Overview On Petroleum Emulsions, Formation

Arabian Journal of Chemistry (2018) xxx, xxx–xxx
King Saud University
Arabian Journal of Chemistry

www.ksu.edu.sa
www.sciencedirect.com
REVIEW ARTICLE
Overview on petroleum emulsions, formation,

influence and demulsification treatment techniques
Murtada Mohammed Abdulredha, Siti Aslina Hussain *, Luqman Chuah Abdullah
Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 UPM,
Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia
Received 17 May 2018; accepted 15 November 2018
KEYWORDS Abstract The most challenging aspect in petroleum industry is high produced water accompanying
Emulsion; crude oil extraction. In modern days, environmental attention has become very significant due to
Produced water; large quantity of produced water. Produced water in crude oil extraction consists of a mixture of
Interfacial stability; several compounds, including inorganic, organic and other elements. The elements in produced
Demulsification mechanism; water have a wide environmental influence and sometimes cause poisonous impact on sounded area.
Surfactant Meanwhile, there are several techniques to treat produced water. However, a major part of pro-
duced water is an emulsion and this leads to a major problem associated with crude oil treatment
and transport. At the same time, limitations in treatment techniques for produced water have been
demanding researchers to investigate on demulsification techniques for several years. Researchers
also noted that there are a lot of elements influencing emulsion stability and interfacial film, includ-
ing asphaltenes, resins, solid particles, water and oil content, PH, etc. However, one of the tech-
niques that has received attention in enhanced oil recovery is a chemical method by using
surface active agents (surfactant).
Ó 2018 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of King Saud University. This is an open access
article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
1.1. Water production sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
1.2. Volume of generated water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
1.3. Overall onshore and offshore produced water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: aslina@upm.edu.my (H. Siti Aslina).
Peer review under responsibility of King Saud University.
Production and hosting by Elsevier
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arabjc.2018.11.014
1878-5352 Ó 2018 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of King Saud University.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Please cite this article in press as: Abdulredha, M.M. et al., Overview on petroleum emulsions, formation, influence and demulsification treatment techniques. Arabian
Journal of Chemistry (2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arabjc.2018.11.014
2 M.M. Abdulredha et al.
1.4. Elements influencing on volume of extraction water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00

1.5. Gas generated water toxic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
1.6. Coal bed methane water generated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
2. Risks of generated water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
2.1. Poisonous impact on marine environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
2.2. Examination of chronic toxicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
2.3. Additional influence concerns. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3. Oily wastewater. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.1. Emulsion formation and stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.1.1. The impact of turbulence on emulsification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.1.2. The impact of asphaltenes, resins and other components on emulsification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.1.3. Emulsion thermodynamic aspect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.2. Classification of emulsion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.2.1. Water-in-oil emulsion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.2.2. Oil-in-water emulsion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.2.3. Multiple or complex emulsion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.2.4. Pickering emulsion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
4. Destabilization emulsion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
4.1. Elastic and viscous modulus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
4.2. Time and speed mixing impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
4.3. Size and diffusion droplets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
4.4. Temperature. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
4.5. Solids particles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
4.6. Environment medium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
4.7. Spread phase salinity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
4.8. Water and oil content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
5. Demulsification and desalination of oil recovery processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
5.1. Measurement of stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
5.2. Destabilizing emulsions and demulsification methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
5.3. Surface active agents (surfactants) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
5.4. General classification of surface active agents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
6. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
Acknowledgment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
1. Introduction crude oil or natural gas (Veil et al., 2004). However, the hydro-
carbon compounds are presented as a fluid mixture on the sur-
A survey of fuel remains is one of the most important activities face. The combination of mixture usually depends on the
in recent society because of large fuel-derived products con- nature of hydrocarbons being extracted. The combination nor-
sumption in several areas. To cover the demand for new reser- mally contains liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons, dissolved or
voirs, the search for new fields has risen in past years. In Brazil, solid contaminants, water, solid particles like salts, silt, sand,
exploration of new petroleum wells below the sea has opened iron and additives, such as chemical compounds and injected
several new opportunities, and at the same time it has fluids during production and exploration activities. Further-
demanded for technological expansion in exploration use, more, the process of extraction includes disarmament of water
treatment and petroleum control, besides its products and and this may lead to natural gas migration to other wells. For-
wastes that are created by this activity (Cassella et al., 2011). mation of water from coal bed methane (CBM) production is
The light dense hydrocarbons traveled to gap locations and also concerned as produced water. There are some similar
converted some of the water from the formation to hydrocar- properties between this type of produced water and water from
bon reservoirs. Consequently, these reservoir rocks will usually oil or conventional gas production, but may be very different
contain petroleum hydrocarbons (liquid and gas) together with in composition (Veil et al., 2004). Furthermore, most fields
water. Resources flow through underground water may rise of crude oil often have a higher content of water and fines,
from above or below the hydrocarbon region, flowing from while this combination of fines and high water content pro-
inside the hydrocarbon area, or stream from injected fluids duced very stable crude oil emulsions. The increasing in emul-
and additives during production activities. This type of water sion viscosity due to the large number of small water droplets
is frequently considered as ‘‘connate water” or ‘‘formation often leading to increasing the cost of operation condition
water” and becomes produced water when the reservoir is pro- (Sellman et al., 2013). The emulsion can be produced due to
duced as these fluids are carried to the surface. Produced water contact between two immiscible liquids, the presence of emul-
can be defined as the water that is raised to the surface with the sifying compounds in crude oil, for example, asphaltenes as
hydrocarbon resource and is brought to the surface along with well as turbulence during production activates. While water
Overview on petroleum emulsions, formation, influence and demulsification 3
Fig. 1 Reservoir layers (Igunnu and Chen, 2012).
in oil emulsion very common in petroleum industry compared Petroleum resources normally contain natural water or for-
with other types of emulsion (M.C.K. de Oliveira et al., 2018). mation water mixed with petroleum in oil reservoirs. Fig. 1,
Asphaltenes considered as the primary parameter in stabilizing gives a general imaginary of reservoir layers, where generally
water in oil emulsion even with low content (Zhang et al., water sits below the hydrocarbon seams and formation water
2016). The issue of separating water or breaking water in oil is slightly acidic. In addition, during the hydrocarbon com-
emulsion returns to the beginnings of production of crude pounds extraction, a drop in reservoir pressure. Consequently,
oil. The emulsion in the petroleum industry is very undesirable water is used to maintain the reservoir pressure by injecting
and in the same time, the formation of the emulsion is ineluct- water into the water layers to enhance oil recovery. Moreover,
able. The emulsion should be broken into two-phase before to inject water, there can be water penetration from outside the
transportation and refinery process and meet the specific stan- reservoir zone, and thus, to ensure a continuous oil and gas
dard of water and salt residual, while the content of water production, the time when formation water reaches production
should be less than 1% (Fink, 2015). The process of breaking well begins and production of water besides the hydrocarbons
emulsion into two-phase refers by demulsification terms. Fur- can be considered. This type of water is recognized as pro-
thermore, the process of demulsification process is a very intri- duced water or oilfield brine. Volume of by-product that is
cate process, generally there three basic methods for produced during oil and gas recovery operations is a mixture
demulsification physical, chemical and biological. The effi- of several compounds, including injected water, formation
ciency of methods depends on the capability in minimizing water, treating chemicals and hydrocarbons, that are generally
emulsion stability until the separation occurs (Zolfaghari organized as oilfield produced water, natural gas produced
et al., 2016). In the petrochemical industries, the emulsion water and coal bed methane (CBM) produced water, depend-
must be broken into two phase before further refining process. ing on the source (Chan et al., 2002; Reynolds and Kiker,
While using chemical additives that know as demulsifiers are 2003; Strømgren et al., 1995).
the prevalent mechanism in breaking emulsion (Issaka et al.,
2015). Demulsifiers or surfactant are organic particles that 1.2. Volume of generated water
consist of two parts, polar portion that attractive to the water
phase (hydrophilic) and the non-polar portion that attractive During crude oil and gas extraction, produced water is mostly
to oil phase (hydrophobic). There are basically four sorts of created through the process. In general, oil and gas production
surfactant nonionic, ionic, amphoteric and polymer surfactant from subsurface resources is accompanied by water or brine,
(Cullum, 1994; Salager, 2002; Yu and Xie, 2012). which is also indicated as produced water. At the end of the
This overview paper on previous studies and related litera- reservoirs age, especially after using secondary or tertiary
ture on produce water, emulsion formation, classification, and recovery methods, the amount of produced water from wells
emulsion stability as well as demulsification methods. increases and usually exceeds the volume of the hydrocarbons
before when compared with the first production stage. The
1.1. Water production sources percentage of water produced from reservoirs basically
depends on two factors; location and reservoir age. Generally,
Reservoirs naturally have water in the shape of a denser layer the average for produced water can vary from a few percent in
under the hydrocarbon sheet and usually this water is called the first production stage to more than 95% in the end of
formation water or produced water. Sometimes produced exploitation. Universal experts approximate that for every bar-
water comes from another source exactly from the surface as rel of crude oil, three barrels of produced water are created,
injected water for hydrocarbon compounds extraction to which means that more than half of the reservoir production
achieve high oil recovery. is water (Fakhru’l-Razi et al., 2009). There are two major ways
Onshore water Offshore

