Economically and Environmentally Sustainable Enhanced Oil Recovery Islam Full Chapter

Economically and environmentally
sustainable enhanced oil recovery

Islam
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/economically-and-environmentally-sustainable-enhan
ced-oil-recovery-islam/
Economically and
Environmentally Sustainable
Enhanced Oil Recovery
Scrivener Publishing
100 Cummings Center, Suite 541J
Beverly, MA 01915-6106
Publishers at Scrivener
Martin Scrivener (martin@scrivenerpublishing.com)
Phillip Carmical (pcarmical@scrivenerpublishing.com)
Economically and
Environmentally Sustainable
Enhanced Oil Recovery
M. R. Islam
This edition first published 2020 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA
and Scrivener Publishing LLC, 100 Cummings Center, Suite 541J, Beverly, MA 01915, USA
© 2020 Scrivener Publishing LLC
For more information about Scrivener publications please visit www.scrivenerpublishing.com.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or other-
wise, except as permitted by law. Advice on how to obtain permission to reuse material from this title
is available at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.
Wiley Global Headquarters

111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA
For details of our global editorial offices, customer services, and more information about Wiley prod-
ucts visit us at www.wiley.com.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty

While the publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this work, they make no rep
resentations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this work and
specifically disclaim all warranties, including without limitation any implied warranties of merchant-
ability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representa
tives, written sales materials, or promotional statements for this work. The fact that an organization,
website, or product is referred to in this work as a citation and/or potential source of further informa
tion does not mean that the publisher and authors endorse the information or services the organiza
tion, website, or product may provide or recommendations it may make. This work is sold with the
understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. The advice and
strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a specialist
where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other
commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.
Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared
between when this work was written and when it is read.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
ISBN 978-1-119-47909-3
Cover image: All images supplied by Dreamstime.com; Rainbow Smoke: Nantapong Kittisubsiri |
Oil Drop: Amnat Buakeaw | Trees: Christos Georghiou |
Leaves: Nadezda Kostina I Orange Flower Wreath: Darya Smirnova
Cover design by Kris Hackerott
Set in size of 11pt and Minion Pro by Manila Typesetting Company, Makati, Philippines
Printed in the USA
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
This book is dedicated to the three creative geniuses that I have
been blessed to call ‘my children’. They are: Elif Hamida Islam, Ali
Omar Islam, and Jaan Sulaiman Islam.
M. R. Islam
v
Contents
Preface xiii
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Opening Remarks 1
1.2 The Prophets of the Doomed Turned Into Scientists 1
1.3 Paradigm Shift in Sustainable Development 2
1.4 Questions Answered in This Book 5
1.4.1 Where to Look for in the Quest of Sustainable
Energy Solutions? 5
1.4.2 How Do Energy and Mass Evolve in
Sustainable System? 6
1.4.3 What Real Natural Resource Do We Have? 6
1.4.4 Can the Current Reserve be Expanded without
Resorting to EOR? 7
1.4.5 How Do We Characterize Complex Reservoirs? 7
1.4.6 When Should We Plan for EOR? 8
1.4.7 How to Achieve Environmental and
Economic Sustainability? 8
1.4.8 Do We Need to Sacrifice Financially to Assure
Environmental Sustainability? 9
2 Petroleum in the Big Picture 11
2.1 Introduction 11
2.2 Pre-Industrial Revolution Period 12
2.2.1 Mercury 16
2.2.2 Sal Ammoniac 22
2.2.3 Sulphur 23
2.2.4 Arsenic Sulphide 29
2.2.5 Refining Techniques 34
2.3 Beginning of the Petroleum Culture 36
2.4 The Information Age 46
2.5 The Energy Crisis 52
vii
viii Contents
2.5.1 Are Natural Resources Finite and

Human Needs Infinite? 53
2.5.2 The Finite/Infinite Conundrum 62
2.5.3 Renewable vs Non-Renewable:
No Boundary-As-Such 63
2.6 Conclusions 67
3 Natural Resources of the Earth 69
3.1 Introduction 69
3.2 Characteristic Time 69
3.3 Organic and Mechanical Frequencies 77
3.3.1 Redefining Force and Energy 78
3.3.2 Transition of Matter from the Sun to the Earth 84
3.4 The Nature of Material Resources 89
3.5 The Science of Water and Petroleum 90
3.5.1 Comparison Between Water and Petroleum 94
3.5.2 Contrasting Properties of Hydrogen and Oxygen 100
3.5.3 The Carbon-Oxygen Duality 104
3.5.4 The Science of Lightening 118
3.6 Nitrogen Cycle: Part of the Water/Nitrogen Duality 138
3.7 Conclusions 175
4 Growth Potential of Petroleum Reservoirs 177
4.1 Introduction 177
4.2 Toward Decarbonization 177
4.3 The Current State of the World of Oil and Gas 181
4.4 World Oil and Gas Reserve 205
4.4.1 Changes in Reserve in 2018 207
4.5 Organic Origin of Petroleum 249
4.6 Scientific Ranking of Petroleum 252
4.7 Reserve Growth Potential of an Oil/Gas Reservoir 264
4.7.1 Reservoir Categories in the United States 266
4.7.2 Eolian Reservoirs 268
4.7.3 Interconnected Fluvial, Deltaic, and Shallow
Marine Reservoirs 276
4.7.4 Deeper Marine Shales 289
4.7.5 Marine Carbonate Reservoirs 293
4.7.6 Submarine Fan Reservoir 294
4.7.7 Fluvial Reservoir 294
4.7.8 Quantitative Measures of Well Production Variability 295
4.8 Conclusions 318
Contents ix
5 Fundamentals of Reservoir Characterization in View

