J Jclepro 2020 120777

Journal Pre-proof
A Review on Systematic Approach for Microbial Enhanced Oil Recovery

Technologies: Opportunities and Challenges
Anbalagan Saravanan, Ponnusamy Senthil Kumar, Kilaru Harsha Vardhan,

Sathasivam Jeevanantham, Suresh Babu Karishma, Ponnambalam Ragini Yaashikaa,
Parthasarathy Vellaichamy
PII: S0959-6526(20)30824-6
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120777
Reference: JCLP 120777
To appear in: Journal of Cleaner Production
Received Date: 23 November 2019

Accepted Date: 25 February 2020
Please cite this article as: Anbalagan Saravanan, Ponnusamy Senthil Kumar, Kilaru Harsha
Vardhan, Sathasivam Jeevanantham, Suresh Babu Karishma, Ponnambalam Ragini Yaashikaa,
Parthasarathy Vellaichamy, A Review on Systematic Approach for Microbial Enhanced Oil
Recovery Technologies: Opportunities and Challenges, Journal of Cleaner Production (2020),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120777
This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the
addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive
version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it
is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article.
Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the
content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
© 2019 Published by Elsevier.

Journal Pre-proof
A Review on Systematic Approach for Microbial Enhanced Oil

Recovery Technologies: Opportunities and Challenges
Anbalagan Saravanan1, Ponnusamy Senthil Kumar2*, Kilaru Harsha Vardhan2, Sathasivam
Jeevanantham1, Suresh Babu Karishma1, Ponnambalam Ragini Yaashikaa2, Parthasarathy
Vellaichamy3
1Department of Biotechnology, Rajalakshmi Engineering College, Chennai, India 602105
2Department of Chemical Engineering, SSN College of Engineering, Chennai, India 603110
3Department of Physics, Hindustan Institute of Technology and Science, Chennai, Tamil
Nadu, India
*Corresponding author: senthilchem8582@gmail.com (+91 9884823425)
Abstract
Oil is an indispensable ingredient for both food and energy in most of the countries. Due to
insufficient extraction process reduces the average oil recovery rate up to 30%. Enhanced oil
recovery (EOR) technologies including physical, chemical and biological methods are used to
regain circumvent and lasting oil caught in supply after essential and optional recuperation
techniques. Microbial Enhanced Oil Recovery (MEOR) is an effective alternative method for
oil recovery among other EOR methods (physical and chemical methods). Microorganisms
and their by-products are the responsible factor for MEOR process. Microorganisms in the oil
reservoirs enhance the recovery process by producing various metabolites such as
biosurfactants, biopolymers, acids, gases, biomass, etc. through in-situ mechanism. In the
present review, explains the MEOR process along with existing conventional oil recovery
methods. It’s also describes the production of various microbial metabolites, their financial
related issues, applications of lab-to-deal with scale, different productive primers of interest
and their drawbacks are addressed. In future, logical models used for the EOR process was
proposed.
Keywords: Enhanced Oil Recovery; Oil reservoirs; Microbial metabolites; Biosurfactant;
Microbial Biomass; MEOR
1
Journal Pre-proof
1. Introduction
Innovation progress, expectations for everyday comforts, industrialization, growing
misuse of natural resources and their change into useful items or due to merchandising, a part
of materials is discarded into the earth causing natural contamination (Dolatabadi et al.,
2018). Expanded chemical usage has prompted an augmentation in ecological contamination.
Artificially, contamination alludes to negative impacts brought about by synthetic compounds
(Gaur et al., 2018; Li et al., 2017). In future, air contamination incorporates all reasons for
mortality (Nieuwenhuijsen et al., 2014). Soil is one of the depleting sources, which performs
crucial role in biosphere. Among the lithosphere, atmosphere, hydrosphere and biosphere,
soils situated in intelligent zone comprise the real piece of the earthbound biological system
(Yang et al., 2019). As of late, researchers (Stojic et al., 2017) have drawn consideration
regarding a progression of prohibitive elements that influence soil quality. Difficulties with
respect to soil contamination have turned out to be critical due to urban development
(Cachada et al., 2016; Varallyai et al., 2015). Soil acts as an essential store and as a marker of
ecological contamination (Wang et al., 2015). These comprise of at least two fused aromatic
rings made of hydrogen and carbon atoms, which establish real class of aromatic compounds.
PAHs are generally produced during imperfect combustion or pyrolysis or by exercises of
human (Wang et al., 2015). PAH in contaminated soil can cause several harmful diseases
including short-term health effects specifically eye irritation, nausea, vomiting and diarrhea
(Kumar et al., 2019). Soil contaminations are by and large from biogenic or anthropogenic
inception (Waigi et al., 2017). Organic compounds, heavy metals (Suganya and Kumar 2018;
Yaashikaa et al., 2019), radionucleids, minerals are a portion of the mixes which causes
negative effect on soil through intense pollution (Mansour et al., 2016). Organic and
biochemical properties are the most valuable in identification of exhaustion of soil quality.
2
Journal Pre-proof
Quality of soil is firmly identified with soil enzyme activities, microbial biomass, nitrogen
mineralization limit and soil respiration (Beiyuan et al., 2018; Cepeda et al., 2000).
1.1. Literature study
Extraction of contaminant vapors are utilized for recovery of volatile soil pollutants.
Bioventing and thermal recovery are another different techniques for recovery of
contaminants in soil (Rostami et al., 2019). Utilizing biological methods, Cleanup guidelines
are hard to meet with a typical development plan on account of their moderate treatment
forms (Lee et al., 2018; Marousek et al., 2015). Water, one of the fundamental assets for life,
is ruined by anthropogenic activities because of expanding populaces (David et al., 2018).
Expanding outflow of water natural contaminants causes perilous issues as well as
undermines human health (Ramezanalizadeh et al., 2017). Poisonous and non-toxic metals
from the effluents of different industries like textile industries, power plants, treatment
facilities, pharmaceutical enterprises and pesticides contaminates the water resources and
pose hazard to human health (Haseena et al., 2017). In respect with negative effect of human
health, various organic and inorganic contaminants are considered as extreme toxicants
(Sikder et al., 2019). Oil cannot be dissolved in water as it forms a stable sludge called as oil
spills. It is the major cause of water pollution as it does not allow atmospheric oxygen and
sunlight to the interior of the water bodies (Jeevanantham et al., 2019; Salah et al., 2016).
Physical, chemical and biological techniques like adsorption, ion exchange process,
nanofiltration, reverse osmosis, membrane separation, ozonation, coagulation or flocculation,
distillation phytotechnologies and bioremediation are used for contaminated water treatment
(Saravanan et al., 2019b). Toxic synthetic compounds in environment are inadequately
treated by the traditional physical and chemical techniques (Saravanan et al., 2019a). For the
effective treatment of pollutants, valid and perceived innovative bioremediation is utilized
(Denis et al., 2018). In most recent decades, more researchers created awareness throughout
3
Journal Pre-proof
the world for biological methods. Both recombinant and natural microorganisms, which alter
perilous materials to harmless mixes, are utilized in bioremediation techniques (Kim et al.,
2018).
1.2 Novelty Statement
In the present review, various advancements for upgrade of oil recuperation in
contaminated condition are engaged in detail. This work offers to the analysts and researchers
interested on oil recuperation innovations, a survey of oil recovery process, key qualities of
biological systems and their inclinations and impairments have been talked about in detail
could be utilized for expanding the nature of oil recuperation. The main scope of this review
is to explain the principle, mechanism, merits and demerits of the microbial enhanced oil
recovery process. The state of the art describes that various physical, chemical and biological
methods for the enhanced oil recovery process. The oil contamination in environment, its
impacts is portrayed and various strategies for treatment of oil and its recuperation. Various
physical, chemical, thermal and biological techniques and their preferences and detriments
have been discussed in detail. Since there is wide scope of biological techniques which
incorporates phytoremediation, bioventing, bioaugmentation, biostimulation, its crucial use
has given environmentalists. The current status and the future focusses on the microbial
enhanced oil recovery process are also described in detail.
2. Environmental pollution by oil
Crude oil is a composite blend of hydrocarbons and heteroelements like oxygen,
nitrogen, sulfur and trace metals. It represents a wide scope of dangers when discharged into
nature (Yim et al., 2015; Sakthipriya et al., 2015). In oil producing countries, soil
contamination with raw petroleum and its subordinates has been considered as one of the
hazardous ecological contaminations which are ineluctable (Motesharezadeh et al., 2018;
Barois et al., 2018). Hydrocarbon films are formed on soil grains surface at the time of
4
Journal Pre-proof
contact with soil changing their surface characteristics, inciting water repellency and soil
hydrophobicity (Marin-Garcia et al., 2016).
Oil initiated hydrophobicity is exceptionally relentless and soils stay hydrophobic
even decades after they were contaminated (Rosenzweig et al., 2018; Reicnecke et al., 2016).
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs), one of the soil contaminants has group of
hydrophobic organic compounds affecting all living organisms causing mutagenicity and
carcinogenicity. In soil, expanding natural contamination level causes the presence of PAHs
in it (Sushkova et al., 2019). These hydrocarbons are one of the contaminants in water
discharged during oil transportation. A vast category of POPs (Persistent Organic Pollutants)
including PAHs are resistant to degradation, fat-soluble and bringing about large amounts of
deposits in aquatic ecosystem (Lu et al., 2019; Brakstad et al., 2018). Digestion of oil by
zooplanktons results in formative and regenerative anomalies. It likewise prompts mortality
at times. Immersion of quills in oil results in feathers being trapped which loses its water
repellent function of protection and flight (Pritsos et al., 2017). As per past toxicological or
epidemiological investigations related with oil slicks, components present in the crude oil
have several biological and functional impacts on human health (Cheong et al., 2019). In this
manner Oil contamination in the earth altogether affects soil and aquatic ecosystem which
indirectly affects the human health.
3. Techniques - Enhanced oil recovery
The enhanced oil recovery processes were majorly classified into three different
types, such as; Physical, Chemical and Biological methods.
The various enhanced oil recovery techniques were shown in Fig. 1. Fig. 1. Enhanced
Oil Recovery Techniques. In oil reservoirs, the microorganisms can produce different
microbial byproducts including bioacids, biogases, bio-solvents, biosurfactants, biopolymers
and microbial biomass (Yaashikaa et al., 2019).
5
Journal Pre-proof
3.1 Physical method
To recover the oil from contaminated sites, various methods are employed. Of these,
physical methods like ultrasonic treatment, electro kinetic treatment and microwave treatment
were first methods which were used from early days.
3.1.1 Ultrasonic treatment
Ultrasonic waves are one of three categories in sound waves whose frequencies range
between 20 KHz to 10 MHz. Several physical and chemical phenomena are responsible for
ultrasonic effect such as shock waves, agitation, vibration, acoustic streaming, shear forces,
compression, rarefaction, cavitation, and radical formation (Mohebbi et al., 2019; Tiwari,
2015). Ultrasonic technique is unconventional enhanced oil recovery method as oil droplets
were mobilized by utilizing pressure wave. Due to ultrasonic stimulation, reduction in
viscosity of water causes reduction in pressure (Junin et al., 2013). The ultrasonic wave
changes interfacial forces between oil and water which leads to increased oil recovery (Agi et
al., 2018; Lim, 2016).
In aqueous phase, cavitation was caused by ultrasonic waves, which results in the
development of bubbles, fluctuation and ferocious collapse are responsible for several
sonophysico-chemical effects (Sivakumar et al., 2020).
In case of oil contaminated soil, the desorption efficiency (Ƞ) was calculated using equation
Ƞ = q˳ - q* (1)
q˳
Where q˳ is the initial concentration of petroleum hydrocarbon in soil, q* is the residual
petroleum hydrocarbon after ultrasonic desorption. From the study, it is concluded that
ultrasound had a momentous improvement on desorption of crude oil by increasing the soil
adsorption capacity of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (Li et al., 2013).
6
Journal Pre-proof
Due to various sizes with different relative vibrational velocities of water particles
will strike with one another increasing mass and volume of particles after which they are
isolated (Wang et al., 2018; Liu et al., 2015).
3.1.2 Electrokinetic treatment
Contaminants were degraded with help of electrodes and it involves placing polarized
electrodes into polluted sites (Chun et al., 2013; Zhang et al., 2010). Thus, a voltage potential
slope is shaped which makes the liquid medium stream move to cathode while hauling
pollutant with mass stream (Kariminezhad et al., 2018; Ranjan et al., 2006).
Blending of several mechanisms increases the efficiency of electrokinetic remediation
process. For example, electro-osmosis and electromigration adds to adequacy of
electrokinetic remediation of oil-polluted soil (Kim et al., 2011; Elektorowicz and Boeva,
1996). The main mechanism of Hydrophobic Organic Contaminants removal from both soil
and water by electrokinetics is electro osmosis. Studies have been reported on electrokinetic
remediation of oil contaminated soils (Jeon et al., 2010; Tsai et al., 2010; Han et al., 2009).
Electrophoresis and electro migration results in movement of charged molecules or
complexes towards electrodes (Kim et al., 2010). Electro migration involves movement of
ions in solution in the presence of electric field (Yang et al., 2011; Virkutyte et al., 2002).
Electrokinetic method has an advantage as it could be done in-situ thereby providing a
quick reaction and low operation cost in case of soil remediation (Gill et al., 2014). To
overcome some of other limitations of current bioremediation technologies, bioelectrical
systems are being used as an alternative strategy (Cameselle et al., 2018; Daghio et al., 2017).
The electrolysis around the electrodes might create thermal hotspots thereby altering the soil
pH and water after a prolonged period of time. In addition, electro kinetic process is not so
7
Journal Pre-proof
effective for low concentration of contaminants and migration might result in stale zones in
electrodes (Lim et al., 2016).
3.2 Thermal method
The principal enhanced oil recovery used to recover heavy and viscous crude oil is
thermal recovery (Kovscek, 2012). To discharge oil held up in lattice of cracked or double
porosity media, for example, diatomite (Murer et al., 2000) with increase in crude oil
temperature its viscosity diminishes which enhances the versatility within reservoirs (Dong et
al., 2019). The technique incorporate steam flooding, heated water flooding and in situ
combustion.
3.2.1 Steam injection
Preferentially, the injected steam pierces into a highly permeable path in oil
contaminated area based on heterogeneous feature of considered parameter (Dong et al.,
2019; Kovscek, 2012). Thermal efficacy of steam is intensely minimized in later stage of
conventional CSS operation (Harding et al., 2016). Thus, a process of recovery is required to
increase the efficiency (Benson et al., 2013). Several trials have been done for enhancement
of CSS process such as addition of steam-assisted CSS with many wells, steam additive
process and steam injection (Chen et al., 2019; Qadeer et al., 1991). In an effective EOR
method, thermal foam flooding, steam injection could be restrained from gravity override and
steam channeling in reservoir by thermal foams (Chen et al., 2018; Pang et al., 2015).
Thermo chemistry assisted steam flooding can also been carried out to improve oil recovery
(Sun et al., 2018). Organic compounds like urea or any solvent also assists the steam flooding
for enhanced oil recovery (Shen et al., 2015).
8
Journal Pre-proof
In Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD), gravity is the driving force for oil
drainage (Babadagli et al., 2009; Butler, 1994). Excluding the steam injection conventional