300000
250000
BBIS*1000 PER DAY

200000
150000
100000
50000
2009
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
YEAR
Fig. 2 Overall water production of onshore and offshore (Dal Ferro and Smith, 2007).
for produced water removal. The first is by draining water to 1.4. Elements influencing on volume of extraction water
the sea. Water that is to be discharged into the sea is treated
to achieve a certain quality level that is specified by local envi- Reynolds and Kiker (2003) estimated that there are several ele-
ronmental policy. Depending on the spot, the range of 30 to ments that affect the production volume of produced water
40 ppm is the highest average oil in water (OIW) content for besides the age of wells:
drainage (Igunnu and Chen, 2012). The second way for pro-
duced water discharge is by reinjecting and pumping the water Drilling well technique: basically there are two types of well,
into a disposal or a production reservoir. Moreover, the rein- namely horizontal and vertical well, The horizontal well
jection way is more preferred than the first way in handling produced water production is more than that of vertical
produced water from the subsea production and processing well, at the same level of drawdown or become the same
facilities. At the same time, the process also conducts several production if the horizontal well drawdown is reduced.
hazards, for instance reservoir souring or harmful formation Location of well within homogeneous or heterogeneous
due to decline in injectivity. Additionally, emulsified oil dro- reservoirs: the area of wells, especially homogenous reser-
plets and suspended solid particles in the produced water can voirs, take a part in decreasing the production of water,
fill holes in the reservoir and reduce the permeability of forma- and at the same time the increase in production of horizon-
tion. This leads to one fact that high quality is strictly required tal reservoirs versus unstimulated vertical wells is related to
for reinjection and discharge options in handling produced the nature of area that is in contact with the wells.
water (Paige and Sweeney, 1993). So the treatment methods Diverse sorts of completion: generally there are two factors
of produced water can be divided into three types to ensure in these elements that ascertain rules. The first factor is to
processing quality. avoid drilling towards water area and second is an open
hole method which permits testing of drilling regions. How-
1.3. Overall onshore and offshore produced water ever, the second factor (perforated completion method)
gives more control because the area can be perforated and
Total extraction of produced water is approximately 250 mil- tested.
lion barrels per day, while 80 million barrels per day is for Water separation methods: there are several technologies
oil and this reverses the contrast between water and oil produc- that are used for treating and lifting water to reduce cost
tion. Consequently, water to oil percentage is about 3:1 and for wells that produce high amount of saline water.
this shows that water production is 70%. The global water These technologies include treatment by using gelled poly-
extraction has grown since a decade ago and is still rising. Pro- mers to shut-off water, dropping beam pump lifting costs
duced water production is usually matured in the old wells, but and the power options help to drop the electrical costs
for driven down depends on the methods used for managing and separation technologies.
and entering of new oil wells into the service (Dal Ferro and Water flooding and injection to enhance oil recovery: the
Smith, 2007; Khatib and Verbeek, 2003). Fig. 2 gives an esti- production rate of oil wells will progressively drop with
mate of onshore and offshore produced water extraction since time, so use water flooding to maintain a steady production
1990 until 2014. rate. As a result of water flooding, the water production
ratio will become higher at the same time as the water injec- time. In addition, water quantity is the other point of difference
tion volume increases. In this case, it is essential to treat in CBM produced water from oil and gas. produce water in
water with chemical characteristics. This is very important production stage. The quantity of CBM produced aqueous
for produced water treatment, or makeup to enable sealing, phase is high in quantity at the first stage of production and
clay swelling and brine incompatibilities. reduces towards the final stage of production. Simultaneously,
Low mechanical integrity: mechanical problems cause a lot when the size of aqueous phase is decreasing in CBM, the quan-
of water entries and one of these problems is casting holes tity of methane extraction increases. There are two general
which are caused by wear or corrosion, and splits caused ways to deal with produced water from CBM; one is by pro-
by flows; extreme pressure can let undesirable fluids to enter cessing and pulling to the surface or reinjecting. The nature
and raise water production. of produced water from CBM vary, depending on three point
Underground communications: usually difficulties in under- of the original depositional environment, i.e., nature of coal,
ground communications occur near reservoirs or wellbores. and coal layers depth, and these properties alter across extrac-
All these difficulties work on rising produced water. Near tion regions (Jackson and Myers, 2002).
wellbore problems are fence failures, completions and route The amount of produced water increases with rise in CBM
behind casing. Reservoir related challenges are channeling, production, and at the same time, the concern about produced
coning, cresting across higher permeability areas or frac- water influence on the environment is growing, while there are
tures and fracturing out of area. some suspicions related to the environment effect of these
water. Moreover, relevant managers and engineer are keen
on environmental safety. The data of produced water are
1.5. Gas generated water toxic increasing and there are several states which provide informa-
tion about produced water. These sources include institutes
During gas extraction, produced water is separated at the same and different states ground water information centers in the
time. However, the construction water and condensed water USA. The organizations which collect information, confirm
that are included in gas process is produced water. The charac- the information, assessing the dependability and reliability of
teristics of produced water that is extracted during gas produc- information is done through DOE and the Bureau of Mines,
tion are distinguished by the molecular-weight contents, like and the USGS organization. Simultaneously, not all data
ethylbenzene, toluene, xylene (BTEX) and benzene. All these about the effect of CBM production are totally understood.
contents are considered as light aromatic hydrocarbons com-
pounds as compared to produced water that is produced from 2. Risks of generated water
oil. In addition, these compounds make water relatively more
toxic. At the same time, many research point out that pro- Produced water can form several environmental effects,
duced water from oil platforms is about 10 times less toxic depending on the area that water is produced. However, dis-
than water extracted from gas/condensate platforms (Jacobs charges into small streams have more influence on the environ-
et al., 1992). In addition, the water production volume from ment than the discharges in open ocean due to the importance
offshore gas fields is lower. Normally, chemical additives that of dilution that occurred after drainage. The influence of water
are used during gas extraction consist hydrogen sulfide, dehy- extraction is related to several factors; the accompanying parts
dration and elimination compounds. In addition, there is a which talk about the potential effects that depend on the area
wide range of chemical elements that exist during water pro- where production occurred and the type of produced water.
duction from gas platforms. Chemicals include brines solution,
additives and inorganic acids (Stephenson, 1992). The charac- 2.1. Poisonous impact on marine environment
teristics of produced water from offshore oil platforms are
greatly different from produced water from gas platforms Effects are identified as exposure of life to different chemical
Jacobs et al. (1992) researched in the North Sea and found that concentrations. Components that have influence are quantity
pH and chlorides concentrations were 8.1 and 19 g/L, alter- of delivered water compounds and solution density. Thus,
nately. The pH for produced water from crude oil wells in
their potential effect on sea-going living beings are incorpo-
the North Sea was 6 to 7.7, while 3.5 to 5.5 was from gas wells, rated in the following points (Georgie et al., 2001):
which was more acidic. Chloride concentration was about 1 to
189 g/L for produced water from gas production, while pro-
Decrease the release in environment.
duced water from oil wells was 12 to 100 g/L. Sudden and longstanding sedimentation.
Evaporation of light hydrocarbons compounds.
1.6. Coal bed methane water generated The interaction between some species in seawater and
physical-chemical of produced water have influence on
Water production from coal bed methane (CBM) varies in delivered water segments.
three basic point compositions; influence on environments, pro- Adsorption on particulate material.
duction technique from oil and gas and traditional technique of Biodegradation of natural mixes to less complex mixes.
produced water. Water content in the coal layers leads to a rise
in hydrostatic pressure and this helps to adsorb methane on the Inside the marine condition, it is important to recognize
crystal surface. One of the methods that is used to remove shallow, ineffectively flushed waterfront zones and the vast
methane from the crystalline body is by decreasing the reservoir sea. For seaside processes, the accepting conditions can incor-
head in the coal layers. During extraction, water holds methane porate shallow, near shore zones, bogs and regions. There are
in the coal layers, while produced water is created at the same many examinations done on destiny and impacts of water that
is releaseed into the waterfront situations of the Gulf of Mex- area due to the large offshore extraction. The examination of
ico (Rabalais et al., 1992). Rabalais et al. (1992), approved that chronic toxicity in the Gulf of Mexico provides poor control.
released water has pollute impact and hat depend on size and
concentration of regional hydrocarbon. Perceiving the poten- 2.3. Additional influence concerns
tial for shallow-water impacts, EPA prohibited the releases
of produced water into beach front waters with an eliminate The water production from wells increases with age of wells,
period beginning in 1997 (Rabalais et al., 1992), noted that and at the same time the production and treating prior to
profound water and quick streams; thus, give more than satis- water from deep offshore platforms will rise. Furthermore,
factory weakening. Moreover, in spite of the fact that residue there is limitation in using common treatment methods of pro-
contamination is obvious at most studied areas, impacts on the duced water due to the lake in the space and movement on the
benthic groups might be restricted or not apparent. For off- rigs. This lead to increase in challenges on which techniques
shore activities, key components cover concentration of con- should be applied for treating the produced water and under-
stituents and different features of the constituents, for standing of compounds in the water, besides how these ele-
example, poisoning, bioavailability and shape. Real destiny ments effect on the environment and which of these
and impacts fluctuate with volume and structure of the release compounds will increase. In addition, the acute toxicity of pro-
and the hydrologic and physical qualities of the receiving envi- duced water depends on concentration of compounds water
ronment (Rabalais et al., 1992). A key concern is the potential and the inside production area. Chemical additives, antagonis-
for poisonous consequences for living amphibian due to tic effects and synergistic can cause or increase the produced
release water into the water environments, like estuarine and water acute toxicity (Veil et al., 2004).
marine.
3. Oily wastewater
2.2. Examination of chronic toxicity
The water extraction from offshore and onshore wells is pro-
Most oil and gas offshore wells are subjected to chronic toxi- duced as ‘‘free” water or sometimes as an emulsion. Any two
city examination under EPA organization. The examination immiscible liquids, like water in oil, can be classified as emul-
result was positive and showed that there was no poisonous sion (Lim et al., 2015). Basically there are three common types
water problems in the USA. In other countries, especially in of emulsion as follows:
North Sea, the researchers focused more on compound inter-
actions effect of chemical martials and applied new methods Water-in-oil (W/O) emulsion
to control produced water. For instance, in Norway, there Oil-in-water (O/W) emulsion
are numerous programs applied to reduce poisonous dis- Multiple emulsion
charges into the environment (Johnsen et al., 2000; Veil
et al., 2004). Furthermore, these methods or programs depend The common type of emulsion in the petroleum industry,
on comparing the predicted from spirited concentrations of which is water-in-oil emulsion, is emulsion with water drops
each element, without any concentration, and see the harmful diffused in the oil constant phase. Oil-in-water is a contrast
effects on the environment. There are two basic assessment of previous type of emulsion. Multifaceted emulsion or multi-
program models (DREAM) and dose-related risk applied to ple emulsion is water-in-oil-in-water (W/O/W) emulsion added
estimate the environmental impact factor (EIF). Moreover, to oil-in-water-in-oil (O/W/O) emulsion (Khan et al., 2011;
this method depends on the quantitative work to estimate Schramm, 1992b). while in each field there are many applica-
the impact of each extraction. This technique is very viable tions of these emulsions. In petroleum, food and pharmaceuti-
with Norwegian due to limited offshore production in the cal the O/W and W/O emulsions are more common than the
North Sea. At the same time this technique is not very com- multiple emulsion (Garti, 1997; Lee et al., 2004; Oh et al.,
mon in the Gulf of Mexico because it is not workable in such 2002; Okochi and Nakano, 2000), while in each field there
Fig. 3 Upstream equipment for crude oil production (Wang, 2005).
Fig. 4 Water-in-oil emulsions formation (Hanapi et al., 2006).
Fig. 5 Molecular structure for asphtenes in Tulare crude oil (Varadaraj and Brons, 2012).
are many applications of these emulsions. In petroleum, food ume of spills (Fingas, 1995; Fingas and Fieldhouse, 2003,
and pharmaceutical the O/W and W/O emulsions are more 2004). Researchers have reported that emulsification affects
common than the multiple emulsion (Julio et al., 2015; physical properties, where it normally increases the volume,
Schramm, 1992b). Emulsification refers to the emulsions for- density and viscosity of spills.
mation process. The water-in-oil emulsion is a challenge in
the petroleum industry and some spill workers call it as 3.1. Emulsion formation and stability
‘‘chocolate mousse” or ‘‘mousse” (Fingas and Fieldhouse,
2003). Emulsification is the second challenge facing the oil One of the most major problems in the petroleum industry,
and gas industry, after evaporation. This is what most especially mature oil fields, is high water quantity accompany-
researchers assume due to the impact of emulsion on the qual- ing crude oil extraction. Besides that, during desalting and
ity of operations and environment (Fingas and Fieldhouse, steam treatment of crude oil, water is injected into the process.
2003). Emulsification is commonly used in upstream petroleum Generally, there are three important factors that cause emul-
industries, especially in pipeline flow. In addition, the percent- sion in the petroleum industry, which are turbulent flows, pres-
age of produced water increases towards the end life of wells sure change in chokes valve and other valves during crude oil
(Lim et al., 2015). Fig. 3 shows the general picture of upstream extraction. Emulsions play certain rules in increasing the cost
equipment for crude oil production. of transportation and pumping of crude oil, facilitated corro-
The oil spills or emulsions properties and features are influ- sion and crude oil production equipment processing plant cat-
enced by physical factors, such as oil viscosity, density and vol- alysts damage (Schramm, 1992a; Sjöblom et al., 1992, 1995).
Schubert and Armbruster (1989), concluded there are three making high viscoelastic films surrounded the water droplets
basics reason to form emulsion, which are: while resins reinforced the stability by replacing the asphaltene
when the asphaltene connection decreased for a period of time.
Interaction between two immiscible fluids, for example, oil Generally, researchers have showed that the composition of
and water. crude oil is the most important factor in an emulsification pro-
Existence of emulsifying agents inside the crude oil such as cess cover the type of asphaltene, resin and concentration of
asphaltenes and resins. compounds. Aspaltenes cover a wide range of elements.
Diffusion of one liquid into another due to turbulence flow Graham et al. (2008), classifying the elements into two types;
or mixing energy. binding and nonbinding, depending on the effect on emulsifi-
cation process, where the elements that have impact on binding
other nonbinding. Czarnecki (2008), found that after studying
3.1.1. The impact of turbulence on emulsification several fractions, each fraction has different compounds, such
Disturbance or mixing energy was the first reason to create as sulfur and oxygen. In addition, after the emulsion is sepa-
emulsion. That was what researchers concluded in the 1970s rated into two phases, there are some droplets which is unable
(Haegh and Ellingsen, 1977; Wang and Huang, 1979). to be separated by an interface. Varadaraj and Brons (2012),
Schubert and Armbruster (1989), found that turbulence in see there are many types of emulsion like W/O, W/O/W, O/
the pipeline flow helped to create emulsion by mixing two W, etc. emulsions are inside the portion of rag. Furthermore
fluid-like flow system of crude oil and water. Besides that, tur- they noted that the broken emulsion has high concentration
bulence has an impact on coalescence and break up of emul- of asphaltenes. There are many studies about emulsion and
sions (Schubert and Armbruster, 1989). Turbulence researchers have reached the fact that asphaltene has an
suppression happens due to contact between emulsion droplets impact on emulsification process (Gu et al., 2002; Kilpatrick
and other liquids (constant phase). The scientific reason behind and Spiecker, 2001; Yarranton et al., 2000). Synergistic com-
the occurrence of turbulence suppression is that kinetic energy pounds can be considered as other factors that help in stabiliz-
of one liquid (single-phased) becomes higher than the other ing emulsion by forming rigid and elastic films around water
two liquids (two-phased) at the same liquid flow rate. Further- droplets and one of the common synergistic compounds is
more, a portion of the kinetic energy is transferred to emul- resins. Mechanism of asphaltenes in working and matching
sions from the two-phased stream and this makes the kinetic intermolecular interactions are not totally understood.
energy of two-phased less than single-phased. At the same Research focus generally on emulsion stabilizing through
time, when the power or kinetic energy is transferred from asphaltenes and neglected to measure the exact stability
single-phased to the particle, the turbulent strength is declined (Kilpatrick and Spiecker, 2001). Besides, there are other fac-
(Schubert and Armbruster, 1989). Fig. 4 clearly shows the tors, including inorganic and organic solid particles and waxes,
stage of water-in-oil emulsions formation. can improve the stability of emulsions (Sztukowski and
Kobayashi et al. (2002), did an experiment on emulsion for- Yarranton, 2004). Asphaltenes construction is anonymous
mulation by using a membrane through injection of diffused and asphaltenes can be known from the deposition of oil in
phase into constant phase by the membrane pores. Besides, aromatic hydrocarbons, like pentane and hexane. In addition,
many researchers had reported about the impact of velocity the molecular weight of asphaltene is approximately 750 Dal-
flow of single-phased and several types of surfactant on mem- tons and surrounded by other compounds, such as alkane, S,
brane emulsification characteristics. These studies focused on N, etc. (Groenzin and Mullins, 2007). Another factor, such
three point effect of diameter range, surfactants on membrane as time, has side effects through enhanced the emulsion stabil-
emulsification and impact of several types of surfactant on ity by rising the complex modulus by 2° in time; from 2 h to
emulsion stability. 4 h. This happens due to the impact of the time on crosslinking
and aggregation of asphaltene on the interface film, and thus
improves the film strength. The diffusion of asphaltenes on
3.1.2. The impact of asphaltenes, resins and other components on interface film in W/O emulsion showed the mechanism of
emulsification emulsion formation. However, what caused emulsion stability
Crude oil comprises of asphaltenes and resins (also called func- is asphaltenes because asphaltenes are made into rigid, elastic
tional molecules). These molecules contain heteroatoms, such and stable film (Lobato et al., 2007; Zhang et al., 2005). Arla
as nitrogen, oxygen and sulfur. This causes acidic and basic et al. (2007), showed that some part of asphaltenes have more
traits in petroleum-based fluids, and thus stabilize water-in- effects than the other part, especially the acid fraction in mak-
oil emulsions (Subramanian et al., 2017). Alphaltenes are ing W/O emulsion more stable. At the same time, many
regarded as having the strongest stability of water-in-oil emul- research (Spiecker and Kilpatrick, 2004; Yang et al., 2004),
sion, because they contain aromatic and polycyclic aromatic have approved that, the stability of emulsion basically depends
hydrocarbons, Fig. 5, shows the molecular structure for on two-factor fractions and concentration of asphaltenes.
asphaltenes in Tulare crude oil. Other studies focused on the impact of resins on W/O emul-
Before 40 years ago, researchers, concluded that asphalte- sion (Fingas and Fieldhouse, 2009). Researcher have fre-
nes take an important part in stabilizing of water-in-oil quently noted on the impact of resins, in which one of them
(W/O) emulsion. These days, the researchers have more under- noted that if resins were added at a ratio of 2:1 (resins:as-
stood the emulsification process than the past (Czarnecki, phaltenes) it will enhance the stability of W/O emulsion twice
2008; Sjöblom et al., 2003). Canevari (1982), showed or clear than without resins (Kilpatrick and Spiecker, 2001). Another
how asphaltene affect by preventing water droplets from coa- study (Ali and Alqam, 2000), showed that, raising the ratio
lescence by making a thick layer on the water surface droplets. of (resins:asphaltenes) in crude oil will enhance the stability
In addition the asphaltene assistedemulsion stability by of W/O emulsion. Pereira et al. (2007), showed that resins
Fig. 6 Thermodynamic phenomenon’s in nanoemulsions (Gupta et al., 2016).
can be found in crude oil, depending on the type of resins. The nes atoms. In normal conditions, asphaltenes adsorb resins to
adsorption of resin on iterfical film depends on several factors, enhance the aggregation and precipitation of asphaltenes.
including silica and asphaltenes, however, some resins are Other studies Spiecker et al. (2003), noted that resins work
more adsorptive on the same surface. Other studies showed on solvated asphaltenes and besides that, they approve that
that the important factor which can decide, whether resins there are interplays between the atoms of resins and asphal-
would stabilize asphaltenes or not. is self-interaction. Silset tenes. On the other hand, resins comprise surface active mate-
et al. (2010), saw that several emulsion stabilities can be rials, which are aromatic ring, long-chain carboxylic acid,
explained through the interaction between resins and asphalte- esters and phenols. Furthermore, resins could also develop
Fig. 7 Optical microscopic image of W/O emulsion; (a) without surfactant and (b) with 200 ppm copolymer (Le Follotec et al., 2010).
an interfacial film structure of a particular strength. Since the

stability of oil-in-water (O/W) emulsion in conjunction with
resins is the strongest, and thus a higher absolute value of zeta
potential for oil droplet surface. Nonetheless, wax comprises
small occurrences of interfacial active materials, whereby it
only comprises short-chain cycloalkanes and hydrocarbons,
leading to the weakest stability of oil-in-water (O/W) and
water-in-oil (W/O) emulsions developed by wax model oil oil
(Zhang et al., 2016). There are less study on other factors, such
as waxes have impact or not on W/O emulsion, at the same
time, waxes have impact on some emulsions like food formu-
lation when waxes are in molten or deformed shape (Binks
and Rocher, 2009).
3.1.3. Emulsion thermodynamic aspect

