OIL-BASED DRILLING WASTE ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS: AN

UPDATE STATUS OF THE TREATMENTS AND DISPOSAL

METHODS. STATUS OF OBM IN ANGOLA
Felisberto J. D. CAMUEGE
Department of Petroleum Engineering, Instituto Superior Técnico, Lisbon, Portugal
Felisberto.camuege@hotmail.com

ABSTRACT: The oil and gas operations generate a considerable amount of drilling waste. The non-aqueous
portion of the drilling waste has the potential to harm the environment and human health. Because of that, several
treatments and disposal methods are available to reduce the impact of drilling waste while complying with more
strict environmental regulations all over the world. This extended abstract describes the different treatment and
disposal techniques available and provides an update of the oil-based drilling mud and cuttings treatment used in
Angola.

KEYWORDS: Oilfield drilling waste, oil-based drilling fluid, drilling waste management, operational waste
discharge, environmental impact, disposal of drill cuttings.

1. INTRODUCTION

The oil and gas industry provides a significant contribution to the world's primary energy needs. Although the
trend is to reduce the fossil fuel source of energy, oil and gas will continue to contribute significantly to the world
energy demand for the years to come. Also, oil is essential for elaborating more than 6 000 products used in our
modern lives [1][2].

This source of energy is mainly obtained by drilling wells in preselected areas. In general, oil and gas exploration
consist in drilling the underground rock formation above and across the reservoirs. As a result, the volume of
drilling waste produced is considerably large, varying from 1 000 – 5 000 m3 per drilled well. Depending on the
location's drilling activity, this volume can go up to 850 000 m3/year [3].

Non-aqueous drilling waste has the potential to harm the environment and public health. For example, the untreated
drilling waste discharged in the sea or disposed-off in the soil could negatively affect the marine life ecosystem,
soil ability to support vegetation or even underground water sources contamination.

Several actions have been implemented to reduce the drilling waste's negative effect and contribute to a clean
environment, including waste reduction by drilling slim holes, or developing treatments and disposal techniques.
Whenever possible, the reuse of the treated cuttings in other industries reduces the waste volume that otherwise
would require disposal.

Various treatment techniques are available for treating the non-aqueous drilling waste, such as surfactant enhanced
washing, supercritical fluids extraction, landspreading, vermicomposting, incineration, thermal desorption, etc.
Some of the disposal techniques include cuttings reinjection, cuttings burial or landfilling. The recycled
applications of the treated cuttings include road paving, cement and concrete applications.

Understanding the potential hazards of non-aqueous drilling waste, the available treatment technologies, and
disposal methods are fundamental for selecting the technologies to reduce the drilling project's final cost and
negative effects.
This extended abstract describes the current treatment, disposal, and reuse applications for the non-aqueous drilling
waste. Also, describes the current treatment and the status of the handling of OBM drilling waste in Angola.

2. DRILL WASTE MAIN COMPONENTS: CHARACTERISTICS AND TOXICITY

During the drilling process, the drilling waste generated is a mixture of drilling fluids and rock cuttings. The
cuttings represent a significant part of the drilling waste and contain a percentage of drilling mud and other
contaminants, varying between 5 – 32% [4].

There are three main types of drilling fluids: water-based, oil-based, and synthetic-based drilling fluids. The oil
and synthetic-based are called non-aqueous drilling fluids.

The water-based mud is appropriate for drilling any non-complex or problematic sections in offshore or onshore
wells. In addition, the water-based drilling fluids does not contain oil in their formulation. Therefore, the drilling
waste generated from drilling with water-based mud does not require special treatment before disposal, except for
drilling in the reservoir sections.

The oil and synthetic-based mud were introduced to allow easier and safer drilling in some drilling conditions such
as some drilling conditions such as High-Pressure, High-Temperature (HPHT) wells, highly deviated wells,
formation swelling, excessive torque and drag, stuck pipe, differential sticking, excessive corrosion in the drilling
tools, and drilling bit lubrication issues.

