OTC 22443

Application of Emulsion Viscosity Reducers to Lower Produced Fluid

Viscosity
Stephan J Allenson, Andrew T Yen and Frank Lang, Nalco Company

Copyright 2011, Offshore Technology Conference

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Offshore Technology Conference Brasil held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 4–6 October 2011.

This paper was selected for presentation by an OTC program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Offshore Technology Conference and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Offshore Technology Conference, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Offshore Technology Conference is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of OTC copyright.

Abstract
One of the major costs in crude oil production is lifting fluids to the surface for processing. During the lifting process
the produced fluid composed of brine and crude oil encounters high shears and pressure drops caused by flowing
through electrical submersible pumps or other forms of impingement and restrictions. In addition, crude oil
generally contains naturally occurring interfacial active materials which act as emulsifiers. When the produced
fluids are subjected to such shear they mix and form a water-in-oil emulsion. This emulsion carries a viscosity that
can be many times higher than the crude itself. This increase in viscosity is the main reason for lifting difficulties
and the associated higher cost of production. Emulsion Viscosity Reducers (EVR) are chemicals designed to
interact with the natural emulsifiers at the water-oil interface and facilitate the water-oil separation. The resolution
of the emulsion results in lowering the overall viscosity of the fluid which leads to increased flow and production. In
this paper we examined the effectiveness of EVR on some typical Brazilian crude emulsions in the laboratory as
well as field application data.

Introduction
In pure form hydrocarbons do not mix with water or brine and the propensity to form an emulsion does not
exist. However, due to the presence of naturally occurring interfacial active substances in crude oil and the mixing
that occurs in oil production process there is a tendency for crude oil to form an emulsion with water or brine. It is
widely known that emulsion formation requires the existence of surfactants and interfacial active components as
well as energy in a mechanical form to shear and mix the two separate and immiscible phases of fluid. Crude oil
has a complex composition that usually contains interfacial active polar compounds such as asphaltenes, resins,
and naphthenic acids.1 These groups are comprised of molecules incorporating oxygen, nitrogen, and sulfur in
forms such as carboxylic acids, amides, alcohols, phenols, mercaptans and amines to name a few. During the
production of crude oil there exist several points where mechanical energy is imparted to the production fluids and
emulsion formation can occur. One such point is the lifting process where the flow of the fluid encounters shear
forces and pressure drops generated by the mechanical forces present in an ESP (electric submersible pump) or
other lifting method such as gas lift. High shear forces provide sufficient energy to cause intimate mixing of the
crude oil and associated brine. As a result, there is a high probability of emulsion formation.
Under most oil production conditions it is common to observe an emulsion formed with a water
discontinuous (or internal) phase suspended in an oil continuous (or external) phase. These emulsions are formed
based on both the interfacial effects of the natural surfactants and on the amount of mechanical energy applied.
Resulting emulsions typically have very fine water droplets ranging in size from 100 μm to less than 10 μm as
demonstrated in the literature over the years. Emulsification of brine into the crude oil can result in a fluid that has
a higher apparent viscosity than the crude itself as a result of the large number of small droplets and the resulting
high oil/water interfacial surface area created. The high surface area results in a large number of surface/surface
interactions between droplets that begin to effectively transfer shear through the bulk phase of the emulsified fluids,
which is recorded as a high viscosity. The viscosity is described as “apparent viscosity” as the true viscosity of
either phase independently is not directly related to the measured viscosity of the fluid. This higher viscosity
emulsion can potentially impede the flow of the fluid, wearing down ESPs and result in lower oil production. To
overcome this impediment the down-hole addition of EVR (emulsion viscosity reducer) can effectively lower the
apparent viscosity of the fluid, thus enable the lifting process to become more efficient.
2 OTC 22443