mechanisms, another two more primary steps or methods available are multiphase fluid flow
and emulsification phenomenon in the superiority of a steam chamber (Gotawala et al.,
2011). This technique has disadvantages like intensive energy input and excessive CO2
emission. Therefore, reduction of steam consumption is necessary for the enhanced recovery
performance of SAGD process (Liua et al., 2018; Mojarad et al., 2016).
3.2.2 Hot water flooding
Water flooding is desirable only at micro scale. In macro scale, it suffers from
gravitational differentiation as injected water is heavier and less viscous than oil (Lei et al.,
2017; Alajmi et al., 2009). To restore formation pressure, thermal expansion of reservoir
should be increased and can be done by hot water flooding (Nian et al., 2017). Temperature
plays a major role in reducing the viscosity of heavy oil. The effect of temperature on
recovery of heavy oil by hot water flooding was studied experimentally by Han et al. (Han et
al., 2017).
3.2.3 In-situ combustion
In in-situ combustion, heater or igniter is located in injection well. Continuous
injection of air or oxygen rich air followed by operation of heater under ignition takes place
(Muhetar et al., 2011). After ignition, a combustion front and gas chamber consisting of air
and combustion gases are formed (Moore et al., 1999). Displacing unburned oil, the
combustion front is propagated towards production well by continuous gas chamber
expansion (Guo et al., 2016; Gie et al., 1990). Mobilization of heavy crude oil occurs due to
combustion reaction. Approximately, temperature of combustion zone in the ISC varies from
9
Journal Pre-proof
345 to 650˚C (Gomez et al., 1999). In-situ combustion is more effective in terms of energy
consumption as consumption of energy is about one tenth compared to steam injection
(Kovscek, 2012). Numerous collapses occur during initial field analyses, which are
predominantly because of the utilization of this method to wrong type of reservoirs or
inappropriate engineering parameters; ISC is regarded as a potentially hazardous recovery
technique (Mahinpey et al., 2007). COSH, THAI and SAGD are some of the ISC
technologies that have been studied (Shi et al., 2017; Rahnema et al., 2017; Xia et al., 2003).
Shokrlu and his colleagues reported that the utilization of nickel ions enhances the in-situ
combustion of heavy oil recovery (Shokrlu et al., 2013). A conclusion of the previous study
work shows that CO2 recycling is beneficial for in-situ combustion process regarding reduced
CO2 emissions and enhanced oil recovery rates (Jessen et al., 2011).
3.2.4 Combined thermo-chemical treatment
In order to enhance the performance of thermal process, chemical additives such as
surfactant, alkali, polymer, NCG (Non-Condensable Gas) foam and gels are used which has
advantages like viscosity reduction, wettability modification, modification of surface
property, reduction of interfacial tension and increased emulsification (Abedinia et al., 2017).
Recovery of oil is more in combined thermo-chemical process compared to conventional
steam-based recovery process (Dejam et al., 2016; Tiab et al., 1982). Different effects on the
performance of SAGD process due to the utilization of alcohol and alkaline-based additives
were studied and showed enhanced recovery relative to conventional SAGD process (Abedini
et al., 2017). This method can also be efficiently used for recovery of heavy oil from oil-
contaminated sites. The viscosity of heavy oil is generally influenced by temperature and for
every increase of 10 ˚C, the viscosity is reduced to half (Ge et al., 1999). Further in
10
Journal Pre-proof
displacement process, water-oil mobility is reduced by hot water (Dong et al., 2019; Dong et
al., 2012).
In-situ emulsification, enhancement of oil relative permeability and wettability
alteration are some of the mechanisms involved in above process (Wu et al., 2018). A novel
study was carried out to observe the oil displacement processes by thermal foams enhancing
steam flooding (Lu et al., 2018). It was found from experiment that oil recovery from thermal
foam process can reach up to 59.95% relative to steam flooding process which is only
48.48% (Pang et al., 2018). Improvement in displacement efficiency, increase in swept
volume and the conformance factor was observed in UASF and UAFSF (Liu et al., 2015).
Another study proved that ultimate recovery of oil from steam flooding is 29.64% whereas
from thermal foam flooding, the recovery was 42.15% (Pang et al., 2012). Thus, combined
thermo-chemical treatment can be used for efficient oil recovery relative to conventional
thermal methods.
3.3 Chemical method
3.3.1 Surfactant flooding
Surfactant flooding is one of the most commonly used chemical methods used for
recovery of oil from reservoirs by enhancing oil displacement in reservoir. Based on this head
part, surfactant can be classified into different types such as anionic, cationic and zwitter-
ionic surfactant (Ahmadi and Shadizadeh, 2015; Guertechin, 1999). The saponification
reaction indirectly involves in reducing interfacial tension between water and oil. The local
optimal salinity for minimum interfacial tension was determined by local ratio of soap /
surfactant (George et al., 2008). Initially surfactant was added to reservoirs for formation of
oil bank (Bera et al., 2011). The oil bank was formed by micro-emulsion process, in which
added surfactants were dissolved with water or oil in the reservoir to form miscible oil.
11
Journal Pre-proof
Finally the oil was recovered from oil bank (Mandal, 2015). The efficiency of oil recovery
from bank was increased by maintenance of sweep efficiency and pressure gradient (Larson
and Hirasaki, 1978).
3.3.2 Polymer displacement
Polymer viscoelastic property is an important factor in oil recovery, it maintains
normal stress between oil and polymer solution (Sheng, 2014). The presence of salt in the
solution decreases the viscosity of polymer aqueous solution. The polymer behavior was
estimated by Flory-Huggins model with the presence of salt in an aqueous solution (Sheng,
2014; Flory, 1953).
3.3.3 Alkaline displacement
As like emulsification and saponification reaction, there are several methods in
alkaline displacement for oil recovery from reservoirs such as wettability reversal, oil
entrainment, precipitation and bubble entrapment (Sheng, 2015). Sodium silicate gives the
effective oil recovery than others as it reacts with the divalent cations to produce high amount
of insoluble precipitate that increases sweep efficiency (Delshad et al., 2013).
3.3.4 Solvent flooding
Hybrid steam- solvent processes are the processes in which solvent was introduced
partially into the steam and VAPEX (vapour extraction) and CSI (cyclic solvent injection) are
completely steam replacing solvent flooding process (Torabi et al., 2012). Continuous Steam
Stimulation (CSS) process works based on the CSI and in this method steam- solvent mixture
was injected into reservoirs instead of steam injection and allowed for soaking and
production period (Upreti et al., 2007).
12
Journal Pre-proof
Vapor extraction (VAPEX) process is a non-thermal process for oil recovery from
their reservoirs. In VAPEX process, the viscosity of oil was reduced by solvent via mass
transfer phenomena, similar to heat transfer phenomena in thermal or steam injection process
(Butler and Mokrys, 1989). Solvent flooding method is not applicable for field applications
though it has several advantages than other recovery methods (Bayat et al., 2015; Vargas-
Vasquez and Romero-Zerón, 2007). In oil recovery by solvent flooding process, the amount
of solvent required for process is estimated by using the following formula,
SOR= 1/ (1+ α ((V/v)-1)) (2)
Where, SOR is the solvent oil ratio, V is the liquid solvent volume, v is the displaced
oil volume and α is the vaporized solvent fraction. Both rock and fluid properties are
responsible for the net amount of cumulative SOR (Butler et al., 1995).
3.4 Gas
Gas infusion is one of the most seasoned enhanced oil recovery methods mostly used
for light oils, it can also being used for heavy oils recovery from the reservoirs. This high gas
immersion can essentially create oil swelling, decrease the interfacial tension (IFT) between
two interfacing liquids and therefore increase oil displacement proficiency (Guo et al., 2016).
3.4.1 CO2 injection
CO2 is the most commonly used fluid for miscible displacement due to its many
advantages like predominance in reduction of viscosity, numerous relationships with oil, less
operating cost. Specifically it has benefits for CO2 sequestration in oil reservoirs to moderate
emission of greenhouse gases and change in environmental condition (Talebian et al., 2014).
The purpose of injecting CO2 is to recover a part of residual oil which was left in reservoirs
after water injection. CO2 flooding will be effectively applied when reservoirs having the
13
Journal Pre-proof
depth over 800 m, because CO2 at this condition will be in super critical state and gravity of
oil are larger (Esene et al., 2019; Hamidi et al., 2017). The process of oil recovery from
reservoirs by CO2 flooding method was shown in Fig. 2. Fig. 2. Enhanced Oil recovery
process by CO2 flooding.
3.4.2 Air injection
The advancement in light oil reservoirs air injection is not the same as the utilization
of the in-situ combustion (ISC) process in heavy oil reservoirs for enhanced oil recovery. ISC
is an air injection process, but all the air injection process did not work similar to the ISC
(Gargar et al., 2014; Jia and Sheng, 2017; Turta and Singhal, 2001). The method of
recovering oil by air injection method was shown in Fig. 3. Fig. 3. Enhanced Oil recovery
mechanism by Air injection. The Significant external factors of the reservoirs are; geology,
reservoir temperature, pressure, oil saturation, air injection rate, petrophysical properties and
minerals (Jia and Sheng, 2017).
3.4.3 Water Alternating Gas (WAG) injection
This technique was more effective than the other oil recovery techniques as it
increases average oil recovery up to 10% than others (Skauge and Stensen, 2003). Displaced
fluids (oil) in reservoirs are achieved by maintaining a favorable mobility ratio (M < 1.0) and
increasing the capillary number (Nca). Mobility ratio (M) was defined as,
M= (λing/λed) (3)
Where, M is mobility ratio, λing is the mobility of the water or gas injected and λed resembles
the mobility of the oil. The capillary number (Nca) was defined as follows,
Nca= (Viscous force/ Capillary force) = (υμ/σ cos ϴ) (4)
14
Journal Pre-proof
Here, Nca represents the capillary number; σ is the interfacial tension (N/m ), μ is the viscosity
of the injected water or gas (Pa.s), υ is the Darcy velocity (m/s) and ϴ is the contact angle.
Capillary number will be increased by reducing the interfacial tension by application of
surfactant or thermal energy (Sen, 2008).
The total oil recovery efficiency was obtained by combining the displacement
efficiency (Ed) and volumetric efficiency (Ev) as defines as follows,
E = Ed × Ev (5)
WAG injection process has different types of variations that are Hybrid-WAG and DUWAG,
Water Alternating Steam Process (WASP), Simultaneous Water-Alternating-Gas injection
(SWAG), Polymer Alternating Gas (PAG) injection and Foam Assistant WAG injection
(FAWAG) (Afzali et al., 2018). The efficiency of WAG injection process depends on fluid
properties such as type of gas used (Salehi et al., 2014), brine salinity (Yip and Alta'ee, 2015)
and miscibility of fluid (Skauge and Sorbie, 2014).
3.5 Biological method
3.5.1 Microbial Enhanced Oil Recovery
Microbial Enhanced Oil Recovery (MEOR) process increases the oil recovery up to
80%. The effectiveness of MEOR process depends on the following parameters; formation
temperature, crude oil viscosity, permeability, brine salinity, water cut, API gravity of crude
oil, pH, pressure, residual oil saturation, depth, porosity, wax content and Bacterial content of
the reservoirs (Yaashikaa et al., 2018; Nmegbu, 2014; Sen, 2008; Awan et al., 2008).
3.5.1.1 Process
15
Journal Pre-proof
MEOR processes are mostly applied with two categories in the reservoirs for EOR
such as in-situ and ex-situ mechanisms. MEOR process classified into six different processes
is mentioned in Table 1. Table 1 Classification of Microbial Enhanced Oil Recovery (MEOR)
processes. In petroleum refining industries, petroleum will be purified from their impurities
by the following biological process (Bachmann et al., 2014);
1. Bio-desulfurization
2. Bio-demetallation
3. Bio-denitrogenation
4. Bio-transformation or Bio-upgrading of petroleum
Organic sulfur present in oil reservoirs takes form of aromatic or saturated form of
thiols, sulphides, and heterocycles. Similarly, inorganic sulfur is in the form of hydrogen
sulphide, elemental sulfur and pyrite (Soleimani et al., 2007; Monticello, 2000).
Biocatalyst is an enzyme from heme oxygenase and cytochrome C reductase.
Cytochrome C reductase was obtained from bacteria (Bacillus megaterium, Escherichia coli,
Catharanthus roseuse) or animal cells (liver and kidney cells) or plant cells (Arabidopsis
thaliana) or yeast cells (Candida tropicalis) (Mogollon et al., 1998). Fedorak and his
colleagues demonstrated demetallation process using chloroperoxidase enzyme from
Caldariomyces fumago, it effectively removes 93% of Ni and 53% V contained in porphyrins
and asphaltenes (Fedorak et al., 1993). This catalytic destruction of porphyrinic ring leads to
formation of undesirable chlorinated by-products (Bachmann et al., 2014). Microorganisms
present in the soil can assist the growth of different plants in the contaminated area. For
example, Pannonibacter phragmetitus bacteria promote the growth of Sorghum bicolor plant
in the Cr(VI) contaminated soil (Yaashikaa et al., 2019).
The advantages of physical and chemical method oil recovery are as follows; reduces
nitrous oxide (NOx) reduction upon combustion, alters many other petroleum constitutes in
16
Journal Pre-proof
crude oil (Benedik et al., 1998) and effective in case of operational point of view. Through
Biodegradation process quinolones and carbazoles are removed from the crude oil (Bai et al.,
2010). Though Carbazoles are resistant to biodegradation process, it was done effectively by
using Klebsiella sp. LSSE-H2 (Li et al., 2008), Burkholderia sp. strain IMP5GC (Castorena
et al., 2008) and pseudomonas sp. (Zhao et al., 2011). Presence of asphaltenes in crude oil
causes trouble in effective recovery, separation and processing of heavy oil and bitumen from
oil reservoirs. The separation process was done without any trouble with help of by-products
such as coke, emulsifiers, surfactants, and polymers (Ayala et al., 2007). These products are
formed by increasing the viscosity of oil. The biotransformation of asphaltene was done by
Peroxidase-catalyzed reaction (Vazquez- Duhalt et al., 2002).
3.5.1.2 Mechanism
The microbial products are surfactants, solvents, acids, emulsifiers, acids, polymers
and carbon dioxides (Joshi et al., 2008). Role of microorganisms in MEOR process were
shown in Fig. 4. Fig. 4. Role of microorganisms in MEOR process. The positive outcome of
MEOR process mostly depends on microbial consortia present in reservoirs as well the type
of reservoirs (Hamme et al., 2003). The microbial oil recovery process comprises of two
different essential elements such as hydrocarbon consuming microorganisms and a nutritional
medium (Wang et al., 2012). Microorganisms, which consume hydrocarbons, are either
exogenous or indigenous and for the growth of microorganisms, the industrial by-products
including corn steep liquor, molasses and cheese whey are injected as natural medium to
reservoirs (Nazina et al., 2003). Nutrients cost for MEOR process can be reduced by injecting
nitrogen and phosphorous; as nitrogen is essential for microorganism’s growth and
phosphorous enhances its microbial activity (Nazina et al., 2012; Al-Sulaimani et al., 2011;
Youssef et al., 2009).
17
Journal Pre-proof
Microorganisms having a place with different genera can utilize hydrocarbons that
involves more than 300 yeast, bacterial, fungal, and actinomycetes strains. Bacillus,
Rhodococcus, Pseudomonas, Mycobacterium, Micrococcus, Candida (Chrzanowski et al.,
2006), Trichosporon (Dallinger et al., 2016) and Exophialia are some of the bacterial and
fungal genera which can oxidise hydrocarbon present in oil reservoirs (Cheng et al., 2004).
3.5.1.3 Microbial by-products
During the MEOR process microorganisms in oil reservoirs produce a variety of
metabolites or by-products that are useful in enhancing oil recovery process. There are seven
main microbial by-products or metabolites produced by the microorganisms; they are listed in
Table 2. Table 2 Microbial by-products during Microbial Enhance Oil Recovery (MEOR)
process.
Biosurfactants are surface active amphipathic molecules which have two different
parts such as head and tail in their structure. Types and applications of biosurfactants were
shown in Fig. 5. Fig. 5 Various types and applications of Biosurfactants. Biosurfactants are
produced by several genera of microorganisms such as Bacillus, Arthrobacter, Acinetobacter,
Pseudomonas, Leuconostoc and Rhodococcus (Patel et al., 2015). Different strategies