of Enhanced Oil and Gas Recovery 321
5.2 Role of Fractures 322
5.3 Natural and Artificial Fractures 328
5.3.1 Interpretation of Borehole Images
to Identify Breakouts 334
5.3.2 Overall In Situ Stress Orientations 335
5.4 Developing Reservoir Characterization Tools for Basement
Reservoirs 339
5.5 The Origin of Fractures 346
5.6 Seismic Fracture Characterization 353
5.6.1 Effects of Fractures on Normal Moveout (NMO)
Velocities and P-Wave Azimuthal AVO Response 356
5.6.2 Effects of Fracture Parameters on Properties of
Anisotropic Parameters and P-Wave NMO Velocities 357
5.7 Reservoir Characterization During Drilling 363
5.7.1 Overbalanced Drilling 368
5.7.2 Underbalanced Drilling (UBD) 369
5.8 Reservoir Characterization with Image Log
and Core Analysis 379
5.8.1 Geophysical Logs 383
5.8.2 Circumferential Borehole Imaging Log (CBIL) 389
5.8.3 Petrophysical Data Analysis Using Nuclear Magnetic
Resonance (NMR) 397
5.8.4 Core Analysis 406
5.9 Major Forces of Oil and Gas Reservoirs 415
5.10 Reservoir Heterogeneity 433
5.10.1 Filtering Permeability Data 442
5.10.2 Total Volume Estimate 447
5.10.3 Estimates of Fracture Properties 447
5.11 Special Considerations for Shale 448
5.12 Conclusions 450
6 Future Potential of Enhnced Oil Recovery 451
6.2 Background 454
6.3 Types of EOR 461
6.3.1 Gas Injection 462
6.3.2 Thermal Injection 463
x Contents
6.3.3 Chemical Injection 466

6.3.4 Microbial Injection 466
6.3.5 Other Techniques 467
6.4 Enhanced Oil Recovery in Relation to Oil and Gas Reserve 469
6.4.1 Role of US Leadership 470
6.4.2 Pivotal Criterion for Selection of EOR Projects 483
6.5 Current Oil Fields 491
6.5.1 Largest Conventional Oilfields 508
6.5.2 Unconventional Oil and Gas 510
6.6 Need for EOR 516
6.7 Conclusions 522
7 Greening of Enhanced Oil Recovery 525
7.2 Carbon Dioxide Injection 528
7.2.1 Canadian Carbon Capture and Sequestration
(CCS) Projects 537
7.2.2 Projects in United States 540
7.2.3 Greening of the CO2-EOR Process 542
7.3 Thermal Methods 544
7.3.1 Steam and Its Hybrids 545
7.3.2 In Situ Combustion (ISC) 565
7.3.3 Greening of Thermal EOR 572
7.4 Chemical Methods 574
7.4.1 Alkali-Sufactant-Polymer Injection 574
7.4.2 Greening of ASP 593
7.4.2.1 Microbial Applications 594
7.4.2.2 Natural Surfactants 599
7.4.2.3 In Situ Generation 601
7.4.2.4 Surface Active Agents from
Commercial Waste 602
7.5 Gas Injection 609
7.5.1 Suitability of CO2 Injection 609
7.5.2 Greening of CO2 Injection 614
7.5.3 Carbon Sequestration Enhanced
Gas Recovery (EGR) 616
7.6 Recap of Existing EOR Projects 621
7.6.1 EOR by Lithology 621
7.6.2 EOR in Sandstone Formations 622
7.6.3 EOR in Carbonate Formations 623
7.6.4 Offshore EOR 653
Contents xi
7.7 Downhole Refinery 657

7.8 Conclusions 662
8 Toward Achieving Total Sustainability EOR Operations 663
8.2 Issues in Petroleum Operations 664
8.2.1 Pathways of Crude Oil Formation 665
8.2.2 Pathways of Oil Refining 665
8.2.3 Pathways of Gas Processing 669
8.2.3.1 Pathways of Glycol and Amines 671
8.3 Critical Evaluation of Current Petroleum Practices 673
8.3.1 Management 674
8.3.2 HSS®A® Pathway in Economic Investment Projects 676
8.4 Petroleum Refining and Conventional Catalysts 678
8.4.1 Catalytic Cracking 682
8.4.2 Isomerisation 683
8.4.3 Reforming 683
8.5 Current Practices in Exploration, Drilling and Production 689
8.6 Challenges in Waste Management 692
8.7 Greening of EOR Operations 693
8.7.1 Direct Use of Solar Energy 693
8.7.2 Effective Separation of Solid from Liquid 698
8.7.3 Effective Separation of Liquid from Liquid 698
8.7.4 Effective Separation of Gas from Gas 699
8.7.5 Natural Substitutes for Gas Processing Chemicals
(Glycol and Amines) 700
8.7.6 Membranes and Absorbents 702
8.7.7 A Novel Desalination Technique 704
8.7.8 A Novel Refining Technique 705
8.7.9 Use of Solid Acid Catalyst for Alkylation 705
8.7.10 Use of Bacteria to Breakdown Heavier Hydrocarbons
to Lighter Ones 706
8.7.11 Use of Cleaner Crude Oil 706
8.7.12 Use of Gravity Separation Systems 708
8.7.13 A Novel Separation Technique 709
8.8 Zero-Waste Operations 710
8.8.1 Zero Emissions (Air, Soil, Water, Solid Waste,
Hazardous Waste) 710
8.8.2 Zero Waste of Resources (Energy, Material,
and Human) 711
8.8.3 Zero Waste in Administration Activities 711
xii Contents
8.8.4 Zero Use of Toxics (Processes and Products) 712