The oil and synthetic-based drilling fluids have a diversity of contaminants such as hydrocarbons and heavy metals,
including Barium (Ba), Chromium (Cr), Copper (Cu), Nickel (Ni), Lead (Pb) and Zinc (Zn). Therefore, the drilling
waste from drilling with non-aqueous fluids requires treatment before disposal or before potential reuse, to remove
or reduce the contaminants to an acceptable level.

The effect of discharging the non-aqueous fluids or drilling waste in the sea while drilling offshore could be
observed more than 5 kilometres away from the discharge location [5]. Additionally, experiments have shown that
after 180 days, less than 5% of the oil-based mud contaminated drill cuttings were biodegraded [6].

The characteristics of both components of the drilling waste depend on several factors. The main characteristics
of the cuttings vary according to the textures, shapes, porosity, and particle size distribution. In general, the particle
size distribution varies between 0.01 – 20 mm, the density of the particles between 1.3 – 2.7 t/m3, and the
compressive strength between 10 – 40 kPa [7][8].

The main characteristics of the different drilling fluids include viscosity, density, gel strength, filtration and pH.
Those properties depend on the composition of the various components such as the type and amount of weighting
agents, polymers, salt, other chemical compounds, the water content, or the type and content of oil used in the
formulation of the drilling fluids.

3. DRILLING WASTE TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL TECHNIQUES

The treatment process starts by first separating both components of the drilling waste (drilling fluids and cuttings)
and then process both parts to reduce the contaminants to an acceptable level.
Various technologies are available to treat non-aqueous fluids drilling waste. Those technologies are subdivided
into four main categories including: physical, chemical, bioremediation, and thermal treatment methods.

3.1. PHYSICAL TREATMENT

Generally, when the drilling waste arrives at the surface, the solids cuttings are separated from most of the drilling
fluids by physical-mechanical means. The mechanical separation is the only physical process applied to the drilling
waste. This process consists of passing the drilling waste thru a series of equipment, called solids control
equipment (SCEs), to reduce the drilling fluids content from the solid cuttings before further cuttings treatment
occurs. After this process, the recovered drilling mud is reconditioned for re-utilization, and the drilling cuttings
go for other treatment.
The SCEs were first introduced in the oil industry in the 1920s. Nowadays, with the addition of the cutting dryers
to the SCEs, the liquid/solids separation efficiency varies between 90 – 95%. From this physical process most of
the drilling fluids are recycled and used to drill other wells. The other 5 – 10% remain attached to the cuttings and
are processed using other treatments methods [10].
The cost of the mechanical separation varies between 100 – 200 US$/m3 [11].

3.2. CHEMICAL TREATMENTS

The chemical treatment technologies use chemical principles to clean, isolate, or destroy the contaminants in the
cuttings. Those methods include stabilization and solidification, surfactant enhanced wash, sub and supercritical
fluids extraction.

SOLIDIFICATION AND STABILIZATION

Solidification and stabilization (S/S) were first introduced as an alternative treatment for drilling waste in the late-
1980s. S/S treatment uses various cementitious material to mix with wet contaminated drill cuttings. After drying,
the drilling waste is transformed into a solid compound, that traps the contaminants into the solidified rock matrix.
Using this method, the isolation of the contaminants can go up to 94% [12]. The cost of the treatment using this
technology varies between 50 – 250 US$/m3 [13][14].

SURFACTANT ENHANCED WASHING

The surfactant enhanced washing (SEWs) was first patented to clean OBDCs in late-1984. The surfactant enhanced
washing uses different surfactant agents to separate some of the wet cutting’s contaminants. The cleaning
efficiency in removing oil contaminants from the cuttings varies between 95 – 98%. The cost of the surfactant
washing treatment varies between 30 – 200 $US/ton [15].