Crude oil Emulsion

Crude oil contains naturally occurring emulsifying agents such as asphaltenes, naphthenic acid, resins,
and other interfacial active polar organic compounds that readily transition toward the oil/water interface and
aggregate over time. Additional particles such as suspended solids and inorganic scale particles can also
aggregate at the oil/water interface as they become associated with components of the crude oil.2 The aggregated
compounds built up at the oil/water interface can form a virtual “skin” or “film” around the water droplets (Figure 1),
preventing them from draining into each other, thus stabilizes the emulsion. By definition emulsions are not truly
stable and will gravitate toward the thermodynamically more favorable arrangement of complete separation of
water and oil that allows for the minimization of the water/oil interface. However, as the aggregation of interfacial
active chemicals and particles becomes more tenacious and stable, this can severely impede the coalescence of
emulsion droplets as they are prevented from draining into each other. Formation of the emulsion depends mainly
on fluid properties, emulsifying agents and amount of shear that was encountered during the fluid migration from
the formation and lifting through the well and on to the surface. The emulsion formed can range from relatively
unstable to very stable. It is not uncommon that a stable emulsion can persist without any separation of oil and
water over a period of several months when left undisturbed.

Figure 1. Emulsion droplets

Emulsion Viscosity

Effect of internal phase volume (water cut). The viscosity of the crude oil emulsion can be many times
higher than the crude oil itself. The viscosity depends on the amount of water that is emulsified into the oil. As the
percentage of water in the production fluid increases, the apparent viscosity of the emulsion increases up to a
maximum apparent viscosity value. Beyond this maximum viscosity water percentage the viscosity starts to drop
again. This drop in viscosity is mainly due to the presence of free water as well as the formation of some reverse
emulsion, which is often referred to as the “inversion” point.
Laboratory experiments have shown that the amount of water that can be emulsified into crude oil varies
greatly with the composition of the crude oil. However, most crude oils continue to form water-in-oil emulsions with
brine of up to about 40-70% by volume before reaching the “inversion” point. The resulting change in rheological
properties can be illustrated in Figure 2 and Figure 3. The emulsions measured in these studies were synthetically
º
created in a laboratory by mixing a 19 API Brazilian crude and synthetic brine at ambient temperature with the aid
of a homogenizer. The emulsion remained stable under ambient conditions for at least 8 hours without any sign of
water breakout. In this Brazilian crude, the inversion point appeared to be around 40% brine. Figure 4 shows the
viscosity change of an oil obtained from the Gulf of Mexico when emulsified with brine over a range of
temperatures. As a general rule, the viscosity differences become more prominent at lower temperatures where it
is not uncommon to see a more than ten folds increase in viscosity over that of the crude oil itself. In the case of
the Gulf of Mexico crude oil depicted in Figure 4 the viscosity of the oil went up from about 70 cP to over 350 cP
when emulsified with 50% brine measured at 55oC.
OTC 22443 3

Figure 2. Viscosity of a Brazil offshore crude and emulsion

Figure 3. Viscosity of a Brazil offshore crude and emulsion

Figure 4. Viscosity of a GOM crude and emulsion

Effect of Shear. In many deep water production facilities today the place where produced fluids run into the most
shear force during lifting is at the ESP. A quantitative value of the shear force produced by an ESP is not clear and
is often estimated due to the complex nature of these calculations. However, shear force is the most important
factor in determining the internal phase droplet size in an emulsion as it determines the amount of force used to
4 OTC 22443

mix the oil and water. Experiments have shown the shear force is directly related to the stability of the emulsion,
thus its droplets size. Laboratory experiments have also shown that various method of mixing resulted emulsions
with different viscosities and droplet sizes. The emulsions can be created by a variety of means of agitation and
shear. In a laboratory under controlled environment, the commonly used methods are blender, shaking machines,
or homogenizers. However, due to lack of these types of equipments in the field simpler methods such as shakers
or hand shaking are usually employed when running emulsion breaking bottle test. This amount of mixing force is
often more than enough when working with topside emulsion treatment for purpose of breaking the emulsion only
as it is representative of the amount of shear force in the flowing production lines.
When studying rheology and flow property of the fluid, it is necessary to utilize more precise instrument to
quantify the amount of shear energy imparted to the fluids during mixing. Using a crude oil obtained from the Gulf
of Mexico and synthetic brine, synthetic emulsions were made using various methods of mixing. Figure 5 shows
o
the viscosity of the crude compared to its emulsions over a range of shear rate at 25 C. In this case, the brine was
30 per cent by volume and the crude was 70 per cent by volume. As expected, higher shear produced an
emulsion that had higher viscosity. Figure 6 shows the relative size of the water droplets in each emulsion as seen
under a microscope.