8.8.5 Zero Waste in Product Life Cycle
(Transportation, Use, and End-of-Life) 712
8.8.6 Zero Waste in Reservoir Management 713
8.9 Conclusions 714
9 Conclusions 717
9.1 The Task 717
9.2 Conclusions 718
9.2.1 Where to Look for in the Quest of
Sustainable Energy Solutions? 719
9.2.2 How Do Energy and Mass Evolve in
Sustainable System? 719
9.2.3 What Real Natural Resource Do We have? 720
9.2.4 Can the Current Reserve be Expanded without
Resorting to EOR? 721
9.2.5 How Do We Characterize Complex Reservoirs? 721
9.2.6 When Should We Plan for EOR? 722
9.2.7 How to Achieve Environmental and Economic
Sustainability? 723
Environmental Sustainability? 723
References and Bibliography 725
Index 787
Preface
“But what good will another round of corefloods and recovery curves do?”,
quipped a Chemical Engineering professor over 3 decades ago. For a grad-
uate student, whose PhD thesis (in Petroleum Engineering) is devoted to
enhanced oil recovery in marginal reservoirs, that comment struck me
with mixed emotions. My PhD supervisor was someone I would later
characterize as academia’s most impactful petroleum engineering profes-
sor. The project that I was working on at the time was well funded by the
government and industry consortium (translation: it was anything but a
stale academic exercise). Even at its initial phase, the project was proving
to be an academic masterpiece (it eventually broke the record for refereed
publications for a PhD dissertation – at least for that University). Yet, this
project was reduced to a set of ‘corefloods and recovery curves’.
I had immense respect for the chemical engineering professor (I still
do – to this date), with whom I had a number of ground-breaking publi-
cations (that emerged from classwork), so I couldn’t even garner enough
courage to confront him or ask for an explanation. Fast forward a 2
decades, I was giving a pep talk to industry and government delegates on
sustainable engineering, upon which a mechanical engineering professor
turned into a quasi-administrator, with no background in energy research,
exclaimed, “Why are you focusing so much on society, where is engineer-
ing?” Thankfully, it was the government partner that quieted down the
vociferous colleague, schooling him, “I thought sustainability is all about
society…”
Fast forward another decade, I was lecturing on sustainable Enhanced
Oil Recovery (the very same topic of this book) when I was ceremonially
interrupted, “But where is the research in it, Professor Islam?” This time it
was a physicist-turned materials engineer-turned Third World university
administrator. Sadly, there was no government official to quiet him down,
and to make it worse, a Third World-trained petroleum engineering pro-
fessor chimed in, “but where does petroleum engineering come in this?”
xiii
xiv Preface
Clearly, they were expecting me to show more coreflood results and recov-
ery curves!
Suffice it to say, in the last 3 decades, the engineering world has not
moved a needle toward knowledge. Just like 3 decades ago, chemical engi-
neers want you to implement chemicals without research, and demand
that you just take their word for it. Materials engineers want you to focus
on how to turn the valve on the well head, trusting them with the material
engineering part. Sadly, petroleum engineers are then convinced that their
research focus should include only yet another coreflood test and another
way to do the material balance Type-curve fitting. University adminis-
trators meanwhile are strictly focused on keeping engineers caged within
their puny research domain, tightly focussed on drilling a copious number
of holes through the thinnest part of the research plank.
Today, I am no longer the wide-eyed graduate student wondering
about the meaning of what professors have to say. It has been well over a
decade that I pointedly asked ‘how deep is the collective ignorance of the
‘enlightened’ academia?1 Ignorance – as I figured within years of stepping
into academic life – doesn’t frighten me, it emboldens my resolve to write
more. I decided to write a book on enhanced oil recovery that doesn’t teach
another way to measure the minimum miscibility pressure – a phenome-
non that doesn’t occur in the field. Upon hearing this, my former gradu-
ate student (currently a university professor) said with utter desperation,
“But, Dr. Islam, that’s the only thing we teach in EOR classes?” The state
of academia is not strong – not even close. It is no surprise that this book
is over 700 pages. It doesn’t shy away from calling out the hollowness of
the incessant theories and academic mumbo jumbo that produced storm
in teacups. Of course, criticism is easy but one must answer the question,
“where is the beef?” For every question raised, a comprehensive solution
is given after demonstrating how modern-day researchers have failed and
why they have failed. The book makes no apology for making a full disclo-
sure of what true sustainability should be – a far cry from the theme that
has been shoved down the throat of the general public in the name of: sus-
tainability should come with a price. The book shows, true sustainability
is free – as in sunlight. Why should that surprise anyone? Didn’t we know
best water (rain), best air (breeze), best cleanser (clay), best food ingredient
(carbon dioxide), best energy (sunlight) – they are all free?
“How Long Is the Coast of Britain? Statistical Self-Similarity and Fractional Dimension” is a
1
paper by mathematician Benoît Mandelbrot, first published in Science in 5 May 1967.

Preface xv
A society that has heard for centuries that chemicals are chemicals,
photons are photons, CO2’ is CO2, murders are murders, all backed by
Nobel prize winning scientists and social scientists, how do you even use
the term ‘collective ignorance’ when ignorance is all that the society has
offered? Why such thoughts will be tolerated, let alone nurtured by the
same establishment that has made economics – the driver of the society
the most paradoxical discipline, ignorance into bliss, science into hysteria,
secular philosophy into cult-like beliefs, Carbon into the ‘enemy’, humans
into a liability, war into a profitable venture? These are not discreet prob-
lems that can be fixed individually. These webs of networks hidden behind
hidden hands making it impossible to even mention what the core prob-
lem is. Thankfully, in the sustainability series of books from my research
group, we have laid out the background. Starting from the dawn of the new
millennium, we have published systematic deconstruction of Newtonian
mechanics, quantum mechanics, Einstein’s energy theory, and practically
all major theories and ‘laws’ in science and social science, after proving
them to be more illogical than Trinity dogma, thus exposing the hope-
lessness of New Science. So, this book has a starting point based on fun-
damentally sound premises. As such it creates no paradox and when it
recommends a new outlook, which is not just blue-sky research, it is the
only recipe to reach true sustainability.
At this point, I don’t have to explain myself. As Ali Ibn Abu Talib (601–
661 CE), the 4th Caliph of Islamic Caliphate pointed out, “Never explain
yourself to anyone, because the one who likes you would not need it, and
the one dislikes you wouldn’t believe it.” It has been a while that I have
written to impress anyone. It’s all about eliminating ignorance and give
knowledge a chance to shine.
M. R. Islam
Halifax
September 2019
1
Introduction
1.1 Opening Remarks