SUB AND SUPERCRITICAL FLUID EXTRACTIONS

Sub and Supercritical Fluid Extractions (SCFEs) use various solvent fluids at a critical point to wash and clean the
contaminants from the cuttings. The technology was patented as an alternative treatment technology to remove oil
from solids in 1980s.
The efficiency in removing contaminants varies between 98 – 99%, and the cost of the technology varies between
250 – 753 $US/m3[16][17].
3.3. BIOREMEDIATION

The bioremediation process uses live organisms to decompose, degrade or eliminate contaminants present in
drilling waste. This technology has four main variations: phytoremediation, vermicomposting, and bio-piles,
landfarming and land spreading, and bioreactors. One of the main disadvantage of the bioremediation methods is
the long time the process takes to get fully clean cuttings.

PHYTOREMEDIATION

Phytoremediation uses plants and their enzymes to treat contaminated cuttings. This technology has been used
since the 1990s, and its mechanism of action can be summarized in six primary processes: phytostabilization,
photostimulation, phytoextraction, phototransformation, photovolatilization, and phizofiltration.

The efficiency of phytoremediation is almost 100% [18]. The cost of the treatment using this technology varies
from 17 – 100 US$/m3 [19].

VERMICOMPOSTING AND BIO-PILES

Vermicomposting and bio-piles use worms to treat the cuttings. The basic principle consists in exposing the treated
drilling cuttings from other methods to worms that will accelerate the natural decomposition of organic waste into
a material capable of supplying necessary nutrients to enhance plants or vegetation growth.

This technology was suggested to treat drilling waste in 2001 and it is appropriate for treating cuttings with high
organic content.

The efficiency of the treatment using this technology is almost 100% [20], and the cost varies between 70 – 100
US$/m3 [14].

LAND FARMING AND LAND SPREADING

Land farming and land spreading treatment techniques were first developed in the 1950s to treat oil waste from
petroleum refineries. The principle behind this technique consists in spreading the previously treated drilling
cuttings from other treatment methods, in a designated area and allow the natural microbial population to
metabolize and complete the decontamination process (landfarming), or adding a small amount of sludge (mixture
of drilling fluids and ultra-fines cuttings from the formations) into the previously treated drilling cuttings
(landspreading).

A study performed by Andrew S. Ball et al. (2012) showed the efficiency of those methods of treatment close to
100%, and the treating cost of landfarming and landspreading varies between 10 – 40 US$/m3.

BIOREACTOR

The bioreactor is a variation of the landfarming and land spreading where the biodegradation process happens in
a contained space, where the environment of the living organisms is optimized. This optimization of the process
allows a faster treating compared to the original Landfarming and land spreading. But it will cost also more.

The estimated cost of the bioreactor treatment technique is 700 US$/m3 [14].
3.4. THERMAL TREATMENTS

The thermal treatment uses direct or indirect heating to remove the contaminants from the cuttings. There are five
thermal treatments: radiofrequency and microwave, incineration, gasification and pyrolysis, thermal desorption,
and thermomechanical cuttings cleaner.

RADIOFREQUENCY AND MICROWAVE

The Radiofrequency (RF) and Microwave (MW) technologies use thermal radiation to heat and remove the water,
organics, and volatile components from the drilling waste. RF and MW use frequency waves ranging between 1 –
300 MHz and 300 – 30,000MHz, respectively [21].

One of the first applications to use frequency waves technology to treat OBDCs was patented in 1972.

The efficiency of this method of treatment is estimated to be more than 99% [22]. The cost of the treatment varies
between 30 – 150 US$/ton [23].

INCINERATION

The incineration technique involves anaerobic burning of the drilling waste at a temperature ranging from 1,200 -
1,500 ºC. The full combustion ensures removing or eliminating the hydrocarbons, organics, and inorganics
contaminants from the cuttings [14][11].

This technology to treat oil contaminated cuttings was patented in late-1987. However, incineration has been
discouraged nowadays due to excessive CO2 and other gas emissions compared to other thermal treatment
methods. Additionally, the treated cuttings could contain heavy metals such as Lead (Pb), Mercury (Ag), and
Cadmium (Cd) [14].

The efficiency of the incineration process to remove oil from the cuttings is close to 100% [24]. The cost of drilling
waste treatment by incineration varies between 200 – 1,000 US$/m3 [11][14].