Figure 5. Effect of shear rate

Figure 6. Emulsion droplet micrograph

Effect of Emulsion Viscosity Reducer (EVR) on Emulsion Viscosity. EVR belongs to a class of chemicals that
promote water/oil separation.3-5 These chemicals are commonly called Emulsion Breakers or Demulsifiers. EVR
are specially formulated to be applied and injected down hole through gas lift systems, capillary tubing, or umbilical
delivery in sub-sea operations. EVR are blends of oil soluble polymers that are interfacially active, and tend to
interact with the natural emulsifiers at the oil/water interface. By interaction with the nature emulsifiers at the
oil/water interface the EVR chemicals weaken the emulsion film around the water droplets and make it easier for
the droplets to drain into each other and form larger droplets. As a result, the so-called “drag resistance” between
the water droplets is greatly reduced due to the reduction in total droplet surface area and the total number of
droplet/droplet interactions that can transfer mechanical shear through the bulk fluid. This lowering in drag
resistance further lowers the apparent viscosity of the fluid. The effect of lowering emulsion viscosity by the
addition of EVR can be illustrated by Figures 7 and 8. When EVR is added to the emulsion fluid, the chemical
migrates to the oil/water interface due to its interfacial activity, where it can interact or compete with the natural
OTC 22443 5

emulsifiers such as asphaltenes. The exact interactive mechanism between the EVR and emulsifiers at the water-
oil interface is not clear. However, the overall effect as a result of the interaction is the emulsion film becomes
weaker, allowing the droplets to drain into each other to more readily form larger droplets as shown in Figure 7.

Figure 7. Water droplets draining into each other1

The overall effect of EVR addition is represented by the illustrations in Figure 8. Upon the introduction of EVR into
an emulsion, the water droplets begin to aggregate and conglomerate to form larger droplets. Eventually these
drops become too large to be droplets anymore, and at this point they combine to form free water. During this
process, the apparent viscosity continues to decrease.

Figure 8. Viscosity lowering with EVR

Laboratory demonstration of viscosity reduction by EVR

Bottle Test. The initial process for identifying an appropriate EVR for any emulsion is to start by carrying out a
screening process called “bottle testing”. The bottle test involves preparing the emulsion samples in multiple
bottles, adding the EVR to individual bottles at varying dosage, and observing the bottles for water drop over time.
This is a selection process when one works with an unfamiliar emulsion. Due to the highly specific nature of each
emulsion, there are usually a large number of products available and one must go through a screening process to
identify the most likely candidates. These products can then be evaluated further by rheological experiment.
Different EVR chemicals usually give different water drop characteristics. Figure 9 shows the effect of
adding various EVR to an emulsion. Selection of the optimum EVR can be based on subtle differences. When
reviewing the results of the bottle test, the EVR chemical with the fastest water drop may or may not be the best
candidate. Field condition such as method of lifting, production compositions, temperature, pressure, etc. must also
be considered before decisions are made.
6 OTC 22443

Figure 9. Effect of different EVR on separation

Experience has shown that using an EVR chemical that is a fast water dropper, normally considered to be a good
candidate for top-side or surface treatment, can produce a negative effect when injected down hole into a deep gas
lift well. While the EVR chemical treatment with fast water drop will effectively reduce the apparent viscosity of the
production fluid, premature separation of the oil and water can result in multi-phase fluid/gas slugging in the
production tubing. Slugging is a problem caused by liquid hold up due to multi-phase flow in tubing, which can
result in overall decreased crude production. Therefore a combination of bottle test and rheology test must be used
to identify the best EVR.
Another critical area to consider during the selection of an EVR is the material compatibility and chemical stability.
Both of these factors are particularly important in sub-sea umbilical application due to lower temperature and
potential plugging caused by chemical instability. The use of incompatible chemicals can result in line damage,
plugging, and incorrect chemical dosage with significant costs associated with mitigation and repair.