involved in the use of Biosurfactants in Microbial Enhanced Oil Recovery (MEOR) process
were shown in Fig. 6. Fig. 6 Different strategies involved in the use of Biosurfactants in
Microbial Enhanced Oil Recovery (MEOR) process (Lazar et al., 2007).
Biopolymers are polysaccharides, secreted by different bacterial species such as
Alcaligeness sp., Sclerotium sp. Aureobasidium sp., Bacillus sp., Xanthomonas sp.,
Leuconostoc sp., and Brevibacterium. The main purpose of these microorganisms is to
produce biopolymers to save them against temporary dehydration and predation and also to
assist in adhesion to surfaces (Saikia et al., 2013).
18
Journal Pre-proof
Fermentative bacteria, Methanogens, Clostridium, Desulfovibrio, Pseudomonas and
Enterobacter are different microorganisms which produce biogases during MEOR process
(Youssef et al., 2009; Azim et al., 2018). Solvents produced by microorganisms will enhance
oil recovery process by reducing oil viscosity, altering wettability and permeability of
reservoir, removing long chain hydrocarbon and heavy oil from reservoir and reducing INT
(Safdel et al., 2017; Al-Sulaimani et al., 2011). The refinery process of petrol from crude oil
was shown in Fig. 7. Fig. 7 Petrol refinery process from crude oil.
3.5.1.4 Classification
Classification of microorganism based on respiration type, pressure, temperature and
pH was listed in Table 3. Table 3 Classification of microorganism based on Respiration type,
Pressure, Temperature and pH. The efficiency of MEOR process varies with respect to
different classes of microorganisms by several factors such as temperature, pH, pressure and
oxidation potential which can reduce the efficiency of MEOR process by affecting microbial
growth and their production. Different Microorganisms and their metabolites used in different
process oil recovery are listed in the Table 4. Table 4 Microorganisms and their metabolites
used in different process oil recovery.
3.5.1.5 Advantages
Several advantages of MEOR process than other conventional Enhanced Oil
Recovery (EOR) processes are listed as follows (Safdel et al., 2017);
 Economically proficient technique
 Requires low injection cost for microorganisms and supplements
 Requires less process cost per steady oil production
 Less trouble of facilities set up
19
Journal Pre-proof
 Does not needs any capital venture for the execution of MEOR venture
 Less energy utilization required for microbial metabolic activities
 Low risk to execute
3.5.1.6 Disadvantages
Though MEOR process has lot of advantages, it has few limitations listed as follows
(Saikia et al., 2013);
 Microorganism resilience confinements in support to store conditions
 Due to aerobic bacterial activity, corrosion may occur.
 Microbial toxicity due to presence of specific heavy metal ions in the soil
4. Conclusion
Thus, MEOR technique for improving oil recovery by considering the following
characteristics; proper understanding of the reservoir characteristics, biochemical and
physiological characteristics of microbial consortia, controlling mechanisms and process
economics are essential prior to MEOR application. Though these enhanced oil recovery
methods produce effective results, they generate and pump large quantity of produced water
into the surface from the well. This water contains various toxic heavy metals; radioactive
substances which can cause harmful effects on humans as well other species in the
environment by damaging or blending with drinking water sources in the environment. By
using disposal wells, these problems could be reduced by injecting produced water into deep
underground. Even in this case, produced water may affect the ground water sources.
5. Current status and Future perspectives
Currently two methods are developed for recovery of oils from their reservoirs such
as oil recovery by using solar energy and nuclear energy. Usually substantial quantity of
energy required for the crude oil extraction process from reservoirs was done by using natural
20
Journal Pre-proof
gases but it leads to emission of greenhouse gases, thereby reducing the oil production rate.
To avoid these problems researches are moving towards solar energy and nuclear energy
based oil recovery process. Future research in oil recovery process by EOR process should
focus on optimizing strategies using mathematical modelling and analysis than cost-efficient
production of steam and microbial by-products for recovery process.
References
Abedinia, A., Kim, M., Pushan, L., Adriana, G., David, S., 2017. Microfluidic pore-scale
comparison of alcohol- and alkaline-based SAGD processes. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 154,
139-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2017.04.025
Afzali, S., Rezaei, N., Zendehboudi, S., 2018. A comprehensive review on Enhanced Oil
Recovery by Water Alternating Gas (WAG) injection. Fuel 227, 218- 246.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2018.04.015
Agi, A., Junin, R., Chong, A.S., 2018. Intermittent ultrasonic wave to improve oil recovery. J.
Petrol. Sci. Eng. 166, 577-591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2018.03.097
Ahmadi, M.A., Shadizadeh, S.R., 2015. Experimental investigation of a natural surfactant
adsorption on shale- sandstone reservoir rocks: Static and dynamic conditions. Fuel
159, 15-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2015.06.035
Al-Adasani, A., Bai, B., 2011. Analysis of EOR projects and updated screening criteria. J.
Alajmi, A.F., Gharbi, R., Algharaib, M., 2009. Investigating the performance of hot water
injection in geo-statistically generated permeable media, J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 66, 143-
155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2009.02.006
21
Journal Pre-proof
Al-Sulaimani, H., Joshi, S., Al-Wahaibi, Y., Al-Bahry, S., Elshafie, A., Al-Bemani, A., 2011.
Microbial biotechnology for enhancing oil recovery: current developments and future
prospects. Biotechnol. Bioinf. Bioeng. 1, 147- 158.
Alvarez, V.M., Jurelevicius, D., Marques, J.M., de Souza, P.M., de Araújo, L.V., Barros,
T.G., de Souza, R.O.M.A., Freire, D.M.G., Seldin, L., 2015. Bacillus
amyloliquefaciens TSBSO 3.8, a biosurfactant-producing strain with biotechnological
potential for microbial enhanced oil recovery. Colloids Sur. B. Biointerfaces 136, 14–
21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfb.2015.08.046
Al-Wahaibi, Y., Joshi, S., Al-Bahry, S., Elshafie, A., Al-Bemani, A., Shibulal, B.,
2014. Biosurfactant production by Bacillus subtilis B30 and its application in
enhancing oil recovery. Colloids Surf. B. Biointerfaces 114, 324–333.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfb.2013.09.022
Ashish., Debnath (Das), M., 2018. Application of biosurfactant produced by an adaptive
strain of C.tropicalis MTCC230 in microbial enhanced oil recovery (MEOR) and
removal of motor oil from contaminated sand and water. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 170, 40–
Awan, A.R., Teigland, R., Kleppe, J., 2008. A survey of North Sea enhanced-oil-recovery
projects initiated during the years 1975 to 2005. SPE Reserv. Eval. Eng. 11, 497- 512.
https://doi.org/10.2118/99546-PA
Ayala, M., Verdin, J., Vazquez-Duhalt, R., 2007. The prospects for peroxidase-based
biorefining of petroleum fuels. Biocatal. Biotransfor. 25, 114- 129.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10242420701379015
Azarhava, H., Ijadi Bajestani, M., Jafari, A., Vakilchap, F., Mousavi, M.S., 2019. Production
and physicochemical characterization of bacterial poly gamma- (glutamic acid) to
22
Journal Pre-proof
investigate its performance on enhanced oil recovery. Int. J. Biol. Macromol.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.10.090
Azim, R.A., Faiz, S., Rahman, S., Elbagir, A., Obaidi, N.A., 2018. Numerical Study of Low
Salinity Water Flooding in Naturally Fractured Oil Reservoirs. Recent Insights in
Petroleum Science and Engineering. 211-228. Doi: 10.5772/intechopen.71299
Babadagli, T., Al Bahlani, A.M., 2009. SAGD laboratory experimental and numerical
simulation studies: a review of current status and future issues. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 68,
135-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2009.06.011
Bachmann, R.T., Johnson, A.C., Edyvean, R.G.J., 2014. Biotechnology in the petroleum
industry: An overview. Inter. Biodeter. Biodegr. 86, 225- 237.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibiod.2013.09.011
Bai, Y.H., Sun, Q.H., Xing, R., Wen, D.H., Tang, X.Y., 2010. Removal of pyridine and
quinolone by bio-zeolite composed of mixed degrading bacteria and modified zeolite. J.
Hazard. Mater. 181, 916- 922. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.05.099
Barois, I., David, G.S., Castillo-Murrieta, I.M., Martínez-Rabelo, F., Gomez-Anaya, A.,
Rodríguez-Campos, J., Hernández-Castellano, B., Contreras-Ramo, S.M., 2018.
Macrofauna and mesofauna from soil contaminated by oil extraction. Geoderma 332,
180-189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.06.013
Bayat, A.E., Kharrat, R., Junin, R., Hejri, S., 2015. Evaluation of Vapour Extraction Process
and its Prospect as an Enhanced Oil recovery Method. Int. J. Oil Gas Coal T. 9, 4. DOI:
10.1504/IJOGCT.2015.069628
Beiyuan, J., Tsang, D.C.W., Bolan, N.S., Baek, K., Ok, Y.S., Li, X.D., 2018. Interactions of
food waste compost with metals and metal-chelant complexes during soil remediation.
J. Clean. Prod. 192, 199-206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.239
23
Journal Pre-proof
Benedik, M.J., Gibbs, P.R., Riddle, R.R., Willson, R.C., 1998. Microbial denitrogenation of
fossil fuels. Trends Biotechnol. 16, 390-395. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-
7799(98)01237-2
Benson, I., Jha, R.K., Kumar, M., Hanzlik, E., 2013. New insights into steam/solvent-
coinjection process mechanism. Soc. Pet. Eng. J. 18, 867-877.
https://doi.org/10.2118/159277-PA
Bera, A., Ojha, K., Mandal, A., Kumar, T., 2011. Interfacial tension and phase behavior of
surfactant-brine-oil system. Colloids Surf. A Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 383, 114–119.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2011.03.035
Brakstad, O.G., Lewis, A., Beegle-Krause, C.J., 2018. A critical review of marine snow in
the context of oil spills and oil spill dispersant treatment with focus on the deepwater
orizon oil spill. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 135, 346-356.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.07.028
Butler, R.M., 1994. Steam-Assisted gravity drainage: concept, development, performance and
future. J. Can. Petrol. Technol. 33. https://doi.org/10.2118/94-02-05
Butler, R.M., Mokrys, I.J., 1989. Solvent analogue model of steam-assisted gravity drainage.
AOSTRA J. Res. 5, 17- 32. https://doi.org/10.2118/93-03-02
Butler, R.M., Mokrys, I.J., Das, S.K., 1995. The solvent requirements for VAPEX recovery.
SPE International Heavy Oil Symposium, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 19- 21 June, SPE
30293. https://doi.org/10.2118/30293-MS
Cachada, A., Silva, E.F., Duarte, A.C., Pereira, R., 2016. Risk assessment of urban soils
contamination: The particular case of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Sci. Total
Environ. 551-552, 271-284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.02.012
24
Journal Pre-proof
Castorena, G., Acuña, M.E., Aburto, J., Jaimes, I.B., 2008. Semi-continuous biodegradation
of carbazole in fuels by biofilm-immobilised cells of Burkholderia sp. strain IMP5GC.
Process Biochem. 43, 1318- 1321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procbio.2008.07.010
Cepeda, C.T., Leiros, M.C., Seoane, S., Gil-sotres, F., 2000. Limitations of soil enzymes as
indicators of soil pollution. Soil Biol. Biochem. 32, 1867-1875.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-0717(00)00160-7
Chen, X., Huang, S., Liu, H., Jiang, J., Xia, Y., 2018. Experimental and numerical study of
solvent optimization during horizontal-well solvent-enhanced steam flooding in thin
heavy-oil reservoirs. Fuel 228, 379-389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2018.05.001
Cheng, Q., Kinney, K.A., Whitman, C.P., Szaniszlo, P.J., 2004. Characterization of two
polyketide synthase genes in Exophiala lecanii-corni, a melanized fungus with
bioremediation potential. Bioorg. Chem. 32, 92- 108.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioorg.2003.10.001
Cheong, H.K., Noh, S.R., Kim, J.A., Ha, M., Jee, Y.K., Park, M.S., Choi, K.H., Cho, S.I.,
Choi, K., Paek, D., 2019. Hebei spirit oil spill and its long-term effect on children’s
asthma symptoms. Environ. Pollut. 248, 286- 294.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2019.02.034
Cho, D.H., Chae, H.J., Kim, E.Y., 2001 Synthesis and characterization of a novel
extracellular polysaccharide by Rhodotorula glutinis. Appl. Biochem. Biotech. 95, 183-
193. https://doi.org/10.1385/ABAB:95:3:183
Chrzanowski, Ł., Kaczorek, E., Olszanowski, A., 2006. The ability of Candida Maltosa
maltosa for hydrocarbon and emulsified hydrocarbon degradation. Pol. J. Environ.
Stud. 15, 47- 51.
25
Journal Pre-proof
Chun, C.L., Payne, R.B., Sowers, K.R., May, H.D., 2013. Electrical stimulation of microbial
PCB degradation in sediment. Water Res. 47, 141- 152.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2012.09.038
Couto, M.R., Gudiña, E.J., Ferreira, D., Teixeira, J.A., Rodrigues, L.R., 2018. The
biopolymer produced by Rhizobium viscosum CECT 908 is a promising agent for
application in Microbial Enhanced Oil Recovery. New Biotechnol. 49, 144-150.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbt.2018.11.002
Daghio, M., Aulenta, F., Vaiopoulou, E., Franzetti, A., Arends, J.B.A., Sherry, A., Head,
A.S.S.I.M., Bestetti, G., Rabaey, K., 2017. Electrobioremediation of oil spills. Water
Res. 114, 351- 370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2017.02.030
Dallinger, A., Duldhardt, I., Kabisch, J., Schauer, F., 2016. Biotransformation of cyclohexane
and related alicyclic hydrocarbons by Candida maltosa and Trichosporon species. Int.
Biodeter. Biodegr. 107, 132- 139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibiod.2015.11.015
David, D.D.M., Emili, G.B., Araguas, R.M., Alcaraz, C., Vidal, O., Sanz, N., Garcia-Marin,
J-L., 2018. Effects of water pollution and river fragmentation on population genetics
structure of invasive mosquitofish. Sci. Total Environ. 637-638, 1372-1382.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.05.003
De Araujo, L. L. G. C., Sodré, L. G. P., Brasil, L. R., Domingos, D. F., de Oliveira, V. M., da
Cruz, G. F., 2019. Microbial enhanced oil recovery using a biosurfactant produced by
Bacillus safensis isolated from mangrove microbiota - Part I biosurfactant
characterization and oil displacement test. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 180, 950-957.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2019.06.031
Dejam, M., Saboorian-Jooybari, H., Chen, Z., 2016. Heavy oil polymer flooding from
laboratory core floods to pilot tests and field applications: half-century studies. J.
26
Journal Pre-proof
Delshad, M., Han, C., Veedu, F.K., Pope, G.A., 2013. A simplified model for simulations of
alkaline- surfactant-polymer floods. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 108, 1- 9.
Denis, P.L., Edson, A.S., Marques, M., Giannesi, G.C., Beatriz, A., Yonekawa, M.K.A.,
Montanholi, A.S., 2018.Fungal Bioremediation of Pollutant Aromatic Amines. Curr.
Opin. Green and Sustain. Chem. 11, 34- 44.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsc.2018.03.012
Dolatabadi, J.E.N., Mahmoudpour, M., Torbati, M., Homayouni-Rad, A., 2019.
Nanomaterials based surface Plasmon resonance signal enhancement for detection of
environmental pollutions. Biosens. Bioelectron. 127, 72-84.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2018.12.023
Dong, X., Huiqing, L., Chen, Z., Keliu, W., Ning, L., Qichen, Z., 2019. Enhanced oil
recovery techniques for heavy oil and oilsands reservoirs after steam injection. Appl.
Energy 239, 1190-1121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.01.244
Dong, X.H., Liu, H.Q., Zhang, H.L., 2012. Experimental and simulation study of hot-water
flooding of heavy oil reservoirs after steam injection. Petroleum Geology and Recovery
Efficiency 19, 50- 53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2019.106597
Dong, Y., Zhao, C., Feng, Y., Li, Y., Dong, Y., 2019. Thermal desorption for remediation of
contaminated soil: A review. Chemosphere 221, 841- 855.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.01.079
Elektorowicz, M., Boeva, V., 1996. Electrokinetic supply of nutrients in soil bioremediation.
Environ. Technol. 17, 1339-1349. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593331708616503
El-Sheshtawy, H. S., Aiad, I., Osman, M. E., Abo-ELnasr, A. A., Kobisy, A. S., 2016.
Production of biosurfactants by Bacillus licheniformis and Candida albicans for
27
Journal Pre-proof
application in microbial enhanced oil recovery. Egypt. J. Pet. 25, 293–298.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpe.2015.07.018
Esene, C., Rezaei, N., Aborig, A., Zendehboudi, S., 2019. Comprehensive review of