PYROLISES AND GASIFICATION

Pyrolysis and gasification convert contaminants in the drilling waste into Carbon Monoxide (CO), Hydrogen (H 2),
and Carbon Dioxide (CO2) by exposing them to high temperatures ranging from 400 – 2,000 ºC under aerobic
heating condition [25].

The oil removal efficiency is close to 100%. The cost of treatment is estimated at 300 US$/ton [26].

THERMAL DESORPTION

The Thermal Desorption (TD) process exposes the drilling waste to high temperatures from 120 – 620 ºC in a
sealed furnace under anaerobic heating conditions to eliminate, remove, or destroy the contaminants.

Vacuum technique, an alternative to the TD process was patented in late 1993 to treat solids contaminated with
hydrocarbons.

The oil removal efficiency in the TD treatment is more than 99% [27]. The treatment process costs for offshore
and onshore ranges between 100 – 1,500 US$/m3 (23 – 600 US$/tons [11].
THERMOMECHANICAL CUTTING CLEAN

Thermomechanical Cuttings Cleaner (TCC) was developed in the 1980s. The TCC technology is a variation of the
TD process that uses a high-speed rotational hammer mill that hits the cuttings, allowing the kinetic energy to be
converted into heat. The friction between different materials generates enough heat to destroy, separate, and/or
recover volatile components present in the drilling cuttings.

TCC temperature ranges between 200 – 350 ºC, and oil removal efficiency is above 99%. The cost of treatment
varies between 100 – 200 US$/m3 [11].

3.5. DRILL CUTTINGS DISPOSAL AND REUSE TECHNIQUES

After the treatment of the waste produced during the drilling process, the Operators still need to deal with the
disposal of the treated cuttings. The drilling waste disposal is the last step of any oilfield drilling project Waste
Management Plan (WMP). Currently, waste disposal techniques include cuttings re-injection, landfilling, cuttings
burial, and vitrification. Another important way to reduce the volume of the treated cutting´s for disposal is to use
them as resources in other industries.

CUTTINGS REINJECTION

The well re-injection as a disposal method was first mentioned in the late-1930s when the O&G companies used
this method primarily for disposing-off the brine. In the 1950´s, drilling waste was first injected into a well.

The Cuttings Reinjection (CRI) process consists in using standard rig equipment such as shaker screens, mixing
tanks, grinding units, low and high-pressure pumps to crush, mix and homogenize the untreated drilling waste.
This process of injecting can be performed in two different ways: from the annular space between casings or casing
and wellbore or from inside the casing of a dedicated disposal well.

Different studies showed the cost of the CRI, including onshore and offshore operation ranging between 32 – 1572
US$/m3. [28].

LANDFILLING AND CUTTINGS BURIAL

Landfilling and cuttings burial are the most used disposal options for onshore and offshore cuttings nowadays. The
landfilling process consists in disposing-off the previously treated cutting in pre-existing excavations or uneven
terrain or irregularities in the soil. Cutting’s burial consists in discharging of the treated cuttings in human-made
pits and covering them with soil.

The cost of the landfilling disposal varies between 40 – 60 US$/m3, while the cost of cutting burial using existing
pits only ranges between 10 – 12 US$/m3. [14].

VITRIFICATION

Vitrification is the disposal process that transforms the non-crystalline amorphous solids from the treated cuttings
into a glass-ceramic. Vitrification of cuttings was patented as a disposal option in late-1992.

The vitrification process consists in grinding the previously treated cuttings, adding some other components to
adjusting to the properties to the required ceramic properties, melting the mixture by exposing to high temperature
varies between 1,600 – 2,000 ºC, and finally cooling at ambient temperature to obtain the glass-ceramic.
The cost of the vitrification process ranges between 55 – 77 US$/tons [26].

OTHER APPLICATIONS

Besides treatment and disposal technologies, other patented applications are considered, adding value to the treated
cuttings. Using the cuttings in other applications reduces the volume of treated cuttings that otherwise would need
to be disposed-off. Those applications include road pavement, cementing manufacture, concrete, and applications,
as a weighting agent in the drilling fluids formulations.

Using the treated cuttings in aggregate and asphalt concrete layers for the road construction was patented in early-
2002 as an alternative option to disposing-off the treated cuttings.