The unchanged in emulsion properties for a certain period of
time can be defined by term ‘‘emulsion stability”. In the same
time, thermodynamically emulsion a considered as an unstable
system and emulsion properties will change slowly as well as
there are various phenomena that occur during the change in
emulsion properties including creaming, flocculation, Ostwald
ripening, coalescence, etc. However, these phenomena may
occur combined together or individual. The emulsion is a sys-
tem of two-phase or more than in most case have media with
various densities. The difference density between droplets and
continuous phase determine the movement of droplets. There
are two phenomenon related two the movement of droplets Fig. 8 Optical microscope images for O/W emulsion prepared
creaming and sedimentation. Creaming phenomenon occurs with (A) Eucalyptus globulus and (B) Citrus limon (Sousa et al.,
when the droplets move up due to the low density of droplets 2014).
reverse the sedimentation that happens when droplets move
down due to high density. Generally, oil has a density less than
the water, consequently, the sedimentation phenomenon takes Water-in-oil emulsion.
place in water in oil emulsion and creaming phenomenon in oil Mesostable water-in-oil emulsions.
in water emulsion (Derkach, 2009; Nollet, 2004; Robins, 2000; Entrained water.
Robins et al., 2002). Single droplets velocity v in creaming Unstable water-in-oil emulsion.
emulsion which is not deformation can be found by Stokes for-
mula (Nollet, 2004). Other research divided emulsion to three general groups, as
follows (Kokal, 2005).
2gr ðqcont qdrop Þ
2
v¼ ð1Þ
9gcont Water-in-oil emulsion
where r, g, qcont, qdrop, gcont are present droplet radius, gravity Oil-in-water emulsion
acceleration, continuous phase density, droplet density and Multiple emulsion
continuous phase Newtonian viscosity. Other phenomenon is
flocculation which is droplets are gathering in emulsion to
form droplets flocs due to attractive interactions (Gupta 3.2.1. Water-in-oil emulsion
et al., 2016). While the merging of droplets describe as coales- In the petroleum industry, water-in-oil emulsion is very com-
cence phenomenon and the coalescence occur when the film mon, as shown in Fig. 7. At the same time crude oil cannot
between two droplets collapses (Marrucci, 1969). While the be refined and transported, before the water-in-oil is broken
process of gradual growth of coalescence droplets into large into two-phased (Mukherjee and Kushnick, 1988; Xia et al.,
droplet in emulsion is defined by Ostwald ripening terms as 2004). During the crude oil extraction, there are many contents
show in Fig. 6 which clear the thermodynamic aspect in accompanying crude oil, such as oily sludge, water and solid
nanoemulsions. content. Concurrently, the percentages for these compounds
are 30–50 wt% oil, 10–12 wt% solid content and 30–50 wt%
3.2. Classification of emulsion water. The solid content works on enhanced emulsion by sta-
bilizing through the adsorbed partials on interfacial film. The
There are many classifications for emulsion, the most common oily sludge in crude oil is harmful to human health, so it is
is by sorting emulsion into four types (Fingas and Fieldhouse, important to apply crude oil for recovery in the sludge disposal
2003; Fingas et al., 2003). Fingas et al. (2003), had classified (Elektorowicz et al., 2006; Hu et al., 2013; Zhang et al., 2012).
emulsion into four basic types, depending on three factors; sta- Furthermore, the sludge recovery was reviewed many times
bility, appearance and rheological measurements, as shown (Hu et al., 2013). The stability of emulsion is affected by sev-
below. eral factors including viscosity, water content, density and
element content of crude oil, while the previous factors change,

depending on the wells and change the emulsion stability
(Rodionova et al., 2014; Roodbari et al., 2016). Asphaltenes,
waxes, resins, etc. All can be considered as surface-active mate-
rials and these elements are absorbed at the interfacial film
which prevent the water droplets from coalescence. At the
same time, N-, O-, S-, SiAOH and SiAOA bonding works
on improving the emulsion stability (McLean and Kilpatrick,
1997; Mukherjee and Kushnick, 1988; Oren and MacKay,
1977; Poindexter and Marsh, 2009; Thompson et al., 1985).
Moreover, asphaltenes and resins are the most effective factors
in enhancing the emulsion stability, while the asphaltenes are
soluble in aromatic hydrocarbon, such as toluene but is not
soluble in alkanes. In contrast, resins with asphaltenes is sol-
Fig. 9 Photomicrograph of typical w/o/w emulsion (Florence
uble in both aliphatic and aromatic solutions. The reason that
and Whitehill, 1982).
made asphaltenes and resins to enhance the emulsion stability
is due to hydrophilic functional groups in their structure (Yang
et al., 2008). The interfacial films’ rigidity depends on what is reported (Masalova et al., 2003). The difference with models
deposited on the surface, whether asphaltenic or resins, while currently available could be accredited to a strong interfacial
asphaltenic will make the interfacial films stronger than resi- tension, which is greater than those of equilibrium values.
nous materials. Demulsification method can be used to break The stronger interfacial tension could explain the reason
emulsion by weakening the interfacial film or immobile inter- behind the lack of inversion occurrence within oil-in-water
facial films, and this helps the droplets to coalescence. In addi- emulsion. The apparent viscosity (which scales as a minus
tion, the elasticity and the emulsion stability are affected by fourth power of continuous phase volume fraction) within
several factors and the most important factors are aromatic the continuous phase of emulsion relies greatly on volume frac-
degree, concentration of asphaltene and resin, resin-to- tion for the oil-in-water emulsion studies of current versus pre-
asphaltene percentage and dose of hydrophilic functional vious experiments (Pons et al., 1995).
groups in crude oil (McLean and Kilpatrick, 1997; Reducing the aeration of oil-in-water emulsion and density
Mohammed et al., 1993; Xia et al., 2004). Resin can work in variance, decreases the velocity of oil droplet (single phase) in
high concentration with asphaltene as a destabilizing agent water phase (continues phase). Consequently, this makes O/W
due to the P-P and polar bonding (Graham et al., 2008; emulsion more stable eventually. Moreover, by reducing the
Schorling et al., 1999; Spiecker et al., 2003). The hydrocarbon density difference between two phases, this well help to prevent
phase is different from crude oil in water-in-oil emulsion and oil droplet as well as air-water surface and oil droplet from
synthetic. Normally, nonionic surfactant can be used for emul- coalescence. During aeration, there are four parameters that
sion stabilization (Chistyakov, 2001). There are noteworthy can be manipulated to decrease the oil droplet in water veloc-
differences between the oilfield emulsions contents against ity. This is done to optimize stabilization of powdered o/w
demulsification and model emulsions, during the crude oil emulsions. These parameters include the density difference
extraction, there are several inhibitors added like corrosion between two phases, water phase viscosity, aeration speed
inhibitor, scale inhibitor, clay stabilizer, etc. (Zaid, 1987; and oil droplet diameter (Murakami et al., 2014). Droplet floc-
Zolfaghari et al., 2016). culation has a strong correlation with the creaming stability of
monodisperse oil-in-water emulsions. Hydrodynamic effects
3.2.2. Oil-in-water emulsion and particle-particle interactions are responsible for the
Due to various properties, from non-Newtonian behavior, increase of droplet flocculation and reduction of droplet con-
elasticity and time emulsions have garnered attention as a very centration. Consequently, this leads to the increase of cream-
important topic of study for rheological investigations. The ing velocity, which could be modeled by utilizing equations
term ‘‘emulsions” is characterized by numerous blends of formulated to model it in nonflocculated systems. However,
immiscible liquids, of which include polymeric substances. As for accurate modeling of this phenomenon, the increase of
a rule of thumb, one denotes mixtures of low molecular weight effective volume fraction due to flocculation should be noted
(e.g., water and oil). The various blends of emulsions can be as well. The results of the preceding phenomenon, studied by
widely observed in technological applications from pharma- Chanamai and McClements (2000), bear many crucial implica-
ceuticals, enhanced oil recovery and food processing, as well tions towards the formulation of various commercially rele-
as biological systems. Fig. 8 shows oil-in-water emulsion, oil- vant emulsion-based products. The study was conducted to
in-water emulsion (i.e., oil submersed in highly-concentrated produce a stable O/W emulsion by using diesel as oil and sor-
emulsions) could form when surfactants of the block copoly- bitan monooleate as the emulsifier. It was found that the opti-
mer type are used with volume fractions being higher than mal emulsifier dosage was 0.5% by volume and that lower
0.96. This type of emulsion could be brought to balance by uti- emulsifier dosages led to unstable emulsions. The lack of emul-
lizing surfactants with a low HLB value. A single Maxwell ele- sion stability at higher dosages was accredited to rapid coales-
ment could appropriately represent the emulsion rheological cence and concentration. The next finding concluded that the
behavior. While the shear varies in linear proportion to the increase of emulsion stability varied inversely with oil-to-
volume fraction, a proper correlation between shear modulus water ratio. The optimal ratio was found to be 1:1 by volume.
as well as the ratio of interfacial tension to radius was not The third finding showed that higher stirring intensity resulted
Fig. 10 Optical micrographs at different storage times for (a) styrene/water Pickering emulsions and (b) water/styrene Pickering
emulsions (Xie et al., 2018).
in emulsions, which were more stable; thus, the best stirring Relatively small reproducibility is found within these unin-
intensity was found to be 2500 rpm. Fourth, high temperature tended preparations which results in low level of multiple
was shown to reduce emulsion stability, with the most optimal drops and instability. While multiple structures may appear
emulsifying temperature being 308 °C. Lastly, emulsion stabil- in numerous liquid-liquid interactions, they are usually so
ity varied linearly with stirring time until 15 min. After this unstable so as to be imperceivable (Florence and Whitehill,
time, the stability varied inversely with stirring time because 1982).
of the drop-out of emulsifier within the oil–water interface
(Chen and Tao, 2005). 3.2.4. Pickering emulsion
High sustained demands for energy with limited crude oil
3.2.3. Multiple or complex emulsion recovery leading to increase the demand for discovering new
The term ‘multiple emulsions’ refers to soft materials made by resources of energy and enhancement the techniques of crude
outer droplets (i.e., droplets which are dispersed) which com- oil recovery. The rare new resources of crude oil drive the oil
prised of smaller droplets inside (i.e., inner droplets). Various producer to exploitation and enhancement the oil recovery
applications may be satisfied by the multi-compartmental fea- as the only option to cover the world energy demands
ture, comprising tight spaces in continuum, detailed prior by (Sharma et al., 2015). Pickering emulsion is suitable in apply-
Binks and Rocher (2009). The common terminology for nor- ing for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) by stabilizing emulsion
mal, double or multiple emulsions may be categorized as oil- with nanoparticles (SiO2 and clay) and oilfield polymer poly-
in-water-in-oil (O/W/O) or water-in-oil-in-water (W/O/W). acrylamide (PAM) in the presence of surfactant (Sharma
The various categorizations are based on the phase sequence et al., 2014). Pickering emulsions can be described as the emul-
of various scales. For this common terminology, the ‘water’ sion stabilized by solids molecules (Zolfaghari et al., 2016).
refers to any polar or aqueous phase and ‘oil’ refers to Fig. 10 clear Pickering emulsions stabilize by carbonaceous
hydrophobic, or water-insoluble phase (Silva et al., 2016). In materials. Pickering emulsion is characterized by environmen-
modern times, development of double or multiple emulsions tally friendly, biologically compatible and more stability
comprises tiny water droplets interspersed amongst bigger oil against coalescence, thus Pickering emulsion application opens
globules, which are in turn interspersed among aqueous con- the door in petroleum, pharmaceuticals, biomedicine, cosmet-
tinuous phases (Bonnet et al., 2010). Even though multiple ics and food industries (Tang et al., 2015). Furthermore, Pick-
emulsion systems have been recognized in modern science, sig- ering emulsion formation including the diffusion the solid
nificant attention was paid to these systems only within the last particles in the continuous phase, so the solid particles adsorb
15 years. Photomicrograph representations of the water-in-oil- on water/oil interfacial file to make electrostatic and steric pro-
in-water multiple emulsion configuration drop are shown in tective layer that prevent droplets coalescence. While the solid
Fig. 9. The two dispersed phases could clearly be perceived, particles adsorption in two immiscible interphases depends on
whereby the small internal aqueous droplets which are sur- particles wettability (Tang et al., 2015). Pickering emulsions
rounded by a surfactant-stabilizing layer, are interspersed response to external triggers like light intensity, temperature,
amongst the oil phases. Consequently, this is interspersed in pH and other variables. Dai et al. (2018), investigate the effect
the outer equeous phase, which is also surrounded by surfac- of composite zein – propylene glycol alginate particles
tant layer (Florence and Whitehill, 1982). Water-in-oil-in- (ZPGAPs) on stabilizing oil in water Pickering emulsion.
water emulsion poses the same advantages of water-in-oil The result shows that (ZPGAPs) may help in stabilizing oil
emulsion while also having a lower viscosity because of the in water Pickering emulsion. In addition, the ionic strength
lower viscosity of the aqueous external phase. This character- has a significant effect on Pickering emulsion stability through
istic makes the particular configuration more convenient to changing the range and magnitude of electrostatic interactions
control and for applications like for injection (Florence and (Dai et al., 2018). Xie et al. (2018), study the influence of par-
Whitehill, 1982). ticle concentration, homogenization speed, pH, oil type, size
distribution on Pickering emulsion. The result shows that et al., 1997). The calculations of rheology emulsion depend on
increasing homogenization speed and particle concentration interfacial tension because the shear forces on surfaces influ-
increase the emulsion stability. While the pH and oil types ence on deformation and internal circulation of droplets in
show no effect on the stability of the emulsion. Schröder the emulsion. Lee et al. (1997), suggest the following formula
et al. (2018), use microfluidic cross-flow device to study the to find the macroscopic two-phase fluid stress tensor.
coalescence stability and formation Pickering emulsions by
rij ¼ gm dij þ dji þ ðvrtÞ þ ðmdtÞ þ ðptÞ ð2Þ
colloidal lipid particle (CLP). The result show particle cover-
age plays a major role in droplets coalescence. CLP has pre- where gm and dij= @ui/@xj are a symbol of continuous phase
vented droplets coalescence at high surface coverage and viscosity and gradient tensor velocity respectively. In addition,
destabilizing emulsion at low surface coverage. In the petro- pt, mdt and vrt represent the pressure term, morphology-
leum industry, the application of stimuli-responsive Pickering dependent term and viscosity ratio term sequentially and can
emulsifiers may be enhanced the crude oil recovery, reduce be calculated as the following equation (Lee et al., 1997).
the operation cost and reduce the demand for energy-
6 gi gm
intensive (Tang et al., 2015). vrt ¼ g / dij þ dji ð3Þ
10 gi þ gm m
4. Destabilization emulsion 16gm þ 19gi
mdt ¼ g /ðdij þ dji Þ ð4Þ
10ðgm þ gi Þ m
Development of stable emulsion is heavily unwanted in the
petroleum industry but, inevitable. This is because the interfa- where / is volume fraction of first order. The capillary number
cial active fractions within crude oil are vital to the develop- for spherical droplet in the diluted emulsion can be calculate
ment and oil emulsion stability (described as dispersed water by the formula (Lee et al., 1997).
droplets resistance towards coalescence). To explain further, g c
Ca ¼ m ð5Þ
coalescence refers to the united bonding of diversed particles a!0
or droplets to form one greater droplet (Chen and Tao, where a and c represent the interfacial tension and shear rate
2005). Under the perspective of thermodynamics, an emulsion respectively. Many researchers predicted the relative viscosity
is considered an unstable system due to the fact that a liquid- of emulsion gr by applying semi empiric models. While rela-
liquid system encounters a natural inclination to disperse, tivee viscosity can be calculated by following equation (C.B.
thereby reducing its interfacial area (in other words, its interfa- de Oliveira et al., 2018).
cial energy as well). Nevertheless, the majority of emulsions
g
tend to be stable over time because they possess kinetic stabil- gr ¼ e ð6Þ
gc
ity (Schramm, 1992a). Oil-field produced emulsions that are
categorized depending on their degree of kinetic stability as where gc and ge are the viscosity of the continuous phase and
shown below (Tambe and Sharma, 1993). emulsions respectively. Non-Newtonian and Newtonian
behavior were applied to predict the viscosity of water in crude
Loose emulsions: which refers to those that will diverge oil emulsions. Pal (1996), investigate the effect of droplet size
within a few minutes. The term ‘free water’ is credited to in oil in water and water in oil emulsions on rheological. It
separated water. was concluded that the coarse emulsions are less storage mod-
Medium emulsions: which will separate within tens of uli and viscosities compering with fine emulsions. In the same
minutes. time, the fine emulsion show low rheological properties and
Tight emulsions: which will separate, wholly or partially, viscosity reduce with the decrease in low shear stresses (see
within hours up to days. Table 1).
Crude oil with high percentage of asphaltenes is insoluble in
The various types of parameters involved in chemical n-heptane and naphthenic acids, besides that, this type of
demulsification, which, if altered may either reduce or rise crude oil it is difficult to handle and refine. This is so because
the emulsion stability are discussed in the following section. during crude oil production, produced water commonly emul-
sifies into the crude oil, and thus lead to water-in-oil emulsion
4.1. Elastic and viscous modulus (Varadaraj and Brons, 2012). There is an inverse relationship
between the creaming rate and oil volume, while the creaming
Emulsion considers as a system consists from immiscible liquid rate and oil volume correlated with viscosity. The creaming
two or more, while the stability of this system depends on the rate and oil volume can be calculated from steady state mea-
presence of adsorbed surfactant on the interfacial system (Lee surement and power law of fluid model. At the same time,
Table 1 Properties of asphaltenes at water-in-oil emulsion (Varadaraj and Brons, 2012).

