani M, Alva-Argaez A, Bergerson J (2015) Evaluation of energy efficiency options in steam assisted gravity drainage oil sands surface facilities via process integration. Appl Therm Eng 87:788–802. doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2015.04.055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Charpentier AD, Kofoworola O, Bergerson JA, MacLean HL (2011) Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of current oil sands technologies: GHOST model development and illustrative application. Environ Sci Technol 45:9393–9404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dadashi Forshomi Z, Alva-Argaez A, Bergerson JA (2017) Optimal design of distributed effluent treatment systems in steam assisted gravity drainage oil sands operations. J Clean Prod 149:1233–1248. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.02.131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Dong HG, Lin CY, Chang CT (2008) Simultaneous optimization approach for integrated water-allocation and heat-exchange networks. Chem Eng Sci 63:3664–3678. doi:10.1016/j.ces.2008.04.044

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Feng X, Li Y, Shen R (2009) A new approach to design energy efficient water allocation networks. Appl Therm Eng 29:2302–2307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gilraine W (2013) SAGD facility water treatment and steam generation process technology selection. Presented at Canadian Heavy Oil Association. Alberta, Canada

  15. Goodman WH, Godfrey MR, Miller TM, Comany N (2010) Scale and deposit formation in steam assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) facilities. Presented at the International Water Conference. San Antonio, Texas

  16. Gwak KW, Bae W (2010) A review of steam generation for in-situ oil sands projects. Geosystem Eng 13:111–118. doi:10.1080/12269328.2010.10541317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Halari A, Jergeas G, Eng P (2011) Lessons learned from execution of oil sands’ SAGD projects. s3.amazonaws.com/elasticbeanstalk-us-east-1-200981706290/wufu/5632b4159a237. Accessed 12 Dec 2015

  18. Heins B (2006) Operational experience of heavy oil produced water evaporation system at Suncor Firebag and Deer Creek facilities in Northern Alberta. Presented at 2006 CONRAD water usage workshop and seminar. Ft. McMurray, Alberta

  19. Hill R (2012) Thermal in situ water conservation study, a summary report. Alberta Innovates—Energy and Environment Solutions. www.ai-ees.ca/media/6868/thermal-in-situ-water-summary-report.pdf. Accessed 10 Dec 2015

  20. Jacobs Consultancy, Suncor Energy Services Inc. (2012) Climate change and emissions management corporation (CCEMC). A greenhouse gas reduction roadmap for oil sands. Climate Change and Emissions Management Corporation (CCEMC). http://sustainability.suncor.com/2014/pdf/CCEMC-Suncor_GHG_Reduction_Roadmap-Final_Jacobs_Report.pdf. Accessed 12 Dec 2015

  21. Jagannath A, Almansoori A (2016) Sequential synthesis of heat integrated water networks: a new approach and its application to small and medium sized examples. Comput Chem Eng 90:44–61. doi:10.1016/j.compchemeng.2016.04.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kawaguchi H, Li Z, Masuda Y, Sato K, Nakagawa H (2012) Dissolved organic compounds in reused process water for steam-assisted gravity drainage oil sands extraction. Water Res 46:5566–5574. doi:10.1016/j.watres.2012.07.036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kemp IC (2007) Pinch analysis and process integration: a user guide on process integration for the efficient use of energy, 2nd edn. Butterworth-Heinemann, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  24. Klemeš JJ, Kravanja Z (2013) Forty years of heat integration: pinch analysis (PA) and mathematical programming (MP). Curr Opin Chem Eng, Biotechnology and bioprocess engineering/Process systems engineering 2:461–474. doi:10.1016/j.coche.2013.10.003

    Google Scholar 

  25. Klemeš JJ, Varbanov PS, Kravanja Z (2013) Recent developments in process integration. Chem Eng Res Des 91:2037–2053

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Linnhoff (1998) Introduction to pinch technology. Northwich, Cheshire, England