The applications of using the treated cuttings to replace the clay in the cement manufacturing process was patented
in late-2005. The process consists in consists in treating the cuttings with acids (such as alkylbenzene sulfonic, or
sulfuric) to activate the clay.

4. STATUS OF OBM DRILLING WASTE IN ANGOLA

Angola is the second-highest oil-producer country in Africa and one of the top 15 world's major producers. The
surface area of the country is 1,247,000 km 2, with more than 1,600 km of coast.

The first-ever observation of Angola's oil occurrence was made in the 1700s in Libongo in the north of Luanda,
when Angola was still a Portuguese colony, and the first commercial oil discovery was made in 1955, in the
Benfica Field.

ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION

The country's legislation and regulations regarding oilfield waste management and environmental control help
ensure the minimum impact of the O&G activities.

The zero-discharge policy was implemented in Angola in 2014, that prohibits any operational discharges from
petroleum activities in onshore or offshore from NAF waste, produced water and cuttings, with the exception for
safety reasons. The legislation applied to drilling waste can be summarized in six main regulations [24]:

– Decree Nº 39/2000: Regulations for the environmental protection measures to be used in o&g activities;
– Decree Nº 5272004: Regulations for the environmental impact assessment;
– Decree Nº 08/2005: Regulations for waste management, removal, and deposit;
– Decree Nº 011/2005: Regulations for the information procedures oilfield spillage;
– Decree Nº 224/2012: Regulations for operational discharge management;
– Decree Nº 097/2014: Regulations for operational waste discharge management, zero discharge police.

WASTE MANAGEMENT AND TREATMENT OPTIONS

The drilling operation in Angola are performed both onshore and offshore. The onshore activities take place in
two of the eighteen provinces, Cabinda and Soyo. The offshore drilling is performed in the seven provinces along
the coast: Cabinda, Soyo, Bengo, Luanda, Cuanza Sul, Benguela, and Namibe.

Angola had 13 oil Operator companies between 2015 – 2020 and more than twenty services companies. The
country produces a considerable amount of drilling waste from R&D drilling activities.
The estimated volume of drilling waste produced by the Operators and services companies in Angola over 2015 –
2019 is over 143 300 m3, where 46 200 m3 generated using WBM, and 97 100 m3 from waste using non-aqueous.
The simplified WMP for the waste produced up to 2019 is summarized in the Figure 1.

Figure 1. Schematic of the possible treatments and disposal adopted for OBDCs in Angola

Analyses from the more than 50 wells in the country indicate that the drilling fluids used to drill, and subsequent
drilling waste produced was 31% WBM, 39% OBM and 30% SBM.

5. CONCLUSIONS

The drilling process generates a lot of waste. The volume of the OBM/SBM waste produced is directly proportional
to the E&D drilling activities in a specific location. Its generation represents an inevitable inconvenience due to
its level of toxicity and environmental impact. Proper legislations and WMP are essential to minimize the potential
human health and environmental issues.

The schematic

Figure 2 resume of the currently treatment and disposal options, as wells as the reuse applications for the OBM
and SBM.
 Figure 2. Schematic of current possible treatments and disposal options for OBDCs

The treatment method implemented could reduce the environmental impact of waste and further treatment before
and after disposal. The efficiency and costs allocated for each technology and the environmental impact of waste
treatment, disposal, or reuse application technologies play an essential role in the technology adopted in each
location. Table 1 resumes the various technologies efficiency and costs.