There have been many books on the topic of Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR)
over the entire period of the plastic era, which spans over 100 years. Each
book brings in incremental knowledge of how to recover more oil faster.
They all follow the same approach – the approach that maximizes profit in
the shortest possible term. This book is unlike any other book on the topic;
petroleum engineering, of all disciplines, does not need another book on
how to calculate minimum miscibility pressure. This book does not lecture
on how to make calculations; rather, it presents how to make fundamen-
tal changes in a culture that has produced what Nobel laureate Chemist
Robert Curl called a ‘technological disaster’.
1.2 The Prophets of the Doomed Turned

Into Scientists
For well over a century, the world has been hearing that we are about to
run out of fossil fuel in matter of decades. First it happened with coal. In
1865, Stanley Jevons (one of the most recognized 19th century economists)
predicted that England would run out of coal by 1900, and that England’s
factories would grind to a standstill. Today, after over 150 years of Jevons’
prediction of the impending disaster, US EIA predicts that the coal reserve
will last another 325 years, based on U.S. coal production in 2017, the
‘recoverable coal’ reserves would last about 325 years (EIA, 2018c).
When it comes to petroleum, as early as 1914, U.S. Bureau of Mines
predicted, “The world will run out of oil in 10 years” (quoted by Eberhart,
2017). Later, the US Department of Interior chimed in, claiming that
“the world would run out of oil in 13 years” (quoted by Eberhart, 2017).
Obviously, the world has not run out of oil, the world, however, has been
accustomed to the same “doomsday warning” and whooped it up as ‘settled
M. R. Islam. Economically and Environmentally Sustainable Enhanced Oil Recovery,

(1–10) © 2020 Scrivener Publishing LLC
1
2 Enhanced Oil Recovery
science’ (Speight and Islam, 2016). Starting with Zatzman and Islam’s
(2007) work, this theme of ‘running out of oil’ has been deconstructed and
over a decade later, the actual settled science has become the fact that it’s
not a matter of if falsehoods are perpetrated it is a mater of why. In 2018a,
Islam et al. made it clear that the entire matter is an economic decision,
concocted to increase short-term profit. Science, let alone the science of
sustainability, cannot be based on falsehood and deception.
It is the same story about ‘concerns’ of climate change and the hyste-
ria that followed. All studies miraculously confirmed something scientists
were paid to do whip up decades ago (Islam and Khan, 2019). Now that
that ‘science’ has matured into settled science, carbon has become the
enemy and the ‘carbon tax’ a universal reality.
If anything good came out of centuries of New Science, it is the fact
that this ‘science’ and these scientists cannot be relied upon as a starting
point (paradigm) for future analysis because each of those tracks will end
up with paradoxes and falsehoods that would reveal themselves only as a
matter of time.
1.3 Paradigm Shift in Sustainable Development

Both terms, ‘paradigm shift’ and ‘sustainability’ have been grossly misused
in recent years. Paradigm shift, a phrase that was supposed to mean a dif-
ferent starting point (akin to the Sanskrit word, , Amulam, meaning
‘from the beginning’) has repeatedly and necessarily used the same starting
point as the William Stanley Jevons (1835-1882), John Maynard Keynes
(1883-1946) the two most prominent alarmist of our time, both of whom
were inspired by Adam Smith (1723-1790), the ‘father of Capitalism’ and
virtually added nothing beyond what Adam Smith purported as the ‘ulti-
mate truth’. Scientists, in the meantime, followed suit with regurgitat-
ing Atomism (a doctrine originally started by Democritus), recycled by
Newton in name of New Science. The loop was completed when engineers
blindly followed that science and defined ‘sustainability’ in a way that
would satisfy politicians, whose primary interest lies in maintaining sta-
tus quo – the antonym of progress. It is no surprise, therefore, our survey
from over decade ago revealed that there is not a single technology that
is sustainable (Chhetri and Islam, 2008). That leaves no elbow room for
petroleum engineering to survive, let alone to thrive. Unsurprisingly, even
petroleum companies have resigned to the ‘settled science’ that carbon is
the enemy and petroleum resources have no place in our civilization (Islam
et al., 2012; Islam and Khan, 2019).
Introduction 3
The current book is a continuation of our research group’s work that