carbonated water injection for enhanced oil recovery. Fuel 237, 1086 - 1107.
Flory, P.J., 1953. Principles of Polymer Chemistry. Cornell University Press, United States.
Gargar, N.K., Mailybaev, A.A., Marchesin, D., Bruining, J., 2014. Effects of water on light
oil recovery by air injection. Fuel 137, 200 - 210.
Gaur, N., Narasimhulu, K., Pydisetty, Y., 2018. Recent advances in the bio-remediation of
persistent organic pollutants and its effect on environment. J. Clean. Prod. 198, 1602 -
1631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.076
Ge, J.J., Zhang, G.C., Zhao, F.L., 1999. The ways of reducing viscosity of Kenxi ultra-heavy
crude oil. Oilfield Chemistry 16, 320 - 322.
George, J.H., Clarence, A.M., Maura, P., 2008. Recent Advances in Surfactant EOR. SPE J.
16. Doi.org/10.2118/115386-PA
Gie, D.N., Moore, R.G., Bennion, D.W., Belgrave, J.D.M., Ursenbach, M.G., 1990. New
insights into enriched-air in-situ combustion. J. Petrol. Eng. 42, 916- 923.
https://doi.org/10.2118/16740-PA
Gill, R.T., Harbottle, M.J., Smithc, J.W.N., Thornton S.F., 2014. Electrokinetic-enhanced
bioremediation of organic contaminants: A review of processes and environmental
applications. Chemosphere 107, 37- 42.
28
Journal Pre-proof
Gomez, P.A., Moore, R.G, Belgrave, J.D.M., Ursenbach, M.G., Laureshen, C.J., Mehta, S.A.,
1999. In situ combustion performance in steam flooded heavy oil cores. J. Can. Petrol.
Technol. 38, 1- 9. https://doi.org/10.2118/99-13-34
Gotawala, D.R., Gates, I.D., 2011. Stability of a edge of a SAGD steam chamber in a
bitumen reservoir. Chem. Eng. Sci. 66, 1802- 1809.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2011.01.025
Gudina, E.J., Fernandes, E.C., Rodrigues, A.I., Teixeira, J.A., Rodrigues, La, R., 2015.
Biosurfactant production by Bacillus subtilis using corn steep liquor as culture medium.
Front. Microbiol. 6, 59. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2015.00059
Guertechin, O., 1999. Surfactant: classification, handbook of detergents. Part A- Properties.
Surfactant science series 82, 40.
Guo, K., Li, H., Yu, Z., 2016. In-situ heavy and extra-heavy oil recovery: A review. Fuel 185,
886- 902. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2016.08.047
Hamidi, H., Haddad, A.S., Mohammadian, E., Rafati, R., Azdarpour, A., Ghahri, P.,
Ombewa, P., Neuert, T., Zink, A., 2017. Ultrasound-assisted CO2 flooding to improve
oil recovery. Ultrason. Sonochem. 35, 243- 250.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2016.09.026
Hamme, J.D.V., Singh, A., Ward, O.P., 2003. Recent advances in petroleum microbiology.
Microbiol. Mol. Biol. R. 67, 503- 549. Doi: 10.1128/mmbr.67.4.503-549.2003
Han, B.-B., Cheng, W.-L., Nian, Y.-L., 2017. Experimental study on effect of temperature
field on recovery of reservoir using hot water flooding. Energy Procedia 142, 3759-
3765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.12.273
Han, H., Lee, Y.-J., Kim, S.-H., Yang, J.-W., 2009. Electrokinetic remediation of soil
contaminated with diesel oil using EDTA-cosolvent solutions. Sep. Sci. Technol. 44,
2437- 2454. https://doi.org/10.1080/01496390902983794
29
Journal Pre-proof
Harding, T.G., Al-Murayri, M.T., Maini, B.B., Oskouei, J., 2016. Multicomponent solvent
co-injection with steam in heavy and extra-heavy oil reservoirs. Energy Fuels 30, 2604-
2616. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.5b02774
Haseena, P.V., Padmavathy, K.S., Madhu, G., 2016. A study on effects of pH, adsorbent
dosage, time, initial concentration and adsorption isotherm study for the removal of
hexavalent chromium (Cr (VI)) from wastewater by magnetite nanoparticles. Procedia
Technol. 24, 585- 594. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protcy.2016.05.127
Huang, S., Chen, X., Liu, H., Xia, Y., Jiang, J., Cao, M., Li, A., Yang, M., 2019.
Experimental and numerical study of steam-chamber evolution during solvent-
enhanced steam flooding in thin heavy-oil reservoirs. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 172, 776-786.
Jeevanantham, S., Saravanan, A., Hemavathy, R.V., Kumar, P.S., Yaashikaa, P.R., Yuvaraj,
D., 2019. Removal of toxic pollutants from water environment by phytoremediation: A
survey on application and future prospects. Environ. Technol. Inno. 13, 264-276.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eti.2018.12.007
Jeon, C.S., Yang, J.S., Kim, K.J., Baek, K., 2010. Electrokinetic removal of petroleum
hydrocarbons from residual clayey soil following a washing process. Clean-soil Air
Water 38, 189- 193. https://doi.org/10.1002/clen.200900190
Jessen, K., Liu, Z., Tsotsis, T.T., 2011. Optimization of in-situ combustion processes: A
parameter space study towards reducing the CO2 emissions. Chem. Eng. Sci. 66, 2723-
2733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2011.03.021
Jia, H., Sheng, J.J., 2017. Discussion of the feasibility of air injection for enhanced oil
recovery in shale oil reservoirs. Petroleum 3, 249- 257.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petlm.2016.12.003
30
Journal Pre-proof
Joshi, S., Bharucha, C., Jha, S., Yadav, S., Nerurkar, A., Desai, A.J., 2008. Biosurfactant
production using molasses and whey under thermophilic conditions. Bioresour.
Technol. 99, 195- 199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2006.12.010
Junin, R., Mohammadian, E., Rahmani, O., Idris, A.K., 2013. Effects of sonication radiation
on oil recovery by ultrasonic waves stimulated water-flooding. Ultrasonics 53, 607-
614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultras.2012.10.006
Kariminezhad, E., Elektorowicz, M., 2018. Effect of various electrokinetic treatment regimes
on solids surface properties and thermal behavior of oil sediments. J. Hazard. Mater.
353, 227- 235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2018.03.060
Ke, C.Y., Lu, G.M., Wei, Y.L., Sun, W.J., Hui, J.F., Zheng, X.Y., Zhang, Q.Z., Zhang, X.L.,
2019. Biodegradation of crude oil by Chelatococcus daeguensis HB-4 and its
potential for microbial enhanced oil recovery (MEOR) in heavy oil reservoirs.
Bioresour. Technol. 287, 121442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2019.121442
Ke, C.Y., Sun, W.J., Li, Y.B., Lu, G.M., Zhang, Q.Z., Zhang, X.L., 2018. Microbial
enhanced oil recovery in Baolige Oilfield using an indigenous facultative anaerobic
strain Luteimonas huabeiensis sp. nov. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 167, 160–167.
Kim, K.H., Vikrant, K., Giri, B.S., Raza, N., Roy, K., Rai, B.N., Singh, R.S., 2018. Recent
advancements in bioremediation of dye: Current status and challenges. Bioresour.
Technol. 253, 355- 367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2018.01.029
Kim, S.-H., Han, H.-Y., Lee, Y.-J., Kim, C.W., Yang, J.-W., 2010. Effect of electrokinetic
remediation on indigenous microbial activity and community within diesel
contaminated soil. Sci. Total Environ. 408, 3162-3168.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.03.038
31
Journal Pre-proof
Kovscek, A.R., 2012. Emerging challenges and potential futures for thermally enhanced oil
recovery. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 98-99, 130- 143.
Kumar, J.A., Amarnath, D.J., Sathish, S., Jabasingh, S.A., Saravanan, A., Hemavathy, R.V.,
Anand, K.V., Yaashikaa, P.R., 2019. Enhanced PAHs removal using pyrolysis-assisted
potassium hydroxide induced palm shell activated carbon: Batch and column
investigation. J. Mol. Liq. 279, 77-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2019.01.121
Lan, G., Fan, Q., Liu, Y., Liu, Y., Liu, Y., Yin, X., Luo, M., 2015. Effects of the addition of
waste cooking oil on heavy crude oil biodegradation and microbial enhanced oil
recovery using Pseudomonas sp. SWP- 4. Biochem. Eng. J. 103, 219–226.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2015.08.004
Larson, R.G., Hirasaki, G., 1978. Analysis of physical mechanisms in surfactant flooding.
Soc. Pet. Eng. J. 18, 42- 58. https://doi.org/10.2118/6003-PA
Lazar, I., Petrisor, I.G., Yen, T.F., 2007. Microbial enhanced oil recovery. Petrol. Sci.
Technol. 25, 1353- 1366. https://doi.org/10.1080/10916460701287714
Lee, J., Cho, Y.J., Yang, J.Y., Jung, Y.J., Hong, S.G., Kim, O.S., 2017. Complete genome
sequence of Pseudomonas antarctica PAMC 27494, a bacteriocin-producing
psychrophile isolated from Antarctica. J. Biotechnol. 259, 15- 18. doi:
10.1016/j.jbiotec.2017.08.013
Lee, T.K., Han., Wee.G.N., No, J.H., 2018. Pollution level and reusability of the waste soil
generated from demolition of a rural railway. Environ. Pollut. 240, 867- 874.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2018.05.025
Lei, W., Ye, T., Xiangyu, Y., Cong, W., Bowen, Y., Shihao, W., Philip, H.W., Xu, W.,
Zhenzhou, Y., Yonghong, W., Jingyuan, C., Yu-Shu, W., 2017. Advances in
32
Journal Pre-proof
improved/enhanced oil recovery technologies for tight and shale reservoirs. Fuel 210,
425-445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2017.08.095
Li, J., Song, X., Hu, G., Thring, R.W., 2013. Ultrasonic desorption of petroleum
hydrocarbons from crude oil contaminated soils. J. Environ. Sci. Health A Tox. Hazard.
Subst. Environ. Eng. 48, 1378- 1389. doi: 10.1080/10934529.2013.781885.
Li, S., Feng, K., Li, M., 2017. Identifying the main contributors of air pollution in Beijing. J.
Clean. Prod. 163, 359- 365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.10.127
Li, Y.G., Li, W.L., Huang, J.X., Xiong, X.C., Gao, H.S., Xing, J.M., Liu, H.Z., 2008.
Biodegradation of carbazole in oil/water biphasic system by a newly isolated bacterium
Klebsiella sp. LSSE-H2. Biochem. Eng. J. 41, 166- 170.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2008.04.009
Li, Z., Delshad, M., Lotfollahi, M., Koh, H., Luo, H., Chang, H.L., Zhang, J., Dempsey, P.,
Lucas-Clement, C., Brennan, B., 2014. Polymer Flooding of a Heavy Oil Reservoir
with an Active Aquifer. SPE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium.
doi.org/10.2118/169149-MS
Lim, M.W., Lau, E.V., Poh, P.E., 2016. A comprehensive guide of remediation technologies
for oil contaminated soil-Present works ad future directions. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 109, 14-
45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.04.023
Liu, J., 2018. Soil remediation using soil washing followed by ozone oxidation. J. Ind. Eng.
Chem. 65, 31- 34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2012.11.137
Liu, P., Li, W., Shen, D., 2015. Experimental study and pilot test of urea- and urea-and-foam-
assisted steam flooding in heavy oil reservoirs. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 135, 291- 298.
33
Journal Pre-proof
Liu, Q., Lin, J., Wang, W., Huang, H., Li, S., 2015. Production of surfactin isoforms by
Bacillus subtilis BS-37 and its applicability to enhanced oil recovery under laboratory
conditions. Biochem. Eng. J. 93, 31–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2014.08.023
Liu, Y., Agarwal, A., 2015. Remediation technologies for oil-contaminated sediments. Mar.
Pollut. Bull. 101, 483- 490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2015.09.010
Liua, H., Cheng, L., Huanga, S., Wub, K., Chen, X., Wang, D., Xiong, H., 2018.
Environmental and economic benefits of Solvent-Assisted Steam-Gravity Drainage for
bitumen through horizontal well: A comprehensive modeling analysis. Energy 164,
418- 431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.08.216
Lu, C., Zhao, W., Liu, Y., Dong, X., 2018. Pore-scale transport mechanisms and macroscopic
displacement effects of in-situ oil-in-water emulsions in porous media. J. Energy
Resour. Technol. 140, 584- 598. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4040200
Lu, S., Meng, Y., Liu, X., Zhang, T., Jin, B., Wang, Q., Tang, Z., Liu, Y., Guo, X., Zhou,
J., Xi, B., 2019. A review on occurrence and risk of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs) in lakes of China. Sci. Total Environ. 651, 2497- 2506. doi:
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.162.
Mahinpey, N., Ambalae, A., Asghari, K., 2007. In situ combustion in enhanced oil recovery
(EOR): a review. Chem. Eng. Commun. 194, 995- 1021.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00986440701242808
Mandal, A., 2015. Chemical flood enhanced oil recovery: A review. Int. J. Oil Gas Coal T. 9,
241. Doi: 10.1504/IJOGCT.2015.069001
Mansour, M.S.M., Shafy, A., Hussein, I., 2016. A review on polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons: Source, environmental impact, effect on human health and remediation.
Egypt. J. Pet. 25, 107- 123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpe.2015.03.011
34
Journal Pre-proof
Maraousek, J., Maraouskova, A., Myskova, K., Vachal, J., Vochozka, M., Zak, J., 2015.
Techno-economic assessment of collagen casings waste management. Int. J. Environ.
Sci. Eng. 12, 3385- 3390. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-015-0840-z
Marin-Garcia, D.C., Adams, R.H., 2016. Effect of crude petroleum on water repellency in a
clayey alluvial soil. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 13, 55-64.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-015-0838-6
Mishra, S., Bera, A., Mandal, A., 2014. Effect of Polymer Adsorption on Permeability
Reduction in Enhanced Oil Recovery. J. Pet. Eng. 2014, 1- 9.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/395857
Mogollon, L., Rodriguez, R., Larrota, W., Ortiz, C., Torres, R., 1998. Biocatalytic removal of
nickel and vanadium from petroporphyrins and asphaltenes. Appl. Biochem. Biotech.
70, 765- 777. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02920187
Mohebbi, A., Dehshibi, R.R., Riazi, M., Danafar, F., 2019. Visualisation study of the effects
of oil type and model geometry on oil recovery under ultrasonic irradiation in a glass
micro-model. Fuel 239, 709- 716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2018.11.071
Mojarad, M., Dehghanpour, H., 2016. Analytical modeling of emulsion flow at the edge of a
steam chamber during a steam-assisted-gravity-drainage. Soc. Pet. Eng. J. 21, 353- 363.
Monticello, D.J., 2000. Biodesulfurization and the upgrading of petroleum distillates. Curr.
Opin. Biotech. 11, 540- 546. https://doi.org/10.2118/170094-PA
Moore, R.G., Laureshen, C.J., Ursenbach, M.G., Mehta, S.A., Belgrave, J.D.M., 1999. A
Canadian perspective on in situ combustion. J. Can. Petrol. Technol. 38, 1- 8.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0958-1669(00)00154-3
Motesharezadeh, B., Taheri, M., Zolfaghari, A.A., Jvadzarrin, I., 2018. Phytoremediation
modeling in soil contaminated by oil-hydrocarbon under salinity stress by eucalyptus
35
Journal Pre-proof
(A comparative study). Comput. Electron. Agr. 150, 162- 169.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2018.04.016
Muhetar, H., Guan, W., Xi, C., Chen, Y., Zhang, X., Liang, J., 2011. Fire-flooding
technologies in post-steam injected heavy oil reservoirs. Petrol. Explor. Dev. 38, 452-
463. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1876-3804(11)60047-5
Murer, A., McClennen, K., Ellison, T., Larson, D., Timmer, R., Thomsen, M., Wolcott, K.,
2000. Steam injection project in heavy-oil diatomite. Society of Petroleum Engineering
Reservoir Engineering and Evaluation 3, 2- 12. https://doi.org/10.2118/38302-MS
Nazina, T.N., Pavlov, N.K., Tatarkin, Y., Shestakov, N.M., Babich, T.L., Sokolov, D.S.,
Ivoylov, V.S., Turov, T.P., Hisametdinov, M.R., Ibatullin, R.R., Belyaev, S.S., Ivanov,
M.V., 2012. The development of biotechnology increase the degree of oil recovery
from carbonate oil reservoirs on the territory of the Republic of Tatarstan. Electronic
Scientific Journal Georesources. Geoenergetika. Geopolitics 2, 1- 6.
Nazina, T.N., Sokolova, D.S., Grigor’yan, A.A., Xue, Y.F., Belyaev, S.S., Ivanov, M.V.,
2003. Production of oil-releasing compounds by microorganisms from the Daqing Oil
Field, China. Microbiology 72, 173- 178. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023216014112
Nian, Y.L., Cheng, W.L., Han, B.B., 2017. Experimental study on effect of temperature field
on recovery of reservoir using hot water flooding. Energy Procedia 142, 3759- 3765.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.12.273
Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J., Basagana, X., Dadvand, P., Martinez, D., Cirach, M., Beelen, R.,
Jacquemin, B., 2014. Air pollution and human fertility rates. Environ. Int. 70, 9-14.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2014.05.005
Nmegbu, C.G.J., 2014. The effect of salt concentration on microbes during microbial
enhanced oil recovery. Int. J. Eng. Res. App. 4, 244- 247.
36
Journal Pre-proof
Nmegbu, G.C.J., Dasigha, P.D., 2014. Modelling a Well Stimulation Process using the
MEOR technique. Int. J. Res. Eng. Technol. 3, 153- 159. DOI:
10.15623/ijret.2014.0303028
Pang, Z., Liu, H., Zhu, L., 2015. A laboratory study of enhancing heavy oil recovery with
steam flooding by adding nitrogen foams. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 128, 184–193.
Pang, Z., Liu, H., Ge, P., Han, L., 2012. Physical simulation and fine digital study of thermal
foam compound flooding. Petrol. Explor. Dev. 39, 791- 797.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1876-3804(12)60106-2
Pang, Z., Lyu, X., Zhang, F., Wu, T., Gao, Z., Geng, Z., Luo, C., 2018. The macroscopic and
microscopic analysis on the performance of steam foams during thermal recovery in