Table 1. Comparison of the Treatment methods

DRILLING WASTE REMEDIATION TECHNIQUES
EFFICIENCY TREATMENT COST
CATEGORIES TECHNIQUES
% US$/m3 US$/tons
PHYSICAL MECHANICAL SEPARATION 90 – 95 100 – 200

STABILIZATION AND SOLIDIFICATION 94 50 – 250

SURFACTANT WASHING 96 – 98 30 – 3,000
CHEMICAL
SUPERCRITICAL WATER OXIDATION EXTRACTION 98 250 – 753 650
FLUID EXTRACTION CARBON DIOXIDE EXTRACTION 99 200 160 – 350

PHYTOREMEDIATION 93 – 97 30 – 100
VERMICULTURE 100 80 – 100
BIOLOGICAL
LAND SPREADING 100 10 – 40
LAND FARMING 100 10 – 12

MICROWAVE 99 30 – 150
INCINERATION 100 200 – 1,000
THERMAL GASIFICATION AND PIROLYSIS 100 300
THERMAL DESORPPTION 99 100 – 1,500 23 – 600
TERMOMECHANICAL CUTTING CLEAN 99 100 – 200

DRILLING DISPOSAL TECHNIQUES

CUTTING RE-INJECTION 32 – 1572
LANDFILLING 40 – 60
DISPOSAL
CUTTING BURIAL 10 – 12
VITRIFICATION 55 – 77

Oilfield drilling generates a considered amount of waste. The produced non-aqueous drilling waste has the
potential to harm environmental and public health. Because of that, the waste needs treatment before disposal or
any potential reuse.

O&G industry has made progress in reducing environmental concerns. Several drilling waste minimizations, waste
treatment, disposal, and reuse application technologies are available nowadays. Depending on the volume of
drilling waste produced, characteristics of the rock cuttings, and the available technologies, the oil Operators and
services companies consider the most appropriate and cost-effective technologies to reduce the environmental
concerns and meet the countries legislations.

Angola is the second-highest oil producer in Africa. This production reflects the previews and current drilling
E&D activities. The volume of waste produced in the country between 2015 – 2019 is estimated to be over 149 300
m3. Also, analyses from more than 50 wells showed 31% used WBM, 39% OBM, and 30% SBM, between land
and offshore operations. Therefore, producing mostly Non-aqueous fluids drilling waste.

Non-aqueous fluids drilling waste require treatment before disposal or reuse in other applications. Several drilling
waste treatments and disposal options are currently considered and explored in the country's oil Operators and
services companies in their waste management plans, including surfactant washing,incineration,
thermomechanical cuttings cleaner, thermal desorption, landfilling and cuttings burial.
REFERENCES

[1] Maria Monteiro Barros Ravenna, Wilson Acchar, E. L. Barros Neto, J. B. Silva, and Vamberto Monteiro Silva,
Study of Influence of Replacement Waste Oil Well Drilling Fluid in the Standard Mass of a Ceramic
Industry in São Gonçalo do Amarante/RN, Brazil, Materials Science Forum, Volume 881, Pages 416 – 421,
November 2016, DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.881.416;

[2] Martin Menachery, DNV GL Forecast: Gas To Become World's Key Energy Source By 2035, O&G Middle
East, 6th September 2017, https://www.oilandgasmiddleeast.com/article-17767-dnv-gl-forecast-gas-to-
become-worlds-key-energy-source-by-2035;

[3] Y. I. Vaisman, K. G. Pugin, and A. S. Vlasov. Using the Resource Potential of Drill Cuttings in Road
Construction, IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Volume 459, Chapter 1, 1 st April
2020, DOI: 10.1088/1755-1315/459/2/022078;

[4] Z. Talbi, B. Haddou, Z. Bouberka, and Z. Derriche, Simultaneous Elimination of Dissolved and Dispersed
Pollutants from Cutting Oil Wastes Using Two Aqueous Phase Extraction Methods, Journal of Hazardous
Materials, Volume 163, Issues 2 – 3, Pages 748 – 755, 30th April 2009, DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.07.022;

[5] Torgeir Bakke, Jarle Klungsøyr, Steinar Sanni, Environmental Impacts of Produced Water and Drilling
Waste Discharges from The Norwegian Offshore Petroleum Industry, Marine Environmental Research,
Volume 92, Pages 154 – 169, 9th December 2013, DOI: 10.1016/j.marenvres.2013.09.012;

[6] Kjetill Østgaard and Arne Jensen, Acute Phytotoxicity Of Oil-Based Drilling Muds, Oil and Petrochemical
Pollution, Volume 2, Issue 4, Pages 281 – 291, 1985, DOI: 10.1016/S0143-7127(85)90261-3;