Interfacial property Hamaca Hoosier Tulare Celtic Talco Cold Lake
E at t = 5 min (mN/m) 11.9 2.4 5.7 2.6 1.3 6.6
E at = 5 h (mN/m) 31 24 38 13 5 22
c (mN/m) 21 19 21 26 22 23
Emulsion stability (%) 59 41 70 21 10 40
Table 2 Summary of demulsification technologies (Arthur et al., 2005).

Treatment Produced water Description Disadvantages Advantages Waste stream
applications
Hydroclone The different methods can This methods depend on Expensive Higher efficiency,
be use in treating oil and centrifugal force that maintenance, fouling, compact modules
water that was extracted cause by pressurized weak in solid and output for
from emulsion before tangential input of separation and smaller oil particles
discharge. Both water influent stream, and this energy requirement
from reservoirs and force is applied for free to generation
flooding can be storaged oil separation pressure at inlet input
Gas floatation as feed stocks. They The particles of oil can Large quantity of Higher efficiency, Skim off volume,
contain grease and oil in reach the surface by link skim volume, lateness fixed parts, robust lumps of oil
this type of water and can to induced gas bubbles in separation time and durable and
be reach to 1000 mg/L and high amount of easy in operation
air generated
Corrugated Separation of free oil High cost for Fixed parts, cheaper, Suspended particles
plate separator from water under gravity maintenance, low robust and resistant, slurry at the bottom
effects enhanced by separation efficiency no required for of the separator
flocculation on the for oil fine particles energy and high
surface of corrugated and long retention efficiency for
plates time suspended solid
removal
Centrifuge Free oil separation under Expensive High efficiency in Suspended particles
centrifugal force from maintenance and extraction solids slurry as
water. The centrifugal energy demand for contaminants and pretreatment waste
force can be generated by rotating oil particles, high
cylinder spinning output and lesser
spinning time
Adsorption These methods can be Porous media adsorbs High retention time, Compact packed Used adsorbent
used in disarmament oil or contaminants from the less efficient at higher bed modules, media, regeneration
trace at small oil and influent stream feed concentration cheaper, efficient waste
Extraction grease content before Removal of free or Use of solvent, No energy required, Solvent regeneration
membrane processing. dissolved oil soluble in extract handling, easy operation, waste
In addition, natural gas lighter hydrocarbon regeneration of removes dissolved
thermogenic and oil solvent solvent oil
Ozone reservoirs normally High oxidizers lead to On-site supply of Easy operation, Solids precipitated
contain hydrocarbons easy soluble of oxidizer, separation efficient for primary in slurry form
liquid such as trace. suspended, high efficiency of precipitate, treatment of soluble
Natural gas like CBNG in for pretreatment of byproduct CO2, etc. constituents
reservoir may not contain soluble contaminant and
liquids but during easy operation
pumping the water can
take hydrocarbons liquid
to the surface
Rapid spray This different types of The treated water can High energy required High quality treated Waste in sludge
evaporation technologies can be occur by injection water for heating air, water, higher form at the end of
distinguished from in high speed at heated required handling of conversion efficiency evaporation
membrane technologies air lead to evaporates the solids
by less pretreatment and water that can be
power. Normally the TDS condensed
Freeze–thaw values of produced water Freezing contaminated Lower conversion No energy required,
evaporation in range of 10,000 to water to produced water efficiency, long natural process,
1000 mg/L. On the other crystals by using natural operation cycle cheaper
hand some of these cycles temperature to
technologies need to produced pure water by
grease and oil thawing crystals
Lime softening contaminants treatments Hardness, bicarbonate Chemical addition, Cheaper, accessible, Used chemical and
before operations while and carbonate can be post-treatment can be modified precipitated waste
other technologies not extracted by adding lime necessary
Ion-exchange Ion-exchangers help in High content of Low energy Regeneration
remove minerals and liquid effluent, high required, possible chemicals
dissolved salts by efficiency need post- continuous
exchanging ions and pre-treatments regeneration of
resin, efficient,
mobile treatment
Table 2 (continued)
Treatment Produced water Description Disadvantages Advantages Waste stream
applications
possible
Ultrafiltration Both two technologies can Applied pressure on High energy, Higher recovery of Concentrate flow
be used in filtering membrane can help in membrane fouling, fresh water, compact during filtration
produced water by removing ultraparticles low MW organics, modules, viruses and operation, high
removal contaminants like from the water salts, etc organics, etc. contain of backwash
soluble organics, trace oil, removal waste output during
Microfiltration microbial, divalent salts, Membrane removes Low efficiency in Higher recovery of membrane cleaning
etc. The selection of micro-particles from the monovalent salts, fresh water, compact
membrane can be chose water under the applied viruses, divalent, etc. modules
depend on nature of pressure High amount of
contaminants energy is required
Constructed Decomposition and Expensive Cheaper, efficient
wetland natural oxidation of maintenance, pH and removal of dissolved
treatment contaminants by fauna temperature effects, and suspended
and flora spinning time contaminants
requirements
Reverse This technique can be Change pressure on Grease, oil and trace Removes Concentrated flow
osmosis apply to disarmament contaminated water lead have effect on monovalent salts, during filtration
inorganics and organics to squeeze in pure water membrane fouling, dissolved operation, high
contaminants. On other that was produced from flooding pressure contaminants, etc., content of backwash
hand some organic contaminated water requirements compact modules waste output during
contaminants need membrane cleaning
pretreatment, at the same
time the energy cost rise
with TDS. In addition, for
higher efficiently in
removing contaminants
the salts contain should
not excess of 10,000 mg/L
Activated It can be applied to Degrade contaminants in The dimensions of Cheaper, simple and Sludge waste at the
sludge filtration of suspended, water by using filter too large and clean technology end of the treatment
like boron, ammonia, microorganisms oxygen requirement
trace, etc. In this
technique the post
treatment is usually
required.
Interffacial Tensio
on γ (mN/m)
30
Interafacial Tension (mM/M)
25
20
15
10
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Emulsion Stability
Fig. 11 Interfacial tension versus emulsion stability (Varadaraj and Brons, 2012).
the correlation between viscosity and creaming rate is linear the speed and mixing interval by reducing diameter size of
and this can be observed in high emulsion concentrations. oil water droplets in oil-in-water emulsion and increasing the
Low shear measurements (constant stress (creep) and oscilla- stability and viscosity due to particle interaction between two
tory measurements) were described as among the most effec- phases (Ahmed et al., 1999). The colloidal surface and Brown-
tive methods of predicting creaming or sedimentation of ian movement forces can be stronger than the hydrodynamic
emulsions (Tadros, 2004). In addition, Table 2 shows the prop- forces in the system where the diameter of dispersed droplets
erties of interfacial film between oil and water droplets, the is less than 1 lm (Ahmed et al., 1999).
interfacial tension, interface elastic modulus (€) and emulsion
stability at percentage ratio of 2:8 water-in-oil volume for 4.3. Size and diffusion droplets
0.1 wt% of asphaltenes in crude oil (Varadaraj and Brons,
2012). High amount of water retained was found to correlate In the petroleum industry, there are two common types of
with high emulsion stability. The oil-water interfacial tension emulsion; water-in-oil and oil-in-water emulsion Generally,
(c) for 50:50 n-hexadecane/toluene solvent mixture was these two types have droplet of size 0.1 lm or larger and some-
33 mN/m. It was observed that types I, II, and III asphaltenes times more than 100 mL. However, the emulsion viscosity is
reduced c to about 20 mN/m. This decrease in c was not as effected by droplet size and distribution of droplets. The distri-
much as the reduction of interfacial tension within conven- bution of small droplets in small area produces emulsion with
tional surfactants. Thus, n-interfacial activity of these high viscosity and stability (Zolfaghari et al., 2016). What
asphaltenes or interfacial tension could not be considered as makes emulsion more stable is that the small droplets need a
a reliable method of measuring interfacial activity of asphalte- longer time to coalesce, while an effective surfactant can
nes (Varadaraj and Brons, 2012). enhance the coalescence of water droplets or oil droplets,
There is no correlation between stability of emulsion and depending on the type of demulsifier.
interfacial tension, as shown in Fig. 11, due to the direct sur-
face action of asphaltenes and autonomy of interfacial tension 4.4. Temperature
with the type of asphaltene. Furthermore, this phenomenon
shows that traditional models for emulsion stability (with oi-
Temperature rising has several impacts on destabilizing emul-
water interfacial tension (c) as the primary stabilizing factor)
sion, including reduce the viscosityof continuous phase,
could not entirely explain stability of asphaltene-stabilized
increase the discrepancy between the dispread and continuous
water-in-oil emulsions (Varadaraj and Brons, 2012).
phase of emulsion and rising the quantity of droplets collisions
The definition of emulsion stability is the resistance of dis-
through weakening of interfacial film between two phases
persed phase droplet against coalescence. Asphaltenes, the
(Mohammed et al., 1994). As a consequence, the increasing
mass percentage of aromatics components, resins, viscous
temperature at the same time disadvantage, including
modulus (G00 ) and elastic modulus (G0 ) are the main parame-
increased concentration percentage on interface due to reduc-
ters that effect on emulsion stability (Wong et al., 2015). Next
tion in oil viscosity (Mohammed et al., 1993). Temperature can
to asphaltenes and volatile aromatic compounds, storage or
affect surfactant solubility, whereby the temperature can have
elastic modulus (G0 ) and loss or viscous modulus (G00 ) were
positive or negative impact on solubility, depending on the
shown to affect emulsions stability. It was previously reported
type of demulsifier. In addition, the solubility of nonionic sur-
that, when the viscous behavior of the fluid is less than the elas-
factants in water decreases with rising temperature, in contrast
tic behavior (G00 oG0 ) of the fluid, the emulsions were compar-
with anionic surfactants (Bourrel et al., 1980). Correspond-
atively stable, provided that both of the parameters were
ingly, the adsorption of nonionic surfactant at interfacial film
independent of the frequency in the linear viscoelasticity
reduces with rising temperature in oil-in-water emulsion, as a
region. Linear viscoelasticity region (LVER) refers to the
result to destabilizing emulsion (Hirasaki et al., 2010). In con-
region where a system does not break down due to applied
trast, other published work showed that the increased temper-
stress (Ortiz et al., 2010). In addition, natural surfactants of
ature in extracting water from ASP flooding improved the
crude oil like asphaltenes affected by the elastic modulus.
emulsion stability (Nguyen et al., 2012), the reason behind this
Maia Filho et al. (2012), reported the effect of adsorption of
behavior was due to high salt content in the produced water
natural surfactant on the water-oil interface. The result present
which enhanced the adsorption of anionic surfactant at inter-
that these surfactants cause intermolecular interactions which
facial film.
lead to increasing the elastic behavior and work against oil-
water emulsion interface. Derkach (2009), concluded that coa-
lescence between droplet dispersed phase decrease when the 4.5. Solids particles
increase inelastic behavior.
The emulsion stability can be enhanced through soft solids
particles, many factors including size, interactions and wetta-
4.2. Time and speed mixing impact bility of solids particles affect the effectiveness of solids parti-
cles. As a result to diffusing the particles on the surface of
Time plays a certain rule in destabilizing emulsion. Generally, interfacial films of W/O emulsion will increase the rigid of
after period of time, like one week or more, the water droplets interfacial film and improve the emulsion stability through pre-
become more reliable because unstable emulsion will be bro- venting the coalescence of emulsion droplets. At the same time,
ken (Fingas and Fieldhouse, 2003, 2004). Some factors cannot fine solids particles can improve the stability of temperature
be considered as affective factors in destabilizing the emulsion. impact through change in average and characteristics of inter-
like water content due to surplus water that can be found in facial films. Furthermore, the compressibility of interfacial
crude oil. Emulsion stability can be improved by increasing films can be influenced by solids particles due to the impact
of solid particles on solubility of demulsifier on interfacial films can be defined or occurred when the interfacial film tension
(Levine and Sanford, 1985; Tambe and Sharma, 1993). between surfactant and brine is the same between the surfac-
tant and oil, while optimum point happened at lower separa-
4.6. Environment medium tion time, surfactant dose, viscosity, IFT, high coalescence
rate and maximum oil recovery (Sharma and Shah, 1985).
The pH effectiveness on emulsion stability is related to oil
phase, brine characteristics in emulsion and organic acids in 4.8. Water and oil content
crude oil can be influenced on demulsification process in
water-in-oil emulsion. Normally, surfactants hydrophilicity There are many factors besides the other impact, such as
normally rise with growth in pH value of emulsion. Acidic asphaltene and resin. Basically, in demulsification, efficiency
environment can help in producing water-in-oil emulsion in by using surfactant increases with increasing water content,
contract with basic and medium environments, which is more while reducing the time and concentration of surfactant dose
suitable to produce oil-in-water emulsion. At the same time, needs to increase the other the water in oil ratio in specific
asphaltenic can be more rigid at low pH level and starts to the percentage of water in range from 0.3 to 07 volumetric
become weaker with rising pH level. Alkaline environment fraction (Borges et al., 2009). However, emulsion is broken fas-
has influence on asphaltenic and make mobile/unstable films, ter with higher water content than lower content, at the same
while the resinous, in contrast with asphaltenic, became stron- time emulsion viscous increases with increasing in water con-
ger in alkaline environment and weaker at low or medium pH. tent (Mouraille et al., 1998; Thompson et al., 1985). In addi-
In addition, ionization of surfactants at interfacial film of tion, increasing the volume of dispersed phase enhances the
water or oil phase gave positive or negative charge for single separation efficiency and average of coalescence due to rise
phase droplets at low pH level, the ionization effect is caused in entropy for high collision between the single phase droplets
through brine solution due to the interaction of salts atom (Menon et al., 1985; Zaki, 1997). It is observed that, reducing
and surfactant at interfacial film (Fortuny et al., 2007; the volume of oil from 90% to 60% in oil-in-water emulsion
Strassner, 1968). The best pH level that helps surfactant to sep- lead to little separation of water droplets while less 50% will
arate with high efficiency of oil-in-water emulsion at medium cause broken emulsion directly. Moreover, increasing the oil
or near to medium level (Azim et al., 2010; Zaki et al., content in oil-in-water emulsion can change the type of emul-
1996). The act of nonionics surfactant depends on the environ- sion from oil-in-water emulsion to water-in-oil emulsion,
ment that works in and normally acts like anionics under basic which is more stable due to high concentration of oil in contin-
environment or like cationic in acidic environment (Möbius uous phase (Ahmed et al., 1999). Sometimes, the emulsion is
et al., 2001). Acidic environment is the best condition to break formed for transportation purposes by reducing the viscous
emulsion and at the same time should avoid the corrosion in of mixture. What is important in this case is pour-point of
treatment equipment. emulsion to avoided freezing of mixture at low temperature
(Zaki, 1997).
4.7. Spread phase salinity
5. Demulsification and desalination of oil recovery processes
The salinity in water normally works in reducing the
hydrophilicity of surfactant through decrease in the interac- The most important in demulsification process is removing
tions of water with surfactant at interfacial films (Goldszal impurities, salt and water from mixture. The desalination tech-
and Bourrel, 2000; Martı́nez-Palou et al., 2013). It was noted nique depends on the concentration of salt in content and the
that, increasing the salinity of water-in-oil emulsion by adding compatibility of technique under high concentration of con-
NaCl and decrease the interfacial film tension, at the same time taminants in produced water. There are several techniques of
the HLD can be adjusted from negative to zero through demulsification. The most common are electric separation,
increased salinity system and enhance the surfactant efficiency chemical treatment and membrane filtration. Demulsification
(Bera et al., 2013; Gaonkar, 1992; Nguyen et al., 2012). In can be defined as the process of separation crude oil into
addition, the increase in salinity in water-in-oil emulsion two-phase crude oil and water. Generally, demulsification
increase the stability of the system due to the interaction method can be assessed in three-point as below (Arthur
between the native surfactants and aqueous phase (Fortuny et al., 2005).
et al., 2007). However (Goldszal and Bourrel, 2000), observed
that when water-in-oil emulsion has various and high concen- Time or speed of broken emulsion process.
tration of resins with high brine salinity would need more Efficiency of process in separating crude oil emulsion.
hydrophilic additives to separate the aqueous phase with high Goodness of removal separated water.
efficiency. Nonionic surfactant tolerance in salinity is more
than in anionic surfactant, while the effect of salinity on stabil- High efficiency of separation with minimum time and best
ity of emulsion is contradictory (Ahmed et al., 1999; Moradi way for disposal water are centrally preferred by crude oil pro-
et al., 2010; X. Wang et al., 2010). At the same time, aqueous ducers. There are specifications about crude oil before it is sent
phase in water-in-oil emulsion with divalent cation is more to refinery or transported in pipelines, like crude oil should
stable than monovalent cation, while salinity water with diva- contain less 0.2% water and sediment and less 10PBT of salt,
lent cation increases the demulsification efficiency in water-in- and this specifications depend on crude oil producer. Gener-
oil emulsion more than monovalent cation (Kuo and Lee, ally, the advantage of using EOR methods is to enhance micro-
2009; Perles et al., 2012; Salager, 2000). The optimal salinity scopic displacement efficiency obtained from water flooding.
Rising temperature.
Monitoring the emulsifying agents.
Increasing time duration.
In the petroleum industry, there are different ways to sepa-