  27. Linnhoff B, Hindmarsh E (1983) The pinch design method for heat exchanger networks. Chem Eng Sci 38:745–763

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Manan ZA, Tea SY, Alwi SRW (2009) A new technique for simultaneous water and energy minimisation in process plant. Chem Eng Res Des 87:1509–1519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Nadella N (2010) Improving energy efficiency in thermal oil recovery. In: Improving energy efficiency in thermal oil recovery. Presented at the World Energy Congress, Montreal

  30. Papalexandri KP, Pistikopoulos EN (1994) A multiperiod MINLP model for the synthesis of flexible heat and mass exchange networks. Comput Chem Eng 18:1125–1139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Pedenaud P, Goulay C, Michaud P (2005) Oily water treatment schemes for steam generation in SAGD heavy oil developments. Society of Petroleum Engineers. doi:10.2118/97750-MS

  32. Peterson D, West HPD, Washington B (2007) Guidelines for produced water evaporators in SAGD. IWC 7:68

    Google Scholar 

  33. Polley GT, Picón-Núñez M, de Jesús López-Maciel J (2010) Design of water and heat recovery networks for the simultaneous minimisation of water and energy consumption. Appl Therm Eng., Selected Papers from the 12th Conference on Process Integration, Modelling and Optimisation for Energy Saving and Pollution Reduction 30:2290–2299. doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2010.03.031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Savulescu L (1999) Simultaneous energy and water minimisation. UMIST, Department of Process Integration, Manchester

    Google Scholar 

  35. Savulescu L, Alva-Argaez A (2013) Chapter 15: process integration concepts for combined energy and water integration. In: Klemeš JJ (ed) Handbook of process integration (PI). Woodhead Publishing Series in Energy. Woodhead Publishing, p 461–483

  36. Savulescu L, Kim JK, Smith R (2005a) Studies on simultaneous energy and water minimisation—part I: systems with no water re-use. Chem Eng Sci 60:3279–3290. doi:10.1016/j.ces.2004.12.037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Savulescu L, Kim JK, Smith R (2005b) Studies on simultaneous energy and water minimisation—part II: systems with maximum re-use of water. Chem Eng Sci 60:3291–3308. doi:10.1016/j.ces.2004.12.036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Savulescu LE, Alva-Argaez A (2008) Direct heat transfer considerations for improving energy efficiency in pulp and paper Kraft mills. Energy 33:1562–1571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Sum Ng DK, Yee Foo DC (2006) Evolution of water network using improved source shift algorithm and water path analysis. Ind Eng Chem Res 45:8095–8104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Turton R, Bailie RC, Whiting WB, Shaeiwitz JA, Bhattacharyya D (2012) Analysis, synthesis and design of chemical processes, 4th edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  41. Walas SM (1988) Chemical process equipment: selection and design, new edition. Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  42. Wang YP, Smith R (1994) Design of distributed effluent treatment systems. Chem Eng Sci 49:3127–3145. doi:10.1016/0009-2509(94)E0126-B

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Xiao W, Zhou R, Dong HG, Meng N, Lin CY, Adi VSK (2009) Simultaneous optimal integration of water utilization and heat exchange networks using holistic mathematical programming. Korean J Chem Eng 26:1161–1174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Yee TF, Grossmann IE (1990) Simultaneous optimization models for heat integration—II. Heat exchanger network synthesis. Comput Chem Eng 14:1165–1184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Zaidi A, Leopold G (2010) Produced water treatment—theory and practice. CANMET, Energy, Mines and Resourced

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) for financial support.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joule A. Bergerson.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Electronic Supplementary Material

ESM 1

(DOC 779 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dadashi Forshomi, Z., Carreon, C.E., Alva-Argaez, A. et al. Energy, Water, Cost, and Greenhouse Gas Implications of Steam-Assisted Gravity Drainage Surface Facility Technologies. Process Integr Optim Sustain 1, 87–107 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41660-017-0007-0

Download citation

Keywords

  • Process integration
  • Water integration
  • Heat integration
  • Pinch analysis
  • Steam-assisted gravity drainage
  • Bitumen production