[7] Paul W. Page, Chris Greaves, Rosey Lawson, Sean Hayes, and Fergus Boyle, Options for the Recycling of
Drill Cuttings, Society of Petroleum Engineers,
SPE/EPA/DOE Exploration and Production Environmental Conference Paper, 10 – 12 th
March 2003,
DOI: 10.2118/80583-MS;

[8] Song Lin Yi, Zhi Ming Wang, Xian Zhong Yi, Wei Chang, The Fundamental Characteristics on Particle Size
Distribution of Drilling Rock-Cuttings, Applied Mechanics and Materials, Volumes 275 – 277, Pages 2411 –
2414, January 2013, DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.275-277.2411;

[9] American Association of Drilling Engineers, Shale Shakers And Drilling Fluid Systems, Techniques and
Technology for Improving Solids Control Management, Gulf Publishing Company, 1999, TN871.27.S53,
ISBN 0-88415-948-5;

[10] M. A. Muherei and R. Junin, Potential Of Surfactant Washing To Solve Drilling Waste Environmental
Problems Offshore, Emirates Journal for Engineering Research, Volume 12, Issue 2, Pages 1 – 10, March
2017, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237546372;

[11] Zhiqiang Huang, Ziyang Xu, Yinhu Quan, Hui Jia, Jianan Li, Qianchun Li, Zhen Chen, and Kailun Pu, The
Evaluation System Of Oily Drill Cuttings Treatment Technologies Based On The Fuzzy Evaluation Method,
IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Volume 170, 2018, DOI: 10.1088/1755-
1315/170/2/022075;
[12] Soroush Ghasemi, Saeid Gitipour, Fereydoun Ghazban, Hamed Hedayati, Treatment of Petroleum Drill-
cuttings Using Stabilization/Solidification Method by Cement and Modified Clay Mixes, Iranian Journal of
Health, Safety & Environment, Volume 4, Issue 3, Pages 781 – 787, 14th Jan. 2017, e-ISSN: 2345-5535;

[13] M. T. Jebeli, N. Heidarzadeh, and S. Gitipour, Pollution Potential Of The Wastes Of Used Oil Treatment
Plants And Their Possible Remediation Techniques, International Journal of Environmental Science and
Technology, Volume 16, Pages 3565 – 3578, 11th June 2018, DOI: 10.1007/s13762-018-1780-1;

[14] Andrew S. Ball, Richard J. Stewart and Kirsten Schliephake, A Review of The Current Options For The
Treatment And Safe Disposal Of Drill Cuttings, Waste Management & Research, Volume 30, Issue 5, Pages
457 – 473, 13th May 2012, DOI: 10.1177/0734242X11419892;

[15] Jeffrey D. Childs, Edgar Acosta, John F. Scamehorn, and David A. Sabatini, Surfactant-Enhanced Treatment
of Oil-Based Drill Cuttings, Journal of Energy Resources Technology, Volume 127, Issue 2, Pages 153 –
162, June 2005, DOI: 10.1115/1.1879044;

[16] Stephane Saintpere, and Anne Morillon-Jeanmaire, Supercritical CO2 Extraction Applied to Oily Drilling
Cuttings. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 4 th October 2000, DOI: 10.2118/63126-MS;

[17] Mahmoud Meskar, Treatment of Petroleum Contaminated Soil using Supercritical Fluid Extraction (SFE)
Technology, UOttawa Research, PhD. Thesis in Civil Engineering, 11 th April 2018, DOI: 10.20381/ruor-
21662;

[18] Hossein Farraji, Brett Robinson, Parsa Mohajeri, Tayebeh Abedi, Phytoremediation: Green Technology For
Improving Aquatic And Terrestrial Environments, Nippon Journal of Environmental Science, Volume 1,
issue 1, Page 1002, 16 March 2020, ISSN: 2435-6786 DOI: 10.46266/njes.1002;