rate or broken emulsion into two-phase oil and water. In addi-
tion, these methods depend on applying one of the methods
below (Kokal and Alvarez, 2003; Pal et al., 1992).
Applying chemical surfactant to emulsion.

Raising the temperature of the system.
Passing electrical fields to enhance the water droplets
coalescence.
Enhancing the physical characteristics of the mixture.
There are several ways to demulsification of emulsion

(Arthur et al., 2005). A summary of demulsification techniques
Fig. 12 Basic schematic of a surfactant molecule (Shui et al., is as in Table 2.
2009).
5.3. Surface active agents (surfactants)
However, EOR techniques are more expensive than water
treatment and this techniques have become economically Surface active agents are essential materials and very common
attractive in huge oilfields (Muggeridge et al., 2014). in different industries, including chemical, detergents, paints,
etc. In addition, it is critical in the oil and gas industry, espe-
5.1. Measurement of stability cially in oil recovery processes, at the same time it is also used
in environmental protection. Consequently, it is necessary to
understand the physical and chemical characteristics of surfac-
One of the most important tests that can be applied is the
tants, unaccepted characteristics and phase behavior is vital in
emulsion measurement stability. Measurement stability refers
the chemical industry. Furthermore, surface active agents
to the ease in broking emulsion to two-phase and there are sev-
mainly consist of two parts; one is hydrophilic and the other
eral techniques to measure the emulsion stability (Kokal and
is hydrophobic. Fig. 12 shows the two parts of a surfactant
Alvarez, 2003; Pal et al., 1992). Bottle test can be considered
atom. The understanding of surfactant phenomena, including
as one of the most common techniques to measure emulsion
the application of surfactant and the elements or compounds
stability, while this method, including mixing surfactant with
that form surfactant (Ottewill, 1984). In petroleum industries,
emulsion, dilution of emulsion and note the separation effi-
the breaking emulsion through chemical demulsification by
ciency with increase in time. However, there are several tech-
apply surfactant or demulsifiers as chemical additives is impor-
niques of bottle test, normally standard ASTM technique is
tant methods. Table 3 represent different types of demulsifiers.
used to measure the sediments and water in the system. Emul-
On other hands, hydrophilic-lipophilic balance (HLB) of
sion stability is connected with fast broken emulsion with time
demulsifier is an important factor that helps in determining
and surfactant concentration. For instance, at specific surfac-
the attraction of demulsifier into water or oil phase. The surfac-
tant dose, the emulsion stability can be fined through the mea-
tants with high HLB number above 10 are hydrophilic and it
surement the percentage of water separation at a certain period
has high attraction into the water phase. While surfactants have
of time. In modern days, the new technique is proposed for
HLB lower 10 considered as lipophilic surfactant and attrac-
determining the stability of emulsion quantitatively (Kokal
tion into the oil phase (Shehzad et al., 2018). HLB parameter
and Wingrove, 2000). This new method is present to determine
is useful in selection demulsifier as well as the surfactant with
the complexity of emulsion. The index in bottle test is used to
HLB between 8 and 11.63 must have food performance in water
measure the complexity of emulsion, while the index start from
in oil emulsion (Ojinnaka et al., 2016). According (Griffin,
zero to 100% total separation and this percentage is influenced
1949), surfactant with HLB value between 7 and 9 considered
by several factors, such as temperature, dose of surfactant and
as wetting agents, while the surfactant with HLB (4–6) can be
type of surfactant (Kokal and Wingrove, 2000).
applied as emulsifiers and surfactant with HLB (13–15) can
be applied as detergents. Fan et al. (2009), investigate the effect
5.2. Destabilizing emulsions and demulsification methods
of HLB number in destabilizing water in oil emulsion with the
ratio (1:1) by using polyoxyethylene nonylphenols as a non-
The interfacial films that include water droplets are responsible ionic surfactant. The result shows that the surfactant with
for the emulsion stability. The emulsion that is broken into HLB 14.2 has high performance in braking emulsion reverse
interfacial film should be destroyed so that the water droplets surfactant with high HLB that has less efficiency which may
can coalesce. There are several factors that can help in weak- be due to the interaction between crude oil components and
ening the interfacial film, as shown below. surfactant and long oxyethyl head groups. Charchari and
Abdelli (2014), investigate the influence HLB value of non-
Decreasing agitation or shear force. ionic surfactants in aqueous solutions on extraction oil. The
Solids disposal. result clear that increasing the HLB of surfactant improve the
Overview on petroleum emulsions, formation, influence and demulsification
Table 3 Summary of application surfactant in demulsification emulsion.

Surfactant name Sort and characteristic Emulsion preparation Operational conditions Advantages Reference
surfactant
Alkyl sulfate Anionic Surfactants Small unilamellar vesicles were Addition of three surfactants in The different types of alkyl sulfate Silvander,
prepared by ultrasonic irradiation different concentration have were used to solubilization of Karlsson
of samples containing about 25 mg influence. On the turbidity of small unilamellar lecithin vesicles et al. (1996)
lecithin in 5 mL buffer. A Soniprep sonicated lecithin vesicles in buffer
150 was used for the irradiation containing 150 mM NaCl
The samples were sonicated for 1 h
and thereafter diluted with buffer
to the desired concentration and
filtrated through a 0.2-mm
Sartorius Minsart filter. However,
the different type of alkyl sulfate
was used to solubilization of small
unilamellar lecithin vesicles
Polyoxyethylene nonylphenols Nonionic surfactants The water and oil are left together, Surfactants add in different dose The (hydrophilic-lipophilic Fan et al.
and after that by using blending and add to water phase before balance) of the surfactant very (2009)
mixture for 5 min at 1500 rpm the emulsification. The entire volume high which is 14.2 and this gave
emulsion was made and test the of samples is 15 mL surfactant very high performance
stability bt livng the sample at in demulsification processing
room temperature around 25 °C
for 24 h and observation if their
water sapreted
Fourier transform infrared Nonionic surfactant. Fourier The crude oil from mineral wells The best operational conditions at High performance in Zhang et al.
(FTIR) transform infrared have was used and heated to (50 °C). 160 °C emulsification impact on water-in- (2017)
trimeric and it is got in two Sequentially emulsifier added to And 2.5 wt% water content oil emulsion with 2.5:7.5 ratio.
stage of polymerization. the sample and mixed at The tests of trimeric nonionic
The first stage is production 10000 rpm for half hour. Then surfactant showed positive result
Acyl chloride by reaction water 20 wt% concertation where that (FTIR) work on enhanced the
thionyl chloride with fatty acid added to the sample. The sample is characteristics of oil-based drilling
with using identical conditions. collated after 60 min of mixing fluids. Generally, the (FTIR)
The second stage is the enhanced the rheological
extraction of amide surfactant characteristics, thermal stability
and API filtration
Triton X-100 (polyethylene Nonionic hydrophilic Two type of crude oils and tap Using surfactant dose in the range Using to the stabilized oil-in-water Abdurahman
glycol octylphenyl ether) surfactant water were used to the preparation from (0.3–2.5 wt%) with mixing emulsion et al. (2012)
of oil-in-water emulsions, the total speed between 1000 rpm and
volume that was preparation 2000 rpm for maximum 15 min.
about 500 mL Furthermore, the pH for a solution
(6–7.8), and the temperature of
homogenization (25–90 1C)
Alkyltrimethylammonium Cationic surfactants 100 mL of oil-in-water emulsion Demulsifier concentration equal to The surfactant was used to Hirasaki et al.
bromide was produced 70 mL of brine 200 ppm with room temperature determine the effect on water and (2010)
water was added to bottles and around (25–30°°C) oil separation of produced
mixed with 30 mL of crude oil emulsions resulting from
from American Petroleum surfactant-polymer floods
Institute (API) at high speed for
19
10 min
(continued on next page)
Table 3 (continued)
20
Surfactant name Sort and characteristic Emulsion preparation Operational conditions Advantages Reference
surfactant
Tweens Nonionic surfactant. The Water in oil emulsion was The temperature was fixed on 60C No corrosion impact Roodbari
surfactant characterized with prepared with water content 10% and the surfactant adding in the et al. (2016)
HLB range from 11 to 16.7 range from 300 ppm to 900 ppm
and high alkenes chains high
molecular weight and content
groups of ester and ketone
Poly(ethylene glycol) distearate, nonionic surfactant and Synthetic water in oil emulsion was The first three parameters fixed in N- Dimethyldodecylamine N – Roshan et al.
Polyoxyethylene (10) tridecyl amphoteric surfactant prepared with water cut 10% and range as following temperature oxide solution have high (2018)
ether, N,N- 20% (50–80 °C), pH (5–9) water cut performance in breaking water in
Dimethyldodecylamine N- (10–20%) and surfactant oil emulsion
oxide solution Polyethylene concentration between (0–
glycol sorbitan monooleate 1000 ppm)
Trioctylmethylammonium Ionic surfactant Synthetic water in oil emulsion Dosage for three surfactants The result shows that the pH and Biniaz et al.
chloride (TOMAC), 1- with different water cut between 300 ppm and 2000 ppm, temperature are the most useful (2016)
Hexadecyltrimethylammonium while the other parameters fixed in variables, while the maximum
bromide (CTAB) and range as show pH (5–9), water cut separation occurs at maximum
Trioctylmethylammonium (10–20%) and temperature (50– temperate and pH near to the
bromide (TOMAB) 80 °C) natural value
PE 6100 and RPE 3110 Nonionic surfactant. The low Water in crude oil emulsion with Thermochemical dewatering The maximum separation Adilbekova
number of relative solubility water content 2% and 22% for method was applied, surfactant achieved at high temperature et al. (2015)
number (RSN) two type of heavy crude oil was mixed (1:1) and add to the 80 °C
emulsion with concentration 1%,
while both surfactant dissolved in
benzene and kerosene
C10E3, DTPB and SDS The surfactant from different Synthetic water in oil emulsion pH range from 2 to 13 The result indicates that the pH Daaou and
families anionic, non-ionic and with 60% water content near to neutral medium more Bendedouch
cationic stable than basic or acidic (2012)
environment cationic and anionic
surfactant much better in
separation water than nonionic
surfactant
Poly(propylene oxide), poly Nonionic surfactant mass Synthetic water in oil emulsion Demulsifiers were added at a The result shows the demulsifiers Kang et al.
(ethylene oxide) and sodium screening was depended for with water oil ratio (1:1) concentration from 200 lL to reduced the interfacial (2018)
dodecyl sulfate (SDS) selecting the demulsifiers 10000 mg/L at 40 °C viscoelasticity and separation of
water occur and the efficiency
depends on demulsifiers nature
Chloride (Cl), bis Ionic liquids with long alkyl Synthetic water in oil emulsion Three demulsifiers were studied in The demulsifiers achieve high Hazrati et al.
M.M. Abdulredha et al.