started publishing on the subject of global sustainability involving energy
and environment, dating back to early 2000s. In terms of the research mono-
graph, we started the paradigm shift from economics, the driver of modern
civilization, aptly characterized as the brainchild of Adam Smith. When our
book, Economics of Intangibles (Zatzman and Islam, 2007) was published, it
was perhaps the first initiatives to recognize the role of intangibles in eco-
nomics and eventually all science and engineering. At that time, the very
concept of intangibles in Economics was perceived to be an oxymoron. Ten
years later, it became recognized as a natural process (Website 5), and a
recognized branch of economics (Website 6). Now we know that without
this approach, we cannot solve a single paradox. For that matter, economics
is a branch that has the most number of paradoxes among all disciplines. It
is quite revealing that after publishing some dozen of research monographs
on the topic on sustainability in energy and environment, there had to be an
encore of the original work on Economics to present specifically economics
of sustainable energy (Islam et al., 2018a) – a book that solved all major
paradoxes, included many cited by Nobel laureate economists.
By adequately introducing a paradigm shift in economic consideration,
new features to sustainability could be invoked. When the concept of intan-
gibles is introduced to fundamental engineering analysis, ‘zero-waste’ pro-
duction becomes a reality. There again, when we introduced the concept of
zero-waste as distinct from waste minimization over a decade ago, it was met
with scepticism (Khan and Islam, 2012; Chhetri and Islam, 2008). Even the
academics couldn’t stomach the concept that rocked the foundation of their
long-term belief that waste can only be minimized and sustainability is a
matter of adding another means to cover up the immediate consequences of
the ‘toxic shock’, which no doubt made a lot of money for those who initiated
it, leaving behind a ‘technological disaster’. Today, zero-waste engineering is
accepted as a frontier of sustainable development (Khan and Islam, 2016).
Perhaps the biggest shock was when our research group introduced the
concept of Green Petroleum in mid 2000’s. When our books on Green
Petroleum (Islam et al., 2010; Islam et al., 2012) were introduced to the
general readership, the phrase Green Petroleum was considered to be an
oxymoron. The word ‘green’ was reserved for renewable energy sources –
something we deemed to be unsustainable (Chhetri and Islam, 2008). Ever
since that pioneering work, the world has become more accustomed to the
phrase ‘Green Petroleum’ although petroleum engineers remain clueless
about how to fight against the ‘carbon is the enemy’ mantra that has swept
the entire globe outside of the 3% scientists, who are marginalized as ‘con-
spiracy theorists’, ‘creationists’, etc. In defence of the 97% alarmists, the 3%
never talked about real science, instead resorting to denying climate change
altogether (Islam and Khan, 2019). The biggest victim of this saga has been
real science and real engineering. Today, when petroleum engineers talk
about sustainable development, they mean coupling with biosurfactants,
or generating some energy with solar or wind power. They have all but
forgotten petroleum itself is 100% natural and that if a paradigm of ‘nature
is sustainable’ - a time honoured principle that has millennia of history to
back it up, there is nothing more sustainable than petroleum itself.
With that paradigm shift, our research group was able to debunk the fol-
lowing myths, some of which are in the core of every technology of mod-
ern era.
Myth 1: Natural resources are limited, human greed is infinity;
Myth 2: There is no universal standard for sustainability, therefore, total

sustainability is a myth;
Myth 3: Environmental integrity must come with a cost and compromise

with cost effectiveness must be made;
Myth 4: Human intervention is limited to adding artificial or synthetic

chemicals;
Myth 5: 3 R’s (Reduce, Recycle, Reuse) is the best we can do;
Myth 6: Energy and mass are separable, meaning mass has no role in
energy transfer;
Myth 7: All physical changes are reversible and original state can be restored
as long as external features are brought back to the original state;
Myth 8: Carbon, natural water, and natural air are our enemy and sus-
tainability lies within reducing carbon, natural water and natural air, thus
purity must be sought in every level;
Myth 9: Synthetic chemicals can be a replacement of natural chemicals as

long as the most external features are comparable;
Myth 10: Zero-waste is an absurd concept; and
Myth 11: Economic viability must precede technical feasibility, which itself
is preceded by environmental integrity test.
Introduction 5
Of course, had we not started with premise different from what all
those philosophers and scientists started from, we would end up shifting
the number of years on Hubert’s graph (Hubbert, 1956) or adding another
coefficient to the curve fitting endeavor to account for another unknown
that we have no clue about, meanwhile ignoring the 800 pound gorilla
that everyone is afraid to talk about (Islam et al., 2018a). We would also
revel about new array of chemicals, which are even more than their prede-
cessors, meanwhile ignoring the toxic shock of the current ‘technological
disaster’ (Chhetri and Islam, 2008). This book is not about repeating the
same conclusion that has been made for over centuries. This book is not
about replacing dogma theories with New Science theories or replacing
“original sin” dogma with some utility theory that’s premised on the same
theme that humans can’t do better. The conclusion of this book shall not
be: the best humanity can do and must try to do is follow the same path
that brought us here. If this book proves anything, it is that with paradigm
shift, the outlook changes like never before and after that the obsession
with status quo is gone for ever. The ‘story’ this book has to offer has not
been told before.
The starting point of this book was entirely different from that taken by
every book on EOR. This approach made it possible to offer solutions that
do not create long-term disasters nor do they cover up long-term liabilities.
Then, key questions that have puzzled industry as well as academia are
answered without resorting to dogmatic assertions. If the book has to be
summarized in one line, it is: It gives a recipe on enhancing oil recovery
while restoring environmental integrity and economic appeal. It is not a
matter of minimizing waste, or maximizing recovery or even minimizing
cost, it is about restoring sustainable techniques that are inherently less
expensive and beneficial to the environment.
1.4 Questions Answered in This Book

1.4.1 Where to Look for in the Quest of Sustainable Energy
Solutions?
We know that 3 R solutions is nothing more than pathetic effort to cover up
toxic shock. In fact, recycling toxic products is more toxic to the environ-
ment, less efficient, and more costly than the original form (Chhetri and
Islam, 2008; Khan and Islam, 2012). Reusing, on the other hand, increases
the extent off contamination (Miralai, 2016; Islam et al., 2010). The ques-
tion the arises Ask 2 where to look for sustainable solutions. Chapter 2
briefly introduces the current status of the oil and gas sector, then embark
on a delinearized history analysis to show how things used to be done in the
past and where exactly the bifurcation between natural an artificial started.
The chapter makes it clear that the modern era is synonymous with artifi-
cial systems, involving both mass and energy. Our previous work already
described the recipe for sustainable energy and mass utilization (Islam et
al., 2015; Islam et al., 2010). So, the question becomes how we can extract
those solutions in the context of EOR. The chapter then revisits historical
developments of petroleum production to pinpoint crucial issues that led
to global unsustainability.
1.4.2 How Do Energy and Mass Evolve in Sustainable System?