Rheology Test. Rheology testing defines EVR treating characteristics in an emulsion. Programmable rheometers
provide the ability to gather data with variable shear rate and temperature profile as a partial list of possible
variables that are important for laboratory simulation of field conditions to obtain a clear overall picture of the EVR
chemical effect on the emulsion. Knowing the temperatures, pressure, shear condition of the fluid from the time it
enters the well bore to the top-side can lead to successful modeling in the laboratory by using a rheometer. Most
of tests discussed within this paper were carried out in an Anton Parr MCR300 high pressure rheometer. The
emulsions were either collected as stable emulsions from the field or laboratory synthesized.

Example 1 – Gulf of Mexico medium API crude. In Figure 10 the crude emulsion was synthesized in the
laboratory by mixing brine with crude from the Gulf of Mexico in a homogenizer. When 100 PPM of EVR was
added, the viscosity of the fluid was lowered substantially to a point even below that of the crude. This was due to
the free water present when the emulsion had been resolved.

Figure 10. GOM Crude emulsion treated with EVR (Example 1)

Example 2 – California low API crude. The viscosity of an emulsion sample from the west coast of the US
was also studied. This natural emulsion was collected from a wellhead after the down-hole injection of EVR
chemical had been stopped for several hours to ensure a chemical free sample. The crude oil used had an API
OTC 22443 7

gravity of approximately 18 with a tenacious emulsion that was extremely viscous. Laboratory evaluation of the
performance of various EVR chemicals showed there were several products that effectively treat this emulsion, as
indicated in Figure 11. The EVR chemical treatment effectively lowered the apparent viscosity from about 1000 cP
at 70oC to less than 100 cP, a more than ten folds decrease in the fluid viscosity.

Figure 11- West Coast crude treated with EVR (Example 2)

Example 3 – Brazil medium API crude. The performance of EVR chemicals in managing the apparent
viscosity of an emulsion was tested further on a crude oil sample from a deep-water well in Brazil. The crude oil
was emulsified with brine and the resulting apparent viscosity was found to be about 360 cP at 60oC. Figure 12
shows that treatment of the synthetic emulsion with two different EVR chemicals could effectively reduce the
apparent viscosity of the fluids to less than 250 cP.

Figure 12 - Brazilian crude treated with EVR (Example 3)

Example 4 – Gulf of Mexico medium API crude. In this experiment, a crude sample obtained from a
different deep water location in the Gulf of Mexico was allowed to emulsify with sea water at 40% volume. The
viscosity of the resulting emulsion was found to be about ten times that of the pure crude. With the addition of an
effective EVR, the fluid viscosity was lowered from an average of 200 cP to about 70 cP (Figure 13).
8 OTC 22443

Figure 13 – GOM medium API crude emulsion treated with EVR (Example 4)