(trifluoromethanesulphonyl) chains (n = 10, 12 and 14) with water content 20% range 500 ppm to 3500 ppm during demulsification rate (86–95%) and (2018)
andhexafluorophosphate (PF6) 24 h reduce the inter factual tension to
range range from 0.7 to 6.26 mN/
m
Six dendritic copolymers Dendritic polyether. The Water in crude oil emulsion with Surfactant concentration is The surfactant achieve high J. Wang et al.
surfactant was prepared by ratio (7:13) respectively 150 mg/L demulsification rate at 150 mg/l (2010)
reaction of ethylene oxide and after 15 min
propylene oxide with various
proportions
Rhamnolipid
Bacillus sp
Emulsan
Bio Surfactant Pseudomonas
Alasan
RLichenysinhamnolipid Acinetobacter
Alkyl Ether Sulfate and Alkyl Ethoxy Sulfate
Surfactant Mixtures Cetyl Trimethyl Ammonium Bromide (CTAB)
Alkyl propoxy Sulfate and Alkyl Ethoxy Sulfonates
Coco Alkyl Trimethyl Ammonium Chloride
Stearyl Trimethyl Ammonium Chloride

Cationic
Dodecyl Trimethyl Ammonium Bromide (DTAB)
Ethoxylated Alkyl Amine
Surfactants
Alkyl Ethoxy Carboxylated
Neodol
Neodol Ethoxylate 91-8
Nonionic Alkyl Polyglycoside (APG)
Neodol 67 Propoxylated Sulfate (N67-7POS)
Nonylphenol “N” Ethoxylate
Polyethoxylated Alkyl Phenols
Lauryl betaine
Betaine Citrate
Amphoterics
Sodium hydroxymethylglycinate
Betaines ,Cocoalkyldimethyl
Alkyl (or Alcohol) Ethoxy Sulfate (AES)
Alkyl Aryl Sulfonates

Anionic
Alkyl Sulfate (AS)
Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate (SDS)
Alkoxylated alkyl phenol condensates