We continue to be told carbon is the enemy, water is the source of contam-
ination and sustainability hinges upon how remotely placed we are from
the natural state of all resources (including sunlight and air). Otherwise,
alarmists tell us that we are about to embark on an apocalyptical point of
no return. Of course, by now we know water is the source of all sustainabil-
ity (Islam, 2014), carbon is the most important ingredient for sustaining
life (water being the source), and sunlight is the primary energy source
alteration of which can onset ripples that can turn into a Tsunami (Khan
and Islam, 2016; Islam and Khan, 2019).
A paradigm shift really means we cannot rely on any previous theory -
at least the ones that started after the natural artificial bifurcation took
place. It means; therefore, we cannot rely upon modern theory of light,
atomic theory of mass, or the quantum theory of ‘everything’. Fortunately,
the background work of deconstruction of current theories as well as
reconstruction of dogma-free comprehensive theory of mass and energy
was done by Islam (2014) and Khan and Islam (2016). So, we are perfectly
capable of answering the question of this subsection. Chapter 3 presents
the science behind water-petroleum cycle, oxygen cycle, carbon cycle, and
delves into such radical topics, as the scientific difference between lighten-
ing (natural electricity) and electricity (AC or DC), chemicals from natural
sources (both energy and mass) and artificial sources, etc.
1.4.3 What Real Natural Resource Do We Have?

We have been told by the ‘father of capitalism’ that natural resources are
limited, while human needs are infinity, and sustainability and sustain-
ability depends on how fast we can contain population growth. By now
Introduction 7
Total remaining recoverable resources

Proven reserves
3,050 years Cumulative production to date
233 years 178 years

142 years
61 yrs 54 yrs
Coal Natural Gas Oil
Figure 1.1 Chapter 4 solves the puzzle of what really is the fossil fuel asset asset and how
long one can produce energy sustainably. Notes: All bubbles are expressed as a number of
years based on estimated production in 2013. The size of the bubble for total remaining
recoverable resources of coal is illustrative and is not proportional to the others. Sources:
BGR (2012), OGJ (2012), USGS (2000, 2012a and 2012b), IEA estimates and analysis.
we know capitalism is more wrong-headed than dogma; socialism is more

hypocritical than trickle down capitalistic economy; and the new progres-
sive agenda is more sinister than socialism (Islam et al., 2018a). In fact, the
entire the economic development model has undergone degradation that
was dubbed as HSSA (honey→sugar→Saccharine→Aspartame) by Zatzman
and Islam (2007). Chapter 4 discards the old theories of hysteria and spu-
rious premises and offers scientific answer to the question: what is the real
oil and gas asset that we have? In answering this question, Chapter 4 brings
out a comprehensive explanation to the actual global energy status, offer-
ing clear picture, free from paradoxes of the past (Figure 1.1).
1.4.4 Can the Current Reserve be Expanded without Resorting

to EOR?
This book is not about selling a particular EOR technique, but rather is
about uncovering the real potential of oil and gas production. The discus-
sion of enhancing recovery or interference with a production regime can
only commence after we are certain what actual asset we have. Chapter
4 first deconstructs the perception-based reserve estimate models, then
presents latest findings of USGS with scientific analysis performed
by Islam (2018) and Islam et al. (2018) to draw a clear picture for the
developer.
1.4.5 How Do We Characterize Complex Reservoirs?

We are familiar with the recent surge in oil and gas from unconventional oil
and reservoirs. What we are less familiar with is the fact that conventional
tools do not apply to unconventional reservoirs. Even less known is the fact
that conventional characterization tools don’t accurately represent even the
conventional reservoirs. Chapter 5 takes a fresh look at all types of reser-
voirs and offers practical guideline for scientific characterization. It turns
out that inherent features of conventional reservoirs are often a less com-
plicated version of those of unconventional reservoirs. This finding eluded
others because of the presumption that the reservoir characterization tools
are adequate for most reservoirs, unless there prevails extraordinary com-
plexity in terms of rock and fluid properties. A newly developed reservoir
characterization tool is presented in Chapter 5.
1.4.6 When Should We Plan for EOR?

The history of EOR has been marked with controversy, misjudgement and
non-technical considerations, devoid of scientific merit. Decisions have
been made based on tax credits, government incentives, politics, and other
factors, unrelated to engineering. The same applies to the latest ‘awareness’
of environmental concerns. In brief, it has been about monetizing science
and technology and not about economic and environmental sustainability.
Engineering should be technology before politicking and science should
be before engineering. In the modern era, we have started a preposterous
culture of short-term profiteering over long-term sustainability. Chapter
6 offers the scientific analysis of all major EOR initiatives and identifies
the source of environmental and economic unsustainability. This chap-
ter takes a close look at historical developments and evolutions in oil and
gas reserves to offer a guideline for the start of EOR projects. All existing
technologies are considered, and their sustainability assessed. Reservoirs
for which EOR should be implemented immediately are highlighted. The
recent awareness of environmental concerns is factored in to present a new
set of criteria for start up of an EOR project.
1.4.7 How to Achieve Environmental and

Economic Sustainability?
This crucial question is answered in Chapter 7. A systematic and scien-
tifically sound analysis shows that only zero-waste schemes can assure
both environmental and economic sustainability. It turns out that these
two concerns are not separate nor are they contradictory. It means a truly
environmentally sustainable scheme will have the greatest efficiency and
the most lucrative economic benefit.
Introduction 9