heavy oil reservoirs. Fuel 233, 166- 176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2018.06.048
Patel, J., Borgohain, S., Kumar, M., Rangarajan, V., Somasundaran, P., Sen, R., 2015. Recent
developments in microbial enhanced oil recovery. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 52, 1539-
1558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.135
Pritsos, C.A., Perez, C.R., Moye, J.K., Cacela, D., Dean, K.M., 2017. Low level exposure to
crude oil impacts avian flight performance: The Deepwater Horizon oil spill effect on
migratory birds. Ecotox. Environ. Safe. 146, 98- 103.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2017.05.028
Qadeer, S., Hornbrook, M.W., Dehghani, K., Ostermann, R.D., Ogbe, D.O., 1991. Effects of
CO2 addition to steam on recovery of west sak crude oil. SPE Reserv. Eval. Eng. 6,
278- 286. https://doi.org/10.2118/18753-PA
Rahnema, H., Barrufe,t M., Daulat, D., Mamorac., 2017. Combustion assisted gravity
drainage – Experimental and simulation results of a promising in-situ combustion
37
Journal Pre-proof
technology to recover extra-heavy oil. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 154, 513- 520.
Ramezanalizadeh, H., Manteghi, F., 2017. Immobilization of mixed cobalt/nickel metal-
organic framework on a magnetic BiFeO3: a highly efficient separable photocatalyst
for degradation of water pollutions. J. Photochem. Photobiol. 346, 89- 104.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jphotochem.2017.05.041
Ranjan, R.S., Qian, Y., Krishnapillai, M., 2006. Effects of Electrokinetics and Cationic
Surfactant Cetyltrimethylammonium Bromide [CTAB] on the Hydrocarbon Removal
and Retention from Contaminated Soils. Environ. Technol. 27, 767- 776.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09593332708618686
Reinecke, A.J., Wyk, M.V., Reinecke, S.A., 2016. The Influence of Soil Characteristics on
the Toxicity of Oil Refinery Waste for the Springtail Folsomia candida (Collembola).
Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 96, 804- 809. doi: 10.1007/s00128-016-1792-9.
Rosenzweig, R., Gordon, G., Stavi, I., Shavit, U., 2018. Oil spill effects on soil
hydrophobicity and related properties in a hyper-arid region. Geoderma 312, 114- 120.
Doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.10.008
Rostami, S., Azhdarpoor, A., 2019. The application of plant growth regulators to improve
phytoremediation of contaminated soils: A review. Chemosphere 220, 818- 827.
Safdel, M., Anbaz, M.A., Daryasafar, A., Jamialahmadi, M., 2017. Microbial enhanced oil
recovery, a critical review on worldwide implemented field trials in different countries.
Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 74, 159- 172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.02.045
Saikia, B.R.U., Vendhan, E., Santosh, K.Y., Shankar S.S., 2013. A Brief review On the
science, mechanism and environmental constraints of microbial enhanced oil recovery
(MEOR). Int. J. Chemtech Res. 5, 1205- 1212.
38
Journal Pre-proof
Sakthipriya, N., Doble, M., Sangwai, J.S., 2015. Bioremediation of Coastal and Marine
pollution due to Crude Oil using a Microorganism Bacillus subtilis. Procedia Eng. 116,
213- 220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2015.08.284
Salah, W., Samy I.E-K., Zammarany, I.A.E., Kholoud, A.E-N., Dalia, A.E-M., Ehab, A.A.A.,
Ahmad, A.O., Ahmad, A.E-E., 2016. Water pollution in the Middle Nile Delta, Egypt:
An environmental study. J. Adv. Res. 7, 781- 794.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jare.2015.11.005
Salehi, M.M., Safarzadeh, M.A., Sahraei, E., Nejad, S.A.T., 2014. Comparison of oil removal
in surfactant alternating gas with water alternating gas, water flooding and gas flooding
in secondary oil recovery process. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 120, 86- 93.
Sar, N., Rosenberg, E., 1983. Emulsifier Production by Acinetobacter calcoaceticus Strains.
Curr. Microbiol. 9, 309- 314. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01588825
Saravanan, A., Jeevanantham, S., Hemavathy, R.V., Kumar, P.S., Yaashika, P.R., Yuvaraj,
D., 2019a. Removal of toxic pollutants from water environment by phytoremediation:
A survey on application and future prospects. Environ. Technol. Inno. 13, 264- 276.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eti.2018.12.007
Saravanan, A., Kumar, P.S., Yaashikaa, P.R., Kanmani, S., Varthine, R.H., Muthu, C.M.M.,
Yuvaraj, D., 2019b. Modelling on the removal of dye from industrial wastewater using
surface improved Enteromorpha intestinalis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Doi:10.1007/s41742-
019-00181-0
Schaller, K.D., Fox, S.L., Bruhn, D.F., Noah, K.S., Bala, G.A., 2004. Characterization of
surfactin from Bacillus subtilis for application as an agent for enhanced oil recovery.
Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 113–116:827- 836. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59259-
837-3_67
39
Journal Pre-proof
Sen, R., 2008. Biotechnology in petroleum recovery: The microbial EOR. Prog. Energy
Combust. Sci. 34, 714- 724. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2008.05.001
Shen, D., Liu, P., Li, W., 2015. Experimental study and pilot test of urea- and urea-and-foam-
assisted steam flooding in heavy oil reservoirs. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 135, 291- 298.
Sheng, J.J., 2014. A comprehensive review of alkaline surfactant polymer (ASP) flooding.
Asia-Pac. J. Chem. Eng. 9, 471- 489. https://doi.org/10.1002/apj.1824
Sheng, J.J., 2015. Status of alkaline flooding technology. Journal of Petroleum Engineering &
Technology 5, 44- 50. Doi: 10.21767/2471-9935.100006
Shi, L., Xi, C., Liu, P., Li, X., Yuan, Z., 2017. Infill wells assisted in-situ combustion
following SAGD process in extra-heavy oil reservoirs. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 157, 958-
Shokrlua, Y.H., Maham, Y., Tan, X., Babadagli, T., Gray, M., 2013. Enhancement of the
efficiency of in situ combustion technique for heavy-oil recovery by application of
nickel ions. Fuel 105, 397- 407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2012.07.018
Sikder, M.T., Rahman, M.M., Jakariya, M., Hosokawa, T., Kurasaki, M., Saito, T., 2019.
Remediation of water pollution with native cyclodextrins and modified cyclodextrins:
A comparative overview and perspectives. Chem. Eng. J. 355, 920- 941.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2018.08.218
Sivakumar, D., Parthiban, R., Kumar, P.S., Saravanan, A., 2020. Synthesis and
characterization of ultrasonic-assisted Delonix regia seeds: modelling and application
in dye adsorption. Desalin. Water Treat. 173, 427-441. Doi: 10.5004/dwt.2020.24820
Skauge, A., Sorbie, K., 2014. Status of fluid flow mechanisms for miscible and immiscible
WAG. SPE EOR conference at oil and gas West Asia. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
https://doi.org/10.2118/169747-MS
40
Journal Pre-proof
Skauge, A., Stensen J.A., 2003. Review of WAG field experience. Oil Recovery–2003, In: 1st
International conference and exhibition, modern challenges in oil recovery. 19- 23.
Soleimani, M., Bassi, A., Margaritis, A., 2007. Biodesulfurization of refractory organic sulfur
compounds in fossil fuels. Biotechnol. Adv. 25, 570- 596. Doi:
10.1016/j.biotechadv.2007.07.003
Stanislaus, A., Marafi, A., Rana, M.S., 2010. Recent advances in the science and technology
of ultra low sulfur diesel (ULSD) production. Catal. Today 153, 1- 68.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cattod.2010.05.011
Stojic, N., Pucarevic, M., Stojic, G., 2017. Railway transportation as a source of soil
pollution. Transp. Res. D 57, 124- 129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.09.024
Suganya, S., Kumar, P.S., 2018. Influence of ultrasonic waves on preparation of active
carbon from coffee waste for the reclamation of effluents containing Cr(VI) ions. J. Ind.
Eng. Chem. 60, 418-430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2017.11.029
Sun, S., Zhang, Z., Luo, Y., Zhong, W., Xiao, M., Yi, W., Yu, L., Fu, P.,
2011. Exopolysaccharide production by a genetically engineered Enterobacter cloacae
strain for microbial enhanced oil recovery. Bioresour. Technol. 102, 6153–6158.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2011.03.005
Sun, Z., Lyua, X., Liu, H., Pang, Z., 2018. Visualized study of thermochemistry assisted
steam flooding to improve oil recovery in heavy oil reservoir with glass micromodels.
Fuel 218, 118- 126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2018.01.007
Sushkova, S., Minkina, T., Deryabkina, I., Rajput, V., Antonenko, E., Nazarenko, O.,
Yadav, B.J., Hakki, E., Mohan, D., 2019. Environmental pollution of soil with PAHs
in energy producing plant zone. Sci. Total Environ. 655, 232- 241. doi:
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.11.080
41
Journal Pre-proof
Suthar, H., Hingurao, K., Desai, A., Nerurkar, A., 2008. Evaluation of bioemulsifier mediated
Microbial Enhanced Oil Recovery using sand pack column. J. Microbiol. Methods 75,
225–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mimet.2008.06.007
Talebian, S.H., Masoudi, R., Tan, I.M., Zitha, P.L.J., 2014. Foam assisted CO2-EOR: a
review of concept, challenges, and future prospects. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 120, 202- 215.
Tango, M.S.A., Islam, M.R., 2002. Potential of extremophiles for biotechnological and
petroleum applications. Energy Sources 24, 543- 559. https://doi.org/10.2118/165280-
MS
Tiab, D., Okoye, C.U., Osman, M.M., 1982. Caustic steam flooding. J. Pet. Technol. 34,
1817- 1827. https://doi.org/10.2118/9945-PA
Tiwari, B.K., 2015. Ultrasound: A clean, green extraction technology. Trends Anal. Chem.
71, 100- 109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trac.2015.04.013
Torabi, F., Jamaloei, B.Y., Stengler, B.M., Jackson, D.E., 2012. The evaluation of CO2-based
vapour extraction (VAPEX) process for heavy-oil recovery. J. Petrol. Explor. Prod.
Technol. 2, 93- 105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13202-012-0025-y
Tsai, T.T., Sah, J., Kao, C.M., 2010. Application of iron electrode corrosion enhanced
electrokinetic-Fenton oxidation to remediate diesel-contaminated soils: a laboratory
feasibility study. J. Hydrol. 380, 4- 13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.09.010
Turta, A.T., Singhal, A.K., 2001. Reservoir engineering aspects of light-oil recovery by air
injection. SPE Reserv. Eval. Eng. 4, 336- 344. https://doi.org/10.2118/72503-PA
Upreti, S.R., Lohi, A., Kapadia, R.A., El-Haj, R., 2007. Vapor extraction of heavy oil and
bitumen: a review. Energy Fuels 21, 1562- 1574. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef060341j
Varallyai, L., Botos, S., Pentek, A., 2015. Socio-economic factors of soil pollution. Procedia
Economics and Finance 33, 573- 583.
42
Journal Pre-proof
Vargas-Vasquez, S.M., Romero-Zerón, L.B., 2007. The vapor extraction process: review. J.
Petrol. Sci. Technol. 25, 1447- 1463. https://doi.org/10.1080/10916460500528979
Vazquez-Duhalt, R., Torres, E., Valderrama, B., Le Borgne, S., 2002. Will biochemical
catalysis impact the petroleum refining industry? Energy & Fuels 16, 1239- 1250.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10916460500528979
Virkutyte, J., Sillanpää, M., Latostenmaa, P., 2002. Electrokinetic soil remediation-critical
overview. Sci. Total Environ. 289, 97- 121. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-
9697(01)01027-0
Waigi, M.G., Sun, K., Gao, Y., 2017. Sphingomonads in Microbe-Assisted
Phytoremediation: Tackling Soil Pollution. Trends Biotechnol. 35, 883- 899.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2017.06.014
Wang, C.H., Wu, S.H., Zhou, S.L., Wang, H., Li, B.J., Chen, H., Yu, Y.N., Shi, Y.X., 2015.
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in soils from urban to rural areas in Nanjing:
Concentration, source, spatial distribution, and potential human health risk. Sci. Total
Environ. 527-528, 375- 383. Doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.05.025.
Wang, X., Li, D., Hendry, P., Volk, H., Rashid, A., Liu, K., Ahmed, M., Gong, S., Daud,
W.A.B.W., Sutherland, T.D., 2012. Effect of nutrient addition on an oil reservoir
microbial population: implications for enhanced oil recovery. Journal of Petroleum &
Environmental Biotechnology 3, 118. Doi: 10.4172/2157-7463.1000118
Wang, Z., Gu, S., 2018. Research on the static experiment of super heavy crude oil
demulsification and dehydration using ultrasonic wave and audible sound wave athigh
temperatures. Ultrason. Sonochem. 40, 1014- 1020.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2017.08.037
43
Journal Pre-proof
Wu, Z., Liu, H., Wang, X., Zhang, Z., 2018. Emulsification and improved oil recovery with
viscosity reducer during steam injection process for heavy oil. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 61,
348- 355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2017.12.033
Xia, T.X., Greaves, M., Turta, A.T., Ayasse, C., 2003. THAI – A short-distance displacement
in situ combustion process for the recovery and upgrading of heavy oil. Chem. Eng.
Res. Des. 81, 295- 304. https://doi.org/10.1205/02638760360596847
Yaashikaa, P. R., Kumar, P. S., & Saravanan, A. (2019). Modeling and Cr(VI) ion uptake
kinetics of Sorghum bicolor plant assisted by plant growth–promoting Pannonibacter
phragmetitus: an ecofriendly approach. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Doi:10.1007/s11356-
019-05764-0
Yaashikaa, P. R., Senthil Kumar, P., Mohan Babu, V. P., Kanaka Durga, R., Manivasagan,
V., Saranya, K., & Saravanan, A. (2018). Modelling on the removal of Cr(VI) ions
from aquatic system using mixed biosorbent (Pseudomonas stutzeri and acid treated
Banyan tree bark). J. Mol. Liq. Doi:10.1016/j.molliq.2018.12.004
Yaashikaa, P.R., Kumar, P.S., Saravanan, A., 2019. Molecular characterization of chromium
resistant gram-negative bacteria isolated from industrial effluent: Bioremedial activity.
J. Ind. Eng. Chem. Doi:10.1016/j.jiec.2019.08.050
Yaashikaa, P.R., Kumar, P.S., Varjani, S.J., Saravanan, A., 2019. Advances in production and
application of biochar from lignocellulosic feedstocks for remediation of environmental
pollutants. Bioresour. Technol. 292, 122030.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2019.122030
Yang J.H., Kim, B.K., Baek, B., Ko, S.H., 2011. Research and field experiences on
electrokinetic remediation in South Korea. Sep. Purif. Technol. 76, 116-123.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2011.03.002
44
Journal Pre-proof
Yang, Y., He, J., Christakos, G., Liu, Y., Yang, X., 2019. Assessment of soil heavy metal
pollution using stochastic site indicators. Geoderma 337, 359- 367.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.09.038
Yim, U.H., Shankar, R., Shim, W.J., An, J.G., 2015. A practical review on photooxidation of
crude oil: Laboratory lamp setup and factors affecting it. Water Res. 68, 304- 315.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2014.10.012
Yip, P.M., Alta'ee, A.F., 2015. Simulation study of the effect of smart water on relative
permeability during WAG-CO2 injection for light oil reservoir. ICIPEG 2014.
Springer, 109-120. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-368-2_10
Youssef, N., Elshahed, M.S., McInerney, M.J., 2009. Microbial processes in oil fields:
culprits, problems, and opportunities. Adv. Appl. Microbiol. 66, 141- 251. Doi:
10.1016/S0065-2164(08)00806-X.
Zhang, T., Gannon, S.M., Nevin, K.P., Franks, A.E., Lovley, D.R., 2010. Stimulating the
anaerobic degradation of aromatic hydrocarbons in contaminated sediments by
providing an electrode as the electron acceptor. Environ. Microbiol. 12, 1011- 1020.
Doi: 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2009.02145.x.
Zhao, C., Zhang, Y., Li, X., Wen, D., Tang, X., 2011. Biodegradation of carbazole by the
seven Pseudomonas sp. strains and their denitrification potential. J. Hazard. Mater. 109,
253- 259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.03.036
Zhao, F., Guo, C., Cui, Q., Hao, Q., Xiu, J., Han, S., Zhang, Y., 2018. Exopolysaccharide
production by an indigenous isolate Pseudomonas stutzeri XP1 and its application
potential in enhanced oil recovery. Carbohydr. Polym. 199, 375–381.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2018.07.038
45
Journal Pre-proof
Zheng, C., Yu, L., Huang, L., Xiu, J., Huang, Z., 2012. Investigation of a hydrocarbon-
degrading strain, Rhodococcus ruber Z25, for the potential of microbial enhanced oil
recovery. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 81, 41-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2011.12.019
Zou, C., Wang, M., Xing, Y., Lan, G., Ge, T., Yan, X., Gu, T., 2014. Characterization and
optimization of biosurfactants produced by Acinetobacter baylyi ZJ2 isolated from
crude oil-contaminated soil sample toward microbial enhanced oil recovery
applications. Biochem. Eng. J. 90, 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2014.05.007
46
Journal Pre-proof
Declaration of interests
✓ The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or
personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in
this paper.
☐The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which