Polymeric
Polyalkylene glycol modified polyester
Fig. 13 Shows general types of surfactant.
enhanced oil yield. Yesßilyurt et al. (2017), study the effect of factant that use to formation emulsions and suspensions their
HLB number on water recovery, dewatering efficiency and elements, Fig. 13 shows the common types of surfactant.
flotation performance of hard bituminous coal slimes. It was
concluded that the surfactant has HLB number equal to ten 6. Summary
have the highest performance infiltration. Xu et al. (2018),
study the effect (HLB), surface tension, infrared spectra and This literature article focused on global water production from
wetting time of anionic surfactants on coal dust wetting ability. the petroleum industry, the source of water from three basic
It was concluded that reduce the wetting time have no influence fields; oil, gas and coal bed methane. Water production from
on surface tension, while reducing surface tension leading to different platforms consists of several elements and have influ-
decreasing wetting time at low surfactant dosage. In addition, ence on the environment. In addition, almost the all the water
electrostatic repulsions and hydrophobic play a major role in produced as emulsion shape, and generally emulsion can be
the adsorption density as well as the surfactant with a high found in three general shapes. Emulsion can be formed
value of HLB has high ability to bring the coal dust into the through turbulence strength in choke valves or during piping
bulk solution. Hassas et al. (2014), designed a special set-up flow. However, the emulsion stability is related with the inter-
to investigate the effect of surfactants HLB value on dewatering facial film among the continuous phase and diffusion phase,
lignite particles. The result clear that the surfactant with HLB the emulsion stability can be enhanced through emulsifying
near to 10 has high performance in dewatering the ultrafine lig- agents, like asphaltenes and resins, interfacial films, elastic
nite, while the surfactants with lower HLB are suitable for modulus & viscous modulus, duration time and agitation
dewatering reagents like hard coals. Jafarirad (2017), found speed and other factors. However, the emulsion stability can
that hydrophobic blocks of amphiphilic agents have a signifi- be measured by different methods, and test bottles is one of
cant effect on surfactant micellar characteristics as well as the these methods.
chain lengths of hydrophobic and hydrophilic have an influence
on the micellar behavior of surfactant. Thus, it helps to design
Acknowledgment
surfactant diversity on hydrophilic/lipophilic balance. Zhang
and Wu (2018), clear the influence of hydrophilic surfactants
The authors wish to acknowledge Universiti Putra Malaysia
including Tween 80, IGEPAL CO890, IGEPAL CO520 and
and Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering
sodium oleate with hydrophilic-lipophilic balance (HLB) range
for the financial support. Gratefully thanks to Assoc. Prof. Ir.
between 10 and 18 on bio-oil separation. The result present that
Dr. Siti Aslina Hussain and Professor Dr. Luqman Chuah
the surfactants hydrophobic groups have a significant effect on
Abdullah for their contribution and support.
oil separation. Tang et al. (2018), investigate the hydrophilic-
lipophilic balance (HLB) based on non-ionic surfactants and
the relationships between the levelness of the dyed samples References
and K/Sum value, (HLB) and reflectance. It was concluded that
Abdurahman, N., Rosli, Y., Azhari, N., Hayder, B., 2012. Pipeline
increasing HLB value increases the reflectance percentage and
transportation of viscous crudes as concentrated oil-in-water
decreases the K/Ssum value as well as the optimum HLB value
emulsions. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 90, 139–144.
leading to high visual appearance a levelness of dyed samples. Adilbekova, A.O., Omarova, K.I., Karakulova, A., Musabekov, K.
Jin et al. (2009), enhanced the direct dropping method to find B., 2015. Nonionic surfactants based on polyoxyalkylated copoly-
the HLB value for Metarhizium anisopliae conidia during dehy- mers used as demulsifying agents. Colloids Surf. A: Physicochem.
dration at various water content stages. The experimental result Eng. Aspect. 480, 433–438.
shows that the HLB value for Metarhizium anisopliae conidia Ahmed, N.S., Nassar, A.M., Zaki, N.N., Gharieb, H.K., 1999.
was 8 and at the optimum value the dehydration percentage Stability and rheology of heavy crude oil-in-water emulsion
did not change, while the wetting time significantly increased. stabilized by an anionic-nonionic surfactant mixture. Pet. Sci.
Finally, it was concluded that the hydrophilic-lipophilic bal- Technol. 17 (5–6), 553–576.
Ali, M., Alqam, M., 2000. The role of asphaltenes, resins and other
ance (HLB) value of a surfactant is a crucial factor that helps
solids in the stabilization of water in oil emulsions and its effects on
in selecting surfactant for a specific application. Actually, The
oil production in Saudi oil fields. Fuel 79 (11), 1309–1316.
hydrophilic-lipophilic balance (HLB) is a skill that uses for see- Arla, D., Sinquin, A., Palermo, T., Hurtevent, C., Graciaa, A.,
ing the tendency of surfactant between water and oil phase as Dicharry, C., 2007. Influence of pH and water content on the type
well as HLB value help in development advanced emulsification and stability of acidic crude oil emulsions. Energy Fuels 21 (3),
method (Yamashita and Sakamoto, 2016). 1337–1342.
Arthur, J.D., Langhus, B.G., Patel, C., 2005. Technical Summary of
Oil & Gas Produced Water Treatment Technologies. All Consult-
5.4. General classification of surface active agents ing, LLC, Tulsa, OK.
Azim, A.A., Abdel-Raouf, M.-S., Abdel-Raheim, A.-R., Maysour,
There are several ways to classify surface active agents and the N.-S., 2010. Sugar-based ethoxylated amine surfactants as demul-
most common one depends on the nature of the hydrophilic sifiers for crude oil emulsions: 2-demulsification of different types
of crudes. Braz. J. Petrol. Gas 4 (4).
part. Normally there are three basic types, cationic, anionic
Bera, A., Mandal, A., Guha, B., 2013. Synergistic effect of surfactant
and amphoteric. Gore et al. (2000), updated a list of existing
and salt mixture on interfacial tension reduction between crude oil
surfactants. van Os et al. (2012), reported the physicochemical and water in enhanced oil recovery. J. Chem. Eng. Data 59 (1), 89–96.
characteristics of different types of surfactant, including non- Biniaz, P., Farsi, M., Rahimpour, M., 2016. Demulsification of water
ionic and cationic. Porter (1994), published a useful book on in oil emulsion using ionic liquids: Statistical modeling and
surfactant. In addition, polymeric surfactant is one type of sur- optimization. Fuel 184, 325–333.
Binks, B.P., Rocher, A., 2009. Effects of temperature on water-in-oil Fingas, M., 1995. Water-in-oil emulsion formation: a review of
emulsions stabilised solely by wax microparticles. J. Colloid physics and mathematical modelling. Spill Sci. Technol. Bull. 2 (1),
Interface Sci. 335 (1), 94–104. 55–59.
Bonnet, M., Cansell, M., Placin, F.d.r., David-Briand, E., Anton, M., Fingas, M., Fieldhouse, B., 2003. Studies of the formation process of
Leal-Calderon, F., 2010. Influence of ionic complexation on release water-in-oil emulsions. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 47 (9), 369–396.
rate profiles from multiple water-in-oil-in-water (W/O/W) emul- Fingas, M., Fieldhouse, B., 2004. Formation of water-in-oil emul-
sions. J. Agric. Food. Chem. 58 (13), 7762–7769. sions and application to oil spill modelling. J. Hazard. Mater. 107
Borges, B., Rondón, M., Sereno, O., Asuaje, J., 2009. Breaking of (1), 37–50.
water-in-crude-oil emulsions. 3. Influence of salinity and water–oil Fingas, M., Fieldhouse, B., 2009. Studies on crude oil and petroleum
ratio on demulsifier action. Energy Fuels 23 (3), 1568–1574. product emulsions: water resolution and rheology. Colloids Surf.
Bourrel, M., Salager, J., Schechter, R., Wade, W., 1980. A correlation A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspect. 333 (1), 67–81.
for phase behavior of nonionic surfactants. J. Colloid Interface Sci. Fingas, M., Fieldhouse, B., Wang, Z., 2003. The long term
75 (2), 451–461. weathering of water-in-oil emulsions. Spill Sci. Technol. Bull. 8
Canevari, G.P., 1982. The formulation of an effective demulsifier for (2), 137–143.
oil spill emulsions. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 13 (2), 49–54. Fink, J., 2015. Petroleum Engineer’s Guide to Oil Field Chemicals
Cassella, R.J., Dos Reis, L.G.T., Santelli, R.E., Oliveira, E.P., 2011. and Fluids. Gulf Professional Publishing.
Direct determination of manganese in produced waters from Florence, A., Whitehill, D., 1982. The formulation and stability of
petroleum exploration by electrothermal atomic absorption spec- multiple emulsions. Int. J. Pharm. 11 (4), 277–308.
trometry using Ir–W as permanent modifier. Talanta 85 (1), 415– Fortuny, M., Oliveira, C.B., Melo, R.L., Nele, M., Coutinho, R.C.,
419. Santos, A.F., 2007. Effect of salinity, temperature, water content,
Chan, L.-H., Starinsky, A., Katz, A., 2002. The behavior of lithium and pH on the microwave demulsification of crude oil emulsions.
and its isotopes in oilfield brines: evidence from the Heletz-Kokhav Energy Fuels 21 (3), 1358–1364.
field, Israel. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 66 (4), 615–623. Gaonkar, A.G., 1992. Effects of salt, temperature, and surfactants on
Chanamai, R., McClements, D.J., 2000. Creaming stability of the interfacial tension behavior of a vegetable oil/water system. J.
flocculated monodisperse oil-in-water emulsions. J. Colloid Inter- Colloid Interface Sci. 149 (1), 256–260.
face Sci. 225 (1), 214–218. Garti, N., 1997. Progress in stabilization and transport phenomena of
Charchari, S., Abdelli, M., 2014. Enhanced extraction by hydrodis- double emulsions in food applications. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 30
tillation of sage (Salvia officinalis L.) essential oil using water (3), 222–235.
solutions of non-ionic surfactants. J. Essential Oil Bearing Plants Georgie, W., Sell, D., Baker, M., 2001. Establishing best practicable
17 (6), 1094–1099. environmental option practice for produced water management in
Chen, G., Tao, D., 2005. An experimental study of stability of oil– the gas and oil production facilities. Paper presented at the SPE/
water emulsion. Fuel Process. Technol. 86 (5), 499–508. EPA/DOE Exploration and Production Environmental
Chistyakov, B., 2001. Theory and practical application aspects of Conference.
surfactants. Stud. Interface Sci. 13, 511–618. Goldszal, A., Bourrel, M., 2000. Demulsification of crude oil
Cullum, D., 1994. Surfactant types; classification, identification, emulsions: correlation to microemulsion phase behavior. Ind.
separation. In: Introduction to Surfactant Analysis. Springer, pp. Eng. Chem. Res. 39 (8), 2746–2751.
17–41. Gore, R.H., Kopko, R.J., Machleder, W.H., Mathis, W.D., Stevens,
Czarnecki, J., 2008. Stabilization of water in crude oil emulsions. Part B.M., Sun, Y., 2000. Pesticide Compositions. Google Patents.
2. Energy Fuels 23 (3), 1253–1257. Graham, B.F., May, E.F., Trengove, R.D., 2008. Emulsion inhibiting
Daaou, M., Bendedouch, D., 2012. Water pH and surfactant addition components in crude oils. Energy Fuels 22 (2), 1093–1099.
effects on the stability of an Algerian crude oil emulsion. J. Saudi Griffin, W.C., 1949. Classification of surface-active agents by‘‘ HLB”.
Chem. Soc. 16 (3), 333–337. J. Soc. Cosmet. Chem. 1, 311–326.
Dai, L., Zhan, X., Wei, Y., Sun, C., Mao, L., McClements, D.J., Gao, Groenzin, H., Mullins, O.C., 2007. Asphaltene molecular size and
Y., 2018. Composite zein-propylene glycol alginate particles pre- weight by time-resolved fluorescence depolarization. Asphaltenes
pared using solvent evaporation: characterization and application as Heavy Oils Petroleomics, 17–62.
Pickering emulsion stabilizers. Food Hydrocolloid. 85, 281–290. Gu, G., Xu, Z., Nandakumar, K., Masliyah, J., 2002. Influence of
Dal Ferro, B., Smith, M., 2007. Global onshore and offshore water water-soluble and water-insoluble natural surface active compo-
production. Oil Gas Rev. OTC ed. nents on the stability of water-in-toluene-diluted bitumen emulsion.
de Oliveira, C.B., Souza, W., Santana, C.F., Santana, C.C., Dariva, Fuel 81 (14), 1859–1869.
C., Franceschi, E., Santos, A.F., et al, 2018. Rheological properties Gupta, A., Eral, H.B., Hatton, T.A., Doyle, P.S., 2016. Nanoemul-
of water-in-Brazilian crude oil emulsions: effect of water content, sions: formation, properties and applications. Soft Matter 12 (11),
salinity, and pH. Energy Fuels 32 (8), 8880–8890. 2826–2841.
de Oliveira, M.C.K., Miranda, L.R., de Carvalho, A.B., Miranda, D. Haegh, T., Ellingsen, T., 1977. The Effect of Breaking Waves on Oil
F.S., 2018. Viscosity of water-in-oil emulsions from different Spills; 1. Emulsification of Crude Oil at Sea. SINTEF, The
American petroleum institute gravity Brazilian crude oils. Energy Foundation of Scientific and Industrial Research at the University
Fuels 32 (3), 2749–2759. of Trondheim, Norway, p. 23.
Derkach, S.R., 2009. Rheology of emulsions. Adv. Colloid Interface Hanapi, B., Ariffin, S., Aizan, A., Siti, I., 2006. Study on demulsifier
Sci. 151 (1–2), 1–23. formulation for treating Malaysian crude oil emulsion. Internet
Elektorowicz, M., Habibi, S., Chifrina, R., 2006. Effect of electrical website: <http://eprints.utm.my/2768/1/74004.pdf>.
potential on the electro-demulsification of oily sludge. J. Colloid Hassas, B.V., Karakasß, F., Çelik, M.S., 2014. Ultrafine coal
Interface Sci. 295 (2), 535–541. dewatering: relationship between hydrophilic lipophilic balance
Fakhru’l-Razi, A., Pendashteh, A., Abdullah, L.C., Biak, D.R.A., (HLB) of surfactants and coal rank. Int. J. Miner. Process. 133, 97–
Madaeni, S.S., Abidin, Z.Z., 2009. Review of technologies for oil 104.
and gas produced water treatment. J. Hazard. Mater. 170 (2–3), Hazrati, N., Beigi, A.A.M., Abdouss, M., 2018. Demulsification of
530–551. water in crude oil emulsion using long chain imidazolium ionic
Fan, Y., Simon, S., Sjöblom, J., 2009. Chemical destabilization of liquids and optimization of parameters. Fuel 229, 126–134.
crude oil emulsions: effect of nonionic surfactants as emulsion Hirasaki, G.J., Miller, C.A., Raney, O.G., Poindexter, M.K.,
inhibitors. Energy Fuels 23 (9), 4575–4583. Nguyen, D.T., Hera, J., 2010. Separation of produced emulsions
from surfactant enhanced oil recovery processes. Energy Fuels 25 Lee, H.M., Lee, J.W., Park, O.O., 1997. Rheology and dynamics of
(2), 555–561. water-in-oil emulsions under steady and dynamic shear flow. J.
Hu, G., Li, J., Zeng, G., 2013. Recent development in the treatment Colloid Interface Sci. 185 (2), 297–305.
of oily sludge from petroleum industry: a review. J. Hazard. Mater. Lee, J.S., Kim, J.W., Han, S.H., Chang, I.S., Kang, H.H., Lee, O.S.,
261, 470–490. Suh, K.D., et al, 2004. The stabilization of L-ascorbic acid in
Igunnu, E.T., Chen, G.Z., 2012. Produced water treatment technolo- aqueous solution and water-in-oil-in-water double emulsion by
gies. Int. J. Low-Carbon Technol. 9 (3), 157–177. controlling pH and electrolyte concentration. Int. J. Cosmet. Sci. 26
Issaka, S.A., Nour, A.H., Yunus, R.M., 2015. Review on the (4), 217.
fundamental aspects of petroleum oil emulsions and techniques of Levine, S., Sanford, E., 1985. Stabilisation of emulsion droplets by
demulsification. J. Petrol. Environ. Biotechnol. 6 (2), 1. fine powders. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 63 (2), 258–268.
Jackson, L., Myers, J., 2002. Alternative use of produced water in Lim, J., Wong, S., Law, M., Samyudia, Y., Dol, S., 2015. A review on
aquaculture and hydroponic systems at naval petroleum reserve the effects of emulsions on flow behaviours and common factors
No. 3. Paper presented at the Ground Water Protection Council affecting the stability of emulsions. J. Appl. Sci. 15, 167–172.
Produced Water Conference, Colorado Springs, CO, Oct.. Lobato, M., Pedrosa, J., Hortal, A., Martinez-Haya, B., Lebron-
Jacobs, R., Grant, R., Kwant, J., Marquenie, J., Mentzer, E., 1992. Aguilar, R., Lago, S., 2007. Characterization and Langmuir
The composition of produced water from Shell operated oil and gas film properties of asphaltenes extracted from Arabian light
production in the North Sea. In: Produced Water. Springer, pp. 13– crude oil. Colloids Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspect. 298 (1),
21. 72–79.
Jafarirad, S., 2017. Innovative amphiphilic cellulose nanobiostruc- Maia Filho, D.C., Ramalho, J.B., Lucas, G.M., Lucas, E.F., 2012.
tures: physicochemical, spectroscopic, morphological, and hydro- Aging of water-in-crude oil emulsions: effect on rheological
philic/lipophilic properties. J. Dispersion Sci. Technol. 38 (8), parameters. Colloids Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspect. 405,
1187–1195. 73–78.
Jin, X., Ugine, T.A., Chen, J., Streett, A.D., 2009. Method for Marrucci, G., 1969. A theory of coalescence. Chem. Eng. Sci. 24 (6),
determining the best hydrophilic-lipophilic balance (HLB) number 975–985.
for a compatible non-ionic surfactant in formulation development Martı́nez-Palou, R., Cerón-Camacho, R., Chávez, B., Vallejo, A.A.,
for aerial conidia of Metarhizium anisopliae (Hypocreales: Clavicip- Villanueva-Negrete, D., Castellanos, J., Aburto, J., et al, 2013.
itaceae). Biocontrol Sci. Tech. 19 (3), 341–347. Demulsification of heavy crude oil-in-water emulsions: a compar-
Johnsen, S., Frost, T., Hjelsvold, M., Utvik, T.R., 2000. The ative study between microwave and thermal heating. Fuel 113, 407–
Environmental Impact Factor-a proposed tool for produced water 414.
impact reduction, management and regulation. Paper presented at Masalova, I., Malkin, A.Y., Slatter, P., Wilson, K., 2003. The
the SPE International Conference on Health, Safety and Environ- rheological characterization and pipeline flow of high concentra-
ment in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production. tion water-in-oil emulsions. J. Nonnewton. Fluid Mech. 112 (2),
Julio, L.M., Ixtaina, V.Y., Fernández, M.A., Sánchez, R.M.T., 101–114.
Wagner, J.R., Nolasco, S.M., Tomás, M.C., 2015. Chia seed oil-in- McLean, J.D., Kilpatrick, P.K., 1997. Effects of asphaltene solvency
water emulsions as potential delivery systems of x-3 fatty acids. J. on stability of water-in-crude-oil emulsions. J. Colloid Interface
Food Eng. 162, 48–55. Sci. 189 (2), 242–253.
Kang, W., Yin, X., Yang, H., Zhao, Y., Huang, Z., Hou, X., Zhang, X., Menon, V., Wasan, D., Becher, P., 1985. In: Encyclopedia of
et al, 2018. Demulsification performance, behavior and mechanism Emulsion Technology, vol. 2. Marcel Dekker, Inc.,, New York &
of different demulsifiers on the light crude oil emulsions. Colloids Basel.
Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspect. 545, 197–204. Möbius, D., Miller, R., Fainerman, V.B., 2001. In: Surfactants:
Khan, B.A., Akhtar, N., Khan, H.M.S., Waseem, K., Mahmood, T., Chemistry, Interfacial Properties, Applications, vol. 13. Elsevier.
Rasul, A., Khan, H., et al, 2011. Basics of pharmaceutical Mohammed, R., Bailey, A., Luckham, P., Taylor, S., 1993. Dewa-
emulsions: a review. Afr. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 5 (25), 2715–2725. tering of crude oil emulsions 2. Interfacial properties of the
Khatib, Z., Verbeek, P., 2003. Water to value-produced water asphaltic constituents of crude oil. Colloids Surf. A: Physicochem.
management for sustainable field development of mature and green Eng. Aspect. 80 (2–3), 237–242.
fields. J. Petrol. Technol. 55 (01), 26–28. Mohammed, R., Bailey, A., Luckham, P., Taylor, S., 1994. Dewa-
Kilpatrick, P., Spiecker, P., 2001. Asphaltene emulsions. In: Sjoblom, tering of crude oil emulsions 3. Emulsion resolution by chemical
J. (Ed.), Encyclopedic Handbook of Emulsion Technology. Marcel means. Colloids Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspect. 83 (3), 261–
Dekker, New York (Chap. 30, 707). 271.
Kobayashi, I., Yasuno, M., Iwamoto, S., Shono, A., Satoh, K., Moradi, M., Alvarado, V., Huzurbazar, S., 2010. Effect of salinity on
Nakajima, M., 2002. Microscopic observation of emulsion droplet water-in-crude oil emulsion: evaluation through drop-size distribu-
formation from a polycarbonate membrane. Colloids Surf. A: tion proxy. Energy Fuels 25 (1), 260–268.
Physicochem. Eng. Aspect. 207 (1), 185–196. Mouraille, O., Skodvin, T., Sjöblom, J., Peytavy, J.-L., 1998. Stability
Kokal, S., Alvarez, C., 2003. Reducing pressure drop in offshore of water-in-crude oil emulsions: role played by the state of
pipelines by controlling the viscosities of pressurized emulsions. solvation of asphaltenes and by waxes. J. Dispersion Sci. Technol.
Paper presented at the Middle East Oil Show. 19 (2–3), 339–367.
Kokal, S., Wingrove, M., 2000. Emulsion separation index: from Muggeridge, A., Cockin, A., Webb, K., Frampton, H., Collins, I.,
laboratory to field case studies. Paper presented at the SPE Annual Moulds, T., Salino, P., 2014. Recovery rates, enhanced oil recovery
Technical Conference and Exhibition. and technological limits. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372 (2006),
Kokal, S.L., 2005. Crude oil emulsions: a state-of-the-art review. SPE 20120320.
Prod. Facil. 20 (01), 5–13. Mukherjee, S., Kushnick, A.P., 1988. Effect of Demulsifiers on
Kuo, C.-H., Lee, C.-L., 2009. Treatment of a cutting oil emulsion by Interfacial Properties Governing Crude Oil Demulsification. ACS
microwave irradiation. Sep. Sci. Technol. 44 (8), 1799–1815. Publications.
Le Follotec, A., Pezron, I., Noik, C., Dalmazzone, C., Metlas- Murakami, R., Moriyama, H., Noguchi, T., Yamamoto, M., Binks,
Komunjer, L., 2010. Triblock copolymers as destabilizers of water- B.P., 2014. Effects of the density difference between water and oil
in-crude oil emulsions. Colloids Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng. on stabilization of powdered oil-in-water emulsions. Langmuir 30
Aspect. 365 (1–3), 162–170. (2), 496–500.
Nguyen, D., Sadeghi, N., Houston, C., 2012. Chemical interactions Schorling, P.-C., Kessel, D., Rahimian, I., 1999. Influence of the
and demulsifier characteristics for enhanced oil recovery applica- crude oil resin/asphaltene ratio on the stability of oil/water
tions. Energy Fuels 26 (5), 2742–2750. emulsions. Colloids Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspect. 152 (1),
Nollet, L.M., 2004. Handbook of Food Analysis: Volume 3 Methods, 95–102.
Instruments and Applications. CRC Press. Schramm, L.L., 1992a. Emulsions: fundamentals and applications in
Oh, C., Chung, S.-C., Shin, S.-I., Kim, Y.C., Im, S.-S., Oh, S.-G., the petroleum industry. Adv. Chem. Ser., 321
2002. Distribution of macropores in silica particles prepared by Schramm, L.L., 1992b. Fundamentals and Applications in the
using multiple emulsions. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 254 (1), 79–86. Petroleum Industry.
Ojinnaka, C., Ajienka, J., Abayeh, O., Osuji, L., Duru, R., 2016. Schröder, A., Sprakel, J., Schroën, K., Spaen, J.N., Berton-Carabin,
Formulation of best-fit hydrophile/lipophile balance-dielectric C.C., 2018. Coalescence stability of Pickering emulsions produced
permittivity demulsifiers for treatment of crude oil emulsions. with lipid particles: a microfluidic study. J. Food Eng. 234, 63–72.
Egypt. J. Pet. 25 (4), 565–574. Schubert, H., Armbruster, H., 1989. Principles of formation and
Okochi, H., Nakano, M., 2000. Preparation and evaluation of w/o/w stability of emulsions. Chem. Ing. Tech. 61 (9), 701–711.
type emulsions containing vancomycin. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 45 Sellman, E., Sams, G.W., Mandewalkar, S., 2013. Improved dehy-
(1), 5–26. dration and desalting of mature crude oil fields. Paper presented at
Oren, J.J., MacKay, G.D.M., 1977. Electrolyte and pH effect on the SPE Middle East Oil and Gas Show and Conference.
emulsion stability of water-in-petroleum oils. Fuel 56 (4), 382–384. Sharma, M., Shah, D., 1985. Macro-and Microemulsions in
Ortiz, D., Baydak, E., Yarranton, H., 2010. Effect of surfactants on Enhanced Oil Recovery. ACS Publications.
interfacial films and stability of water-in-oil emulsions stabilized by Sharma, T., Kumar, G.S., Chon, B.H., Sangwai, J.S., 2014. Viscosity
asphaltenes. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 351 (2), 542–555. of the oil-in-water Pickering emulsion stabilized by surfactant-
Ottewill, R., 1984. Surfactants. Academic Press, London. polymer and nanoparticle-surfactant-polymer system. Kor.-Austr.
Paige, R., Sweeney, F., 1993. Produced water-reinjection: under- Rheol. J. 26 (4), 377–387.
standing the problems. Paper presented at the Water Management Sharma, T., Kumar, G.S., Sangwai, J.S., 2015. Comparative effec-
Offshore Conference. tiveness of production performance of Pickering emulsion stabi-
Pal, R., 1996. Effect of droplet size on the rheology of emulsions. lized by nanoparticle–surfactant–polymerover surfactant–polymer
AIChE J. 42 (11), 3181–3190. (SP) flooding for enhanced oil recoveryfor Brownfield reservoir. J.
Pal, R., Yan, Y., Masliyah, J., Schramm, L., 1992. Emulsions: Petrol. Sci. Eng. 129, 221–232.
fundamentals and applications in the petroleum industry. Adv. Shehzad, F., Hussein, I.A., Kamal, M.S., Ahmad, W., Sultan, A.S.,
Chem. Ser. 231, 295–312. Nasser, M.S., 2018. Polymeric surfactants and emerging alterna-
Pereira, J.C., López, I., Salas, R., Silva, F., Fernández, C., Urbina, tives used in the demulsification of produced water: a review.
C., López, J.C., 2007. Resins: the molecules responsible for the Polym. Rev. 58 (1), 63–101.
stability/instability phenomena of asphaltenes. Energy Fuels 21 (3), Shui, L., van den Berg, A., Eijkel, J.C., 2009. Interfacial tension
1317–1321. controlled W/O and O/W 2-phase flows in microchannel. Lab Chip
Perles, C.E., Volpe, P.L.O.f., Bombard, A.n.J., 2012. Study of the 9 (6), 795–801.
cation and salinity effect on electrocoalescence of water/crude oil Silset, A., Hannisdal, A., Hemmingsen, P.V., Sjöblom, J., 2010.
emulsions. Energy Fuels 26 (11), 6914–6924. Emulsions of heavy crude oils. II. Viscous responses and their
Poindexter, M.K., Marsh, S.C., 2009. Inorganic solid content governs influence on emulsion stability measurements. J. Dispersion Sci.
water-in-crude oil emulsion stability predictions. Energy Fuels 23 Technol. 31 (10), 1432–1445.
(3), 1258–1268. Silva, B.F., Rodrı́guez-Abreu, C., Vilanova, N., 2016. Recent
Pons, R., Solans, C., Tadros, T.F., 1995. Rheological behavior of advances in multiple emulsions and their application as templates.
highly concentrated oil-in-water (o/w) emulsions. Langmuir 11 (6), Curr. Opin. Colloid Interface Sci. 25, 98–108.
1966–1971. Silvander, M., Karlsson, G., Edwards, K., 1996. Vesicle solubiliza-
Porter, M., 1994. Handbook of Surfactants Blackie Academic and tion by alkyl sulfate surfactants: a cryo-TEM study of the vesicle to
Professional: Glasgow, UK. micelle transition. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 179 (1), 104–113.
Rabalais, N., McKee, B., Reed, D., Means, J., 1992. Fate and effects Sjöblom, J., Aske, N., Auflem, I.H., Brandal, Ø., Havre, T.E.,
of produced water discharges in coastal Louisiana, Gulf of Mexico, Sæther, Ø., Kallevik, H., et al, 2003. Our current understanding of
USA. In: Produced Water. Springer, pp. 355–369. water-in-crude oil emulsions: recent characterization techniques
Reynolds, R.R., Kiker, R.D., 2003. Produced water and associated and high pressure performance. Adv. Colloid Interface Sci. 100,
issues. Oklahoma Geol. Surv. 399–473.
Robins, M.M., 2000. Emulsions—creaming phenomena. Curr. Opin. Sjöblom, J., Mingyuan, L., Christy, A.A., Gu, T., 1992. Water-in-
Colloid Interface Sci. 5 (5–6), 265–272. crude-oil emulsions from the Norwegian continental shelf 7.
Robins, M.M., Watson, A.D., Wilde, P.J., 2002. Emulsions— Interfacial pressure and emulsion stability. Colloids Surf. 66 (1),
creaming and rheology. Curr. Opin. Colloid Interface Sci. 7 (5– 55–62.
6), 419–425. Sjöblom, J., Mingyuan, L., Christy, A.A., Rønningsen, H.P., 1995.
Rodionova, G., Kelesßoğlu, S., Sjöblom, J., 2014. AC field induced Water-in-crude oil emulsions from the Norwegian continental shelf
destabilization of water-in-oil emulsions based on North Sea acidic 10. Ageing of the interfacially active components and the influence
crude oil. Colloids Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspect. 448, 60–66. on the emulsion stability. Colloids Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng.
Roodbari, N.H., Badiei, A., Soleimani, E., Khaniani, Y., 2016. Aspect. 96 (3), 261–272.
Tweens demulsification effects on heavy crude oil/water emulsion. Sousa, F., Santos, M., Rocha, S., Trindade, T., 2014. Encapsulation
Arabian J. Chem. 9, S806–S811. of essential oils in SiO2 microcapsules and release behaviour of
Roshan, N., Ghader, S., Rahimpour, M.R., 2018. Application of the volatile compounds. J. Microencapsul. 31 (7), 627–635.
response surface methodology for modeling demulsification of Spiecker, P.M., Gawrys, K.L., Trail, C.B., Kilpatrick, P.K., 2003.
crude oil emulsion using a demulsifier. J. Dispersion Sci. Technol. Effects of petroleum resins on asphaltene aggregation and water-in-
39 (5), 700–710. oil emulsion formation. Colloids Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng.
Salager, J.-L., 2000. Formulation concepts for the emulsion maker. Aspect. 220 (1), 9–27.
Pharm. Emul. Suspensions 105, 19–72. Spiecker, P.M., Kilpatrick, P.K., 2004. Interfacial rheology of
Salager, J.-L., 2002. Surfactants types and uses. FIRP booklet petroleum asphaltenes at the oil water interface. Langmuir 20
(E300A). (10), 4022–4032.
Stephenson, M., 1992. A survey of produced water studies. In: Xie, X., Wang, Y., Li, X., Wei, X., Yang, S., 2018. Pickering
Produced Water. Springer, pp. 1–11. emulsions stabilized by amphiphilic carbonaceous materials derived
Strassner, J., 1968. Effect of pH on interfacial films and stability of from wheat straw. Colloids Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspect.
crude oil-water emulsions. J. Petrol. Technol. 20 (03), 303–312. 558, 65–72.
Strømgren, T., Sørstrøm, S., Schou, L., Kaarstad, I., Aunaas, T., Xu, C., Wang, D., Wang, H., Ma, L., Zhu, X., Zhu, Y., Liu, F., et al,
Brakstad, O., Johansen, Ø., 1995. Acute toxic effects of produced 2018. Experimental investigation of coal dust wetting ability of
water in relation to chemical composition and dispersion. Mar. anionic surfactants with different structures. Process Saf. Environ.
Environ. Res. 40 (2), 147–169. Prot.
Subramanian, D., May, N., Firoozabadi, A., 2017. Functional Yamashita, Y., Sakamoto, K., 2016. Hydrophilic-Lipophilic Balance
molecules and the stability of water-in-crude oil emulsions. Energy (HLB): Classical Indexation and Novel Indexation of Surfactant.
Fuels 31 (9), 8967–8977. Encyclopedia Biocolloid Biointerface Sci. 2V Set, 570–574.
Sztukowski, D.M., Yarranton, H.W., 2004. Characterization and Yang, X., Hamza, H., Czarnecki, J., 2004. Investigation of subfrac-
interfacial behavior of oil sands solids implicated in emulsion tions of Athabasca asphaltenes and their role in emulsion stability.
stability. J. Dispersion Sci. Technol. 25 (3), 299–310. Energy Fuels 18 (3), 770–777.
Tadros, T., 2004. Application of rheology for assessment and Yang, X., Tan, W., Bu, Y., 2008. Demulsification of asphaltenes and
prediction of the long-term physical stability of emulsions. Adv. resins stabilized emulsions via the freeze/thaw method. Energy
Colloid Interface Sci. 108, 227–258. Fuels 23 (1), 481–486.
Tambe, D.E., Sharma, M.M., 1993. Factors controlling the stability Yarranton, H.W., Hussein, H., Masliyah, J.H., 2000. Water-in-
of colloid-stabilized emulsions: I. An experimental investigation. J. hydrocarbon emulsions stabilized by asphaltenes at low concen-
Colloid Interface Sci. 157 (1), 244–253. trations. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 228 (1), 52–63.
Tang, A.Y., Lee, C., Wang, Y., Kan, C., 2018. Effect of hydrophilic- Yesßilyurt, Z., Vaziri Hassas, B., Karakasß, F., Boylu, F., 2017.
lipophilic balance (HLB) values of PEG-based non-ionic surfactant Ultrafine coal flotation and dewatering: Selecting the surfactants of
on reverse micellar dyeing of cotton fibre with reactive dyes in non- proper hydrophilic–lipophilic balance (HLB). Int. J. Coal Preparat.
aqueous medium. Fibers Polym. 19 (4), 894–904. Utiliz., 1–17
Tang, J., Quinlan, P.J., Tam, K.C., 2015. Stimuli-responsive picker- Yu, W., Xie, H., 2012. A review on nanofluids: preparation, stability
ing emulsions: recent advances and potential applications. Soft mechanisms, and applications. J. Nanomater. 2012, 1.
Matter 11 (18), 3512–3529. Zaid, N.H., 1987. Dispersed Oil Soluble Corrosion Inhibitor and
Thompson, D., Taylor, A., Graham, D., 1985. Emulsification and Water Soluble Phosphonate Scale Inhibitor Composition. Google
demulsification related to crude oil production. Colloids Surf. 15, Patents.
175–189. Zaki, N.N., 1997. Surfactant stabilized crude oil-in-water emulsions
van Os, N.M., Haak, J.R., Rupert, L.A.M., 2012. Physico-chemical for pipeline transportation of viscous crude oils. Colloids Surf. A:
Properties of Selected Anionic, Cationic and Nonionic Surfactants. Physicochem. Eng. Aspect. 125 (1), 19–25.
Elsevier. Zaki, N.N., Abdel-Raouf, M.E., Abdel-Azim, A.-A., 1996. Propylene
Varadaraj, R., Brons, C., 2012. Molecular origins of crude oil oxide-ethylene oxide block copolymers as demulsifiers for water-in-
interfacial activity. Part 4: oil–water interface elasticity and crude oil emulsions, I. Effect of molecular weight and hydrophilic-
oil asphaltene films. Energy Fuels 26 (12), 7164–7169. lipophylic balance on the demulsification efficiency. Monatshefte
Veil, J.A., Puder, M.G., Elcock, D., Redweik Jr, R.J., 2004. A white für Chemie/Chem. Month. 127 (6–7), 621–629.
paper describing produced water from production of crude oil, Zhang, J., Li, J., Thring, R.W., Hu, X., Song, X., 2012. Oil recovery
natural gas, and coal bed methane. Retrieved from. from refinery oily sludge via ultrasound and freeze/thaw. J. Hazard.
Wang, H., Huang, C., 1979. The effect of turbulence on oil Mater. 203, 195–203.
emulsification. Paper presented at the Workshop on Physical Zhang, J., Tian, D., Lin, M., Yang, Z., Dong, Z., 2016. Effect of
Behavior of Oil in the Marine Environment. resins, waxes and asphaltenes on water-oil interfacial properties
Wang, J., Hu, F.-L., Li, C.-Q., Li, J., Yang, Y., 2010a. Synthesis of and emulsion stability. Colloids Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng.
dendritic polyether surfactants for demulsification. Sep. Purif. Aspect. 507, 1–6.
Technol. 73 (3), 349–354. Zhang, L.Y., Lopetinsky, R., Xu, Z., Masliyah, J.H., 2005. Asphal-
Wang, X., Brandvik, A., Alvarado, V., 2010b. Probing interfacial tene monolayers at a toluene/water interface. Energy Fuels 19 (4),
water-in-crude oil emulsion stability controls using electrorheology. 1330–1336.
Energy Fuels 24 (12), 6359–6365. Zhang, M., Wu, H., 2018. Separation of bio-oil by hydrophilic
Wang, Z., Fingas, M., Yang, C., Christensen, J.H., 2005. Crude Oil surfactants. Energy Fuels 32 (3), 3559–3565.
and Refined Product Fingerprinting: Principles, in Environmental Zhang, R., Huo, J., Peng, Z., Feng, Q., Zhang, J., Wang, J., 2017.
Forensics. Emulsification properties of comb-shaped trimeric nonionic sur-
Wong, S., Lim, J., Dol, S., 2015. Crude oil emulsion: a review on factant for high temperature drilling fluids based on water in oil.
formation, classification and stability of water-in-oil emulsions. J. Colloids Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspect. 520, 855–863.
Petrol. Sci. Eng. 135, 498–504. Zolfaghari, R., Fakhru’l-Razi, A., Abdullah, L.C., Elnashaie, S.S.,
Xia, L., Lu, S., Cao, G., 2004. Stability and demulsification of Pendashteh, A., 2016. Demulsification techniques of water-in-oil
emulsions stabilized by asphaltenes or resins. J. Colloid Interface and oil-in-water emulsions in petroleum industry. Sep. Purif.
Sci. 271 (2), 504–506. Technol. 170, 377–407.