Environmental Sustainability?
For the longest time, the guiding principle of environmental sustainabil-
ity has been that it must come with a cost. Often an environmentally sus-
tainable project is considered to be untenable with the absence of public
funding. In fact, this notion is so prevalent that the recent global warming
hysteria has been driven by calls for a universal carbon tax, the cornerstone
of the Paris Agreement, which in turn is a euphemism for globalization of
the ‘money for environment’ mantra (Khan and Islam, 2019). Chapter 8
debunks this perception and presents an array of technological options in
both EOR and EGR (Enhanced Gas Recovery) that are inherently sustain-
able as well as the least cost intensive.
2
Petroleum in the Big Picture
2.1 Introduction
The role of petroleum products in shaping human energy needs is unde-
niable. Hydrocarbons and their transformations play major roles in sus-
taining today’s civilization. Even though petroleum continues to be the
world’s most diverse, efficient, and abundant energy source, due to “grim
climate concerns”, global initiatives are pointing toward a “go green” man-
tra. When it comes to defining ‘green’, numerous schemes are being pre-
sented as ‘green’ even though all it means is the source of energy is not
carbon. This newfound activism against petroleum sources is illogical and
defies the fact that petroleum fluids, including natural gas are 100% natu-
ral. While there had been no ambiguity in terms what constitutes natural
in both material and spiritual senses before modern age, modern age is rife
with confusion regarding sustainability of energy as well as mere existence
of the human race.
The current practice of petroleum engineering is not sustainable but the
source of unsustainability is hardly known by the mainstream scientists,
content with the ‘carbon is the enemy mantra’ – the ones called ‘97% con-
sensus group’ by Islam and Khan (2018). The study of sustainability is a
complex science as it involves subsurface and surface, natural and artifi-
cial materials, with very high ratio of unknowns over known information
(Figure 2.1). Any false-step of Figure 2.1 can trigger unsustainability. Both
science and mathematics of the process have been deficient at best.
In 2018, Islam and Khan used detailed pathway analysis to identify
flaws of various energy production schemes, including petroleum resource
development. They pointed out that the sources of unsustainability have
eluded modern scientists. Instead, scientists have gone with the most pop-
ular theme of any given time and conformed to the path of maximizing
benefit to the scientific community, in terms of government funding.
M. R. Islam. Economically and Environmentally Sustainable Enhanced Oil Recovery,

(11–68) © 2020 Scrivener Publishing LLC
11
Consideration of complex rheology

Use of “memory”
Sustainable Revisit risk Addition of 4th

technology analysis dimension, time
Hydrocarbon
Drilling Transportation Reservoir formation production
and end user
Mystery and
uncertainty cloud Reservoir modeling
Formulation
Necessity of Discretization
Linearization
Mathematical Avoiding complexity
background Ignoring role of viscosity
Ignoring time dependency
Figure 2.1 Various steps involved in petroleum technology.
In this chapter, a delinearized history of energy developments in rela-

tion to petroleum production, particularly as it relates to oil and gas is
presented. It is complimented with timelines of unsustainable practices,
including those involved in enhanced oil recovery (EOR).
2.2 Pre-Industrial Revolution Period

Ancient practices right up to the era of industrial revolution were all sus-
tainable (Khan and Islam, 2012). The technological marvels ranging from
pyramids and mummies to curving houses out of rock were all based on
sustainable developments. The energy sources were no exception. The
knowledge of how beneficial oil could be was widespread all across the
ancient world and people from all continents used oil for a number of
purposes. These practices were also extremely effective and produced far
more durable products than what are available today, without adding toxic
chemicals. In terms of petroleum use, pre-industrial age era used natu-
ral products in their raw form. For instance, for millennia tar, a naturally
deposited petroleum product, was used as a sealant for roofing shingles,
brick bonding, the hulls of ships and boats (Daintith, 2008). The desired
quality of tar was its ability to be waterproof. Tar was also used us a gen-
eral disinfectant. Often tar would be mixed with other natural oil, such as
Petroleum in the Big Picture 13
balsam turpentine, linseed oil or Chinese tung oil, to obtain the desired
properties.
One important direct use of petroleum products (e.g. tar) was medicinal
(Barnes and Grieve, 2017). Since most oils that had seeped to the surface
would mostly evaporate and leave behind bitumen - the tarry component of
the mixture of hydrocarbons from which it is composed, this tarry material
was the most in use. Even in Ancient Europe, tar once had the reputation
of being a panacea. Pine tar, a carbonized distilled form of pine, is reported
to be in use for over 2000 years as a medicine for skin conditions because of
its soothing and antiseptic properties (Barnes and Grieve, 2017). Although
pine tar is considered to be distinct from coal tar or naturally occurring
petroleum tar, they all have medicinal values for a wide range of applica-
tions because of its antipruritic, anti‐inflammatory, antibacterial and anti-
fungal nature (Muller, 1984). In addition to its keratolytic action, pine tar
has been shown to be antipruritic (Braun‐Falco, 1991), anti‐inflammatory,
antiseptic (Dawber, 1994), astringent, keratoplastic, cytostatic, antibacte-
rial (Veijola and Mustakallio, 1964) and antifungal (Ishida et al., 1992). This
is no surprise because it is well known that tar from natural sources have
all of the natural chemicals (including heavy metals) that can serve as a
medicine. After all, the pharmaceutical industry indeed uses the synthetic
version of the same chemicals.
Similarly, crude oil is known to have been used since the ancient era.
Even today, some parts of the globe use crude oil for medicinal (Dienye
et al., 2012) and therapeutical (Hoke, 2015) purposes. However, in the
modern era, use of crude oil or petroleum products in their native form is
not promoted as a valid material source for any application and invariably
all petroleum resources undergo refining.
In terms of refining petroleum products, there is evidence that even
during medieval era, refining techniques were present. However, those
days, refining was not done in an unsustainable manner (Islam et al.,
2010). There is evidence that both distillation and expression were com-
mon during the medieval era. In the perfume industry, as early as during
early Islamic era (7th century onward), distillation in the form of hydrodis-
tillation and production of absolute, mainly through Enfleurage and fer-
mentation was common (Katz, 2012).
The distillation process for refining oil appears to have been practiced
throughout ancient times. Recent discovery of a 5000-year-old earthenware
distillation apparatus, used for steam distillation tells us that our ances-
tors were well versed on developing sustainable technologies (Shnaubelt,
2002). Khan and Islam (2016) demonstrated how an earthenware distil-
lation apparatus is sustainable. The ancient and middle age practices were
mainly focused on medicinal applications. It was the case in ancient Orient