may be considered as potential competing interests:
(Dr. P. Senthil Kumar)
Corresponding Author
Journal Pre-proof
Figures
Fig. 1. Enhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Fig. 2. Enhanced Oil recovery process by CO2 flooding
47
Journal Pre-proof
Fig. 3. Enhanced Oil recovery mechanism by Air injection
Fig. 4. Role of microorganisms in MEOR process
48
Journal Pre-proof
Fig. 5. Various types and applications of Biosurfactants
Fig. 6. Different strategies involved in the use of Biosurfactants in Microbial Enhanced Oil
Recovery (MEOR) process
49
Journal Pre-proof
Fig. 7. Petrol refinery process from crude oil
50
Journal Pre-proof
Tables
Table 1 Classification of Microbial Enhanced Oil Recovery (MEOR) processes
S. MEOR Description Microorganism Problem References

No process Used Caused
1 Well A treatment performed to Bacillus sp. Low oil (Nmegbu and
stimulation restore or enhance the Pseudomonas relative Pepple,2014;
well productivity sp. permeability Gudiña et al.,
2015)
2 Water Waterflooding is the Enterobacter sp. Trapped Oil (Azim et al.,
Flooding process of injection of Mixed due to 2018)
water into the reservoirs acidogens capillary
for enhanced oil force
recovery by increasing
pressure.
3 Permeability Permeability Xanthomonas Poor sweep (Mishra et al.,
Modification modification is the sp. efficiency 2014)
process of adjusting or Aureobasidium channelling
decreasing the sp.
permeability of water or
oil in the high
permeability for
enhanced oil recovery.
4 Wellbore Removal of debris Acinetobacter Scaling and (Sar and
cleanup generated during drilling, sp. paraffin Rosenberg,
which cause trouble in Pseudomonas problems 1983)
the fluid flow in the sp.
reservoirs.
5 Polymer Polymer flooding is used Leuconostoc sp. Low sweep (Li et al., 2014)
Flooding to increase oil recovery Brevibacterium efficiency
by decreasing the
water/oil ratio by
increasing viscosity of
the displacing water
6 Mitigation of Coning is a production Campestris Water or gas (Safdel et al.,
coning problem in which gas Leuconostoc sp. coning 2017)
cap gas or bottom water
infiltrates the perforation
zone in the near-wellbore
area and reduces oil
production.
51
Journal Pre-proof
Table 2 Microbial by-products during Microbial Enhance Oil Recovery (MEOR) process
S. Reservoir Microorganism Product Result References