[19] C. M. Frick, R.E. Farrell and J.J. Germida, Assessment of Phytoremediation as an In-Situ Technique for
Cleaning Oil-Contaminated Sites, Petroleum Technology Alliance of Canada (PTAC), December 29, 1999,
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228592129_Assessment_of_phytoremediation_as_an_in-
situ_technique_for_cleaning_oil-contaminated_sites;

[20] Innocent Chukwunonso Ossai, Aziz Ahmed, Auwalu Hassan, Fauziah ShahulHamid, Remediation Of Soil
And Water Contaminated With Petroleum Hydrocarbon: A Review, Environmental Technology &
Innovation, Volume 17, February 2020, DOI: 10.1016/j.eti.2019.100526;

[21] Åse Lunde, Sindre, Energy Efficient Drill Cuttings Treatment Plant Designed By Norwegian-Group As A
Feasibility Study, Master thesis, Universitetet of Stavanger, 29 th January 2015, https://uis.brage.unit.no/uis-
xmlui/handle/11250/300379;

[22] Marina Seixas Pereira, Curt Max de Ávila Panisset, André Leibsohn Martins, Carlos Henrique Marques de Sá,
Marcos Antonio de Souza Barrozo, Carlos Henrique Ataíde, Microwave Treatment Of Drilled Cuttings
Contaminated By Synthetic Drilling Fluid, Separation And Purification Technology, Volume 124, Pages 68
– 73, 18th March 2014, DOI: 10.1016/j.seppur.2014.01.011;
[23] B. O. Akinnuli, S. P. Ayodeji, and O. O. Ojo, Reclamation Of Base Oil From Oil Wells Drill Cuttings And
Its Disposal Ecological Hazard Control, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Nigeria, April – June 2018,
ISSN: 2067-3809;

[24] Hassan Dashtian, Sahar Bakhshian, Abouzar Mirzaei Paiaman, and Bandar Duraya Al-Anazi, A Review on
Impacts of Drilling Mud Disposal on Environment and Underground Water Resources in South of Iran,
Society of Petroleum Engineers, Middle East Drilling Technology Conference & Exhibition Paper, 28th
October 2009, DOI: 10.2118/125690-MS;

[25] Esmaeil Yazdani, Seyed Hassan, and Hashemabadi Afshin Taghizadeh, Study Of Waste Tire Pyrolysis In A
Rotary Kiln Reactor In A Wide Range Of Pyrolysis Temperature, Waste Management, Volume 85, Pages
195 – 201, 15th February 2019, DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2018.12.020;

[26] T. J. Appleton, R. I. Colder, S. W. Kingman, I. S. Lowndes, and A. G. Read, Microwave Technology For
Energy-Efficient Processing Of Waste, Applied Energy, Volume 81, Issue 1, Pages 85 – 113, 11th September
2005, DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2004.07.002;

[27] Fangzhou Li, Yaping Zhang, Shui Wang, Guobo Li, Xiupeng Yue, Daoxu Zhong, Chunhong Chen and Kai
Shen, Insight Into Ex-Situ Thermal Desorption Of Soils Contaminated With Petroleum Via Carbon
Number-Based Fraction Approach, Chemical Engineering Journal, Volume 385, 1st April 2020,
DOI: org/10.1016/j.cej.2019.123946;

[28] Mikhail P. Gorbadey, Analysis Of Drilling Wastes Disposal Methods Effectiveness In Russian Arctic
Offshore Fields, master’s thesis in Offshore Technology / Marine and Subsea Technology, Faculty of Science
and Technology, University of Stavanger, 15 th June 2017, DOI: http://hdl.handle.net/11250/2460096;

[29] Council of Ministers, Angolan Ministry of Petroleum, Constitutional Law, the Basic Law on the Environment
and the Law on Petroleum Activities, Executive Decrees No. 39/00 of 10 th October, No. 11/05 12th January,
No. 244/12 16th July 15 and No. 97/14 of 8th January, [Online], (Accessed on 12th May 2020), Available on
https://www.ecolex.org/details/legislation/decree-no-3900-on-environmental-protection-measures-to-be-
used-in-oil-activities-lex-faoc063760/?;