Field application of EVR

As mentioned earlier, successful field application of EVR chemicals to reduce the apparent viscosity of crude oil
emulsions depends on making a sound judgment based on running relevant rheology tests that appropriately
mimic field conditions combined with consideration for the appropriate behavior of the fluids over time to minimize
the risk of inducing a slug flow regime in fluid production. The EVR product selected not only has to perform, it
must also be chemically stable, and compatible with downhole injection criteria as a second part of the chemical
selection process. Successful application of an EVR chemical increases crude output, lowers energy consumption,
decreases wear and tear on down hole equipment such as ESP. As a result, there is an overall cost reduction and
revenue increase. The field application of EVR is normally monitored by several areas, such as total daily fluid
production, tubing pressure, bottom hole pressure, and ESP power consumption etc. Generally speaking, the
expected outcome for an optimum EVR chemical application include lower pressure, more production, less power
consumption and less fluid slugging.
Two examples for successful field application of EVR chemicals are included below. At a deepwater
location in Brazil, it was reported that the ESP was working at or beyond the engineering limits and was
encountering pumping problems due to the mechanical limitations. An EVR chemical was selected based on the
system criteria and injected down hole into the production fluid upstream of the ESP. Both Figure 14 and Figure 15
show the effect the EVR chemical has on the ESP monitored parameters. The key data illustrated in Figure 14 is
the lowering in motor temperature before and after the injection of the EVR chemical. Figure 15 shows that the
pressure in the front end of the ESP went up after injection of the EVR chemical, which indicates that fluid has
become more mobile and therefore more fluid is entering the pump, resulting in an increase in production. The
data in Figure 15 also shows the pump current had become lower with less variation in the current demand, thus
lead to less power consumption.

Figure 14 - Effect of EVR on ESP motor temperature

OTC 22443 9

Figure 15 - Effect of EVR on ESP pressure and current

In a separate field trial at a west coast US field with emulsified heavy oil production fluids the operator was using
gas lift to support the field along with EVR chemical applied via capillary injection. The emulsion in this field was
extremely viscous and required the injection of EVR as a critical component of the production strategy of the field.
Figure 16 shows how the injection of EVR chemical into the production fluids resulted in the reduction in the flow
line pressure and associated lowering of the gas demand for lifting gas. At the same time, bottom-hole pressure
(Figure 17) reflected the changes in production line stability with and without EVR. The overall production increase
was approximately 30% versus the production rate with no EVR chemical added.

Figure 16 - Effect of EVR on Flow line and Gas lift pressure

Figure 17. Effect of EVR on Bottom hole pressure

10 OTC 22443

Summary

In many production facilities throughout the world production fluids are water-in-oil emulsions with fluids that have
higher apparent viscosity than that of the actual crude oil. The result of the increased apparent viscosity is the
restriction of flow through pipelines that impedes production. One solution to enhance the flow rate is to reduce the
apparent viscosity by using the Emulsion Viscosity Reducer (EVR) to begin breaking the emulsion and reduce the
apparent viscosity to increase fluid flow rates. This application requires relevant testing with correct data
interpretation to provide the correct chemical selection. The use of this technology has been demonstrated in
several field applications in different locations around the world. Success can be measured by a variety of field
parameters including flow-rates, pump temperatures, pressures, and others.

References

(1) Kilpatrick, P. K. Spiecker, P. M. Asphaltene Emulsions. In Encyclopedic Handbook of Emulsion Technology;

Sjoblom, J., Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 2001; Chapter 30, pp 707-730.
(2) Aveyard, R.; Clint, J. H. Solid Particles at Liquid Interfaces, Including their effect on emulsion and foam stability.
In Absorption and Aggregation of surfactants in solution; Surfactant Science Series; Marcel Dekker: New York,
2003; Vol. 109, Chapter 3, pp 61-90.
(3) Staiss, F; Bohm, R.; Improved Demulsifier Chemistry: A Noval Approach in the Dehydration of Crude Oil. SPE
Prod. Eng. 1991,6, p. 334-338
(4) Becker, J. R. Crude Oil Emulsion Breakers. In Crude Oil Waxes, emulsions and Asphaltenes; Pennwell: Tulsa,
OK, 1997; Chapter 4, P. 67-81.
(5) Mikula, R. J.; Munoz, V. A. Characterization of Demulsifiers. In Surfactants; Fundamentals and Applications in
the Petroleum Industry; Schramm, L. L.; Ed.: Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, U. K., 2000; Chapter 2, P.
51-77.