Overview On Petroleum Emulsions, Formation

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

Overview On Petroleum Emulsions, Formation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Arabian Journal of Chemistry (2018) xxx, xxx–xxx

King Saud University

Arabian Journal of Chemistry

Overview on petroleum emulsions, formation,

Received 17 May 2018; accepted 15 November 2018

Production and hosting by Elsevier

1.4. Elements inﬂuencing on volume of extraction water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00

Fig. 1 Reservoir layers (Igunnu and Chen, 2012).

Onshore water Oﬀshore

BBIS*1000 PER DAY

Fig. 3 Upstream equipment for crude oil production (Wang, 2005).

Fig. 4 Water-in-oil emulsions formation (Hanapi et al., 2006).

Fig. 6 Thermodynamic phenomenon’s in nanoemulsions (Gupta et al., 2016).

an interfacial ﬁlm structure of a particular strength. Since the

3.1.3. Emulsion thermodynamic aspect

element content of crude oil, while the previous factors change,

Table 1 Properties of asphaltenes at water-in-oil emulsion (Varadaraj and Brons, 2012).

Table 2 Summary of demulsiﬁcation technologies (Arthur et al., 2005).

In the petroleum industry, there are different ways to sepa-

Applying chemical surfactant to emulsion.

There are several ways to demulsiﬁcation of emulsion

Table 3 Summary of application surfactant in demulsiﬁcation emulsion.

M.M. Abdulredha et al.

Alkyl Ether Sulfate and Alkyl Ethoxy Sulfate

Surfactant Mixtures Cetyl Trimethyl Ammonium Bromide (CTAB)

Alkyl propoxy Sulfate and Alkyl Ethoxy Sulfonates

Coco Alkyl Trimethyl Ammonium Chloride

Stearyl Trimethyl Ammonium Chloride

Ethoxylated Alkyl Amine

Alkyl Ethoxy Carboxylated

Neodol Ethoxylate 91-8

Nonionic Alkyl Polyglycoside (APG)

Neodol 67 Propoxylated Sulfate (N67-7POS)

Nonylphenol “N” Ethoxylate

Polyethoxylated Alkyl Phenols

Alkyl (or Alcohol) Ethoxy Sulfate (AES)

Alkyl Aryl Sulfonates

Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate (SDS)

Alkoxylated alkyl phenol condensates

Fig. 13 Shows general types of surfactant.

You might also like