No Type Used
1 Carbonate Clostridium Acids CO2 production, (Nazina et
or Enterobacter Emulsification, Dissolving al., 2003;
Carbonaceo Fermentative of minerals in the Azim et al.,
us bacteria reservoirs and 2018)
reservoirs Permeability and porosity
Improvement.
2 Stratified Bacillus sp. Biomass Emulsification, Oil (Nazina et
reservoirs Campestris degradation, Permeability al., 2003;
with Licheniformis reduction and Selective Sen, 2008 )
different Leuconostoc sp. and nonselective
permeable Xanthomonas Plugging.
zones sp.
Stratified Aureobasidium Biopoly Injectivity profile and (Cho et al.,
reservoirs sp. mers Viscosity modification, 2001; Mishra
with Bacillus sp. Mobility control and et al., 2014;
different Alcaligeness sp. permeability reduction Li et al.,
permeable Sclerotium sp. in water-swept regions. 2014; Safdel
zones Bre vibacterium et al., 2017)
4 Sandstone Acinetobacter Biosurfa Emulsification, Interfacial (Tango and
or Arthrobacter ctants tension (IFT) reduction Islam, 2002;
carbonate Bacillus sp. and wettability alteration. Schaller et
reservoirs Pseudomonas al., 2004;
with sp. Sen, 2008;
moderate Rhodococcus Eduardo et
temperature sp. al., 2015;
s Gudiña et al.,
(< 50 °C) 2015)
Mature Acinetobacter Emulsifi Emulsification (Sar and
water sp. ers Rosenberg,
flooded Candida sp. 1983;
reservoirs Pseudomonas Youssef et
sp. al., 2009)
6 Heavy oil Clostridium Gases IFT and viscosity (Youssef et
reservoirs Enterobacter reduction, Flow al., 2009;
Methanogens characteristics Safdel et al.,
Improvement, Oil 2017)
swelling and Reservoir re-
pressurization.
7 Strongly Clostridium Solvents Heavy, long chain (Sen, 2008)
oil-wet, Klebsiella sp. hydrocarbons removal
water Zymomonas from
flooded Fermentative pore throats, Oil viscosity
reservoirs bacteria reduction and
Permeability
improvement.
52
Journal Pre-proof
Table 3 Classification of microorganism based on Respiration type, Pressure, Temperature

and pH
S. No Parameter Class of Microorganism

1 Respiration Type Corynebacterium
(i) Aerobic Pseudomonas
Streptococcus
(ii) Anaerobic Bacillus
Clostridium
Desulfovibrio
Leuconostoc
(iii) Facultative Arthobacter
Enterobacter
2 Pressure (MPa) Piezotolerant (1- 50)
Barophilic (40.5- 50.6)
Extreme Barophilic (> 50.6)
Piezophiles (50- 65)
Extreme piezophiles (65- 100)
3 Temperature (℃) Mesophile (5- 52)
Psychrophile (< 42)
Extreme Psychrophile (< 20)
Thermophiles (30- 70)
Extreme thermophile (65- 100)
4 pH Extreme Acidophiles (0- 2)
Acidophiles (2- 5)
Neutrophiles (5- 8)
Alkalophiles (8.5- 11.5)
Extreme Alkalophiles (11.5- 13.5)
53
Journal Pre-proof
Table 4 Microorganisms and their metabolites used in different process oil recovery
Metabolites
S. No Microorganisms Or Technique % recovery References
Used products of oil
1 Bacillus licheniformis Poly gamma- Water flooding 16.6% Azharava et

(glutamic acid) Biopolymer flooding 31.45% al., 2019
2 Chelatococcus Bioemulsifier Core flooding 20.5% Ke et al.,

daeguensis 2019
3 Rhizobium viscosum Biopolymer Sand-pack columns 25.7% Couto et al.,

2018
4 Luteimonas Biosurfactants laboratory based core 11% Ke et al.,
huabeiensis sp column flooding 2018
5 Candida tropicalis Biosurfactants. Sand packed method 39.80% Ashish and
Bacillus subtilis Debnath.,
2018.
6 Pseudomonas sp. Rhamnolipids Core flooding 24.4% Lan et al.,
2015.
7 Genetically Exopolysaccharide Core flooding - Sun et al.,
engineered 2011
Enterobacter cloacae
8 Bacillus licheniformis Bioemulsifier Sand pack column 43% Suthar et
al., 2008
9 Rhodococcus ruber Biosurfactant Sand package 8..88 – Zheng et al.,
technology 25.78% 2012
10 Pseudomonas stutzeri Exopolysaccharide Core flooding 13.56% Zhao et al.,
biopolymer 2018
11 Bacillus subtilis Surfactin isoforms Sand pack test 14.21% Liu et al.,
Biosurfactants Core flood test 31% 2015; Al-
Wahaibi et
al., 2014
12 Bacillus safensis Biosurfactant Core flood experiment 13% De Araujo
et al., 2019
13 Bacillus Biosurfactant MEOR Column 43% Alvarez et
amyloliquefaciens experiment al., 2015
14 Acinetobacter baylyi Biosurfactant Core displacement 28% Zou et al.,
experiment 2014
15 Bacillus licheniformis Biosurfactant Sand packed column 16.6% El-
Candida albicans technique 8.6% Sheshtawy
et al., 2016
54

J Jclepro 2020 120777

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

J Jclepro 2020 120777

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal Pre-proof

A Review on Systematic Approach for Microbial Enhanced Oil Recovery

Anbalagan Saravanan, Ponnusamy Senthil Kumar, Kilaru Harsha Vardhan,

To appear in: Journal of Cleaner Production

Received Date: 23 November 2019

© 2019 Published by Elsevier.

A Review on Systematic Approach for Microbial Enhanced Oil

Anbalagan Saravanan1, Ponnusamy Senthil Kumar2*, Kilaru Harsha Vardhan2, Sathasivam

Jeevanantham1, Suresh Babu Karishma1, Ponnambalam Ragini Yaashikaa2, Parthasarathy

Keywords: Enhanced Oil Recovery; Oil reservoirs; Microbial metabolites; Biosurfactant;

Microbial Biomass; MEOR

Innovation progress, expectations for everyday comforts, industrialization, growing

2018). Expanded chemical usage has prompted an augmentation in ecological contamination.

Artificially, contamination alludes to negative impacts brought about by synthetic compounds

PAHs are generally produced during imperfect combustion or pyrolysis or by exercises of

1.1. Literature study

is ruined by anthropogenic activities because of expanding populaces (David et al., 2018).

Expanding outflow of water natural contaminants causes perilous issues as well as

nanofiltration, reverse osmosis, membrane separation, ozonation, coagulation or flocculation,

(Saravanan et al., 2019b). Toxic synthetic compounds in environment are inadequately

effective treatment of pollutants, valid and perceived innovative bioremediation is utilized

1.2 Novelty Statement

In the present review, various advancements for upgrade of oil recuperation in

incorporates phytoremediation, bioventing, bioaugmentation, biostimulation, its crucial use

enhanced oil recovery process are also described in detail.

2. Environmental pollution by oil

Crude oil is a composite blend of hydrocarbons and heteroelements like oxygen,

hazardous ecological contaminations which are ineluctable (Motesharezadeh et al., 2018;

hydrophobicity (Marin-Garcia et al., 2016).

Oil initiated hydrophobicity is exceptionally relentless and soils stay hydrophobic

zooplanktons results in formative and regenerative anomalies. It likewise prompts mortality

indirectly affects the human health.

3. Techniques - Enhanced oil recovery

types, such as; Physical, Chemical and Biological methods.

microbial byproducts including bioacids, biogases, bio-solvents, biosurfactants, biopolymers

and microbial biomass (Yaashikaa et al., 2019).

3.1 Physical method

were first methods which were used from early days.

3.1.1 Ultrasonic treatment

were mobilized by utilizing pressure wave. Due to ultrasonic stimulation, reduction in

al., 2018; Lim, 2016).

sonophysico-chemical effects (Sivakumar et al., 2020).

Where q˳ is the initial concentration of petroleum hydrocarbon in soil, q* is the residual

adsorption capacity of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (Li et al., 2013).

isolated (Wang et al., 2018; Liu et al., 2015).

3.1.2 Electrokinetic treatment

Blending of several mechanisms increases the efficiency of electrokinetic remediation

process. For example, electro-osmosis and electromigration adds to adequacy of

Electrophoresis and electro migration results in movement of charged molecules or

Electrokinetic method has an advantage as it could be done in-situ thereby providing a

overcome some of other limitations of current bioremediation technologies, bioelectrical

electrodes (Lim et al., 2016).

3.2 Thermal method

3.2.1 Steam injection

contaminated area based on heterogeneous feature of considered parameter (Dong et al.,

for enhanced oil recovery (Shen et al., 2015).

and emulsification phenomenon in the superiority of a steam chamber (Gotawala et al.,

performance of SAGD process (Liua et al., 2018; Mojarad et al., 2016).

3.2.2 Hot water flooding

3.2.3 In-situ combustion

In in-situ combustion, heater or igniter is located in injection well. Continuous

combustion front is propagated towards production well by continuous gas chamber

consumption as consumption of energy is about one tenth compared to steam injection