and ancient Greece and Rome, as well as the Americas the oils used for
medicinal purposes.
However, as reported by Islam et al. (2010), Medieval era scientists were
also refining oil for producing shoot-free light. During the fifth century
AD, the famed writer, Zosimus of Panopolis, refers to the distilling of a
divine water and panacea. Throughout the early Middle Ages and beyond,
a basic form of distillation was known and was used primarily to prepare
floral waters or distilled aromatic waters. These appear to have been used
in perfumery, as digestive tonics, in cooking, and for trading.
Over 1000 years ago, Al-Rāzī (865-923), a Persian Muslim alchemist,
wrote a book titled: Kitāb al-Asrār (Book of Secrets), in which he outlined
a series of refining and material processing technologies (See Taylor, 2015
for the translation). Al-Rāzī developed a perfectly functioning distillation
process. In this distillation process, he used naturally occurring chemi-
cals. His stockroom was enriched with products of Persian mining and
manufacturing, even with sal ammoniac, a Chinese discovery. These were
all additives that he was using similar to the way catalysts are used today.
His approach was fitting for his time, but way ahead of today’s concept of
technology development. He avoided, the ‘intellectual approach’ (what has
become known as mechanical approach ever since Newtonian era or New
Science) in favour of causal or essential approach (what Khan and Islam,
2016, called the ‘science of intangibles’). Table 2.1 shows that the 389 pro-
cedures by Al-Rāzī can be divided into four basic types: primary, interme-
diate, reagent, and preparation methods. The 175 “primary” procedures
involve transformation of metals into gold or silver. It is worth noting here
that bulk of Newton’s unpublished work also involved transformation of
metals into gold (Zatzman and Islam, 2007). The 127 preparatory proce-
dures involve softening and calcination. Today, equivalent processes are
called denaturing, in which the natural features of materials are rendered
artificial. Al-Rāzī then adds 51 procedures for reagent preparations. The
reagents are solvents and tinctures, which usually contain trace amount of
heavy metals. It is similar to what is used today except that Al-Rāzī used
natural sources. Table 2.1 further shows 36 instructions for commonly
needed processes such as mixing or dissolving.
The procedure types include sublimation, calcination, softening whereas
major sources are all natural (such as, quicksilver, sulfur, metals, stones).
The calcination, sublimation and calcination themselves are also done
through natural processes.
The dominant theme was all source materials are derived from plants,
animals and minerals and used in their natural state. The knowledge of
Table 2.1 Classification of the procedures use by Al-Razi in Book of Secrets.

Type of
procedure Purpose Count Percent Example
Primary Produces a 175 45 Sublimation of
substance that mercury
transforms metals
into gold or silver
Intermediate Prepares materials 127 33 Calcination of
required silver through
for primary burning
procedures
Reagent Produces a chemical 51 13 Liquids that
used in other dissolve or
procedures create colours
Preparation Instructions for a 36 9 Mixing through
method used in pulverizing
other procedures and roasting
Total 389 100
seven alchemical procedures and techniques involved: sublimation and

condensation of mercury, precipitation of sulphur, and arsenic calcination
of minerals (gold, silver, copper, lead, and iron), salts, glass, talc, shells, and
waxing. In addition, the source of heat was fire.
Al-Rāzī gave methods and procedures of coloring a silver object to imi-
tate gold (gold leafing) and the reverse technique of removing its color back
to silver. Also described was gilding and silvering of other metals (alum, cal-
cium salts, iron, copper, and tutty, all being processed in a furnace with real
fire), as well as how colors will last for years without tarnishing or changing.
Al-Rāzī classified naturally occurring earthly minerals into six divisions
(Rashed, 1996):
I. Four spirits (Al-Arwāh, the plural of the Arabic word Rūh, which is
best described in the Qur’an as an order of Allah):
1. mercury
2. sal ammoniac, NH4Cl
3. sulfur
4. arsenic sulphide (orpiment, As2S3 and realgar, As4S4 or AsS)
Even though this classification has been often referred to as ‘ghosts that
roam around the earth’, this translation is ill-conceived and defies Qur’anic
logic. Correct meaning is these materials are the source materials as in
essence. In our previous work, we have called it the ‘intangible’ (Zatzman
and Islam, 2007; Khan and Islam, 2012; Islam et al., 2010; Islam et al., 2015).
The above list is meaningful. Each of these materials bears some sig-
nificance in terms of sustainability and human health. In today’s society,
mercury is known to be a toxic material with adverse effects on the body
and unanimously portrayed as a toxic chemical with long-term implica-
tion, it is one of those rare metals that had time-honoured applications
even in the ancient society (Iqbal and Asmat, 2012). This unique heavy
metal, which is less toxic in its elemental form than in its compound form,
has enjoyed both industrial and medicinal applications throughout history
(Wong, 2001).
2.2.1 Mercury
From ancient times, the history of mercury has been connected with that of
the medicine and chemistry (Block, 2001). Both sulphur and mercury are
known to have been used in early civilizations in China, India and Egypt.
Mercury has particular relevance to the history of science of both medicine
and alchemy (Norn et al., 2008). Both sulphur and mercury have been used
as disinfectants. In post Roman Catholic Church (RCC) Europe, mercury
was first introduced by Muslim physicians and it was first mentioned in
European literature in 1140 by Matthaeus Platearius, who recommended
its use for treatment of syphilis as well as for treatment of wound and oth-
ers (Block, 2001). On the medicinal side, mercury, in both its elemental
and compound forms, has been used throughout history as a microbiocide
(Weber and Rutala, 2001). However, ancient times had used only natural
processes for extracting mercury. In this context, Figure 2.3 Summarizes
how metals act within human bodies. This figure is adapted from Islam
et al. (2016), who used the bifurcation to demonstrate that natural chemi-
cals act the opposite way from unnatural chemicals, and Weber and Rutala
(2001), who did not distinguish between natural processing and unnatu-
ral processing, settling instead for ‘essential’ and ‘non-essential’ varieties.
Islam et al. (2015) as well as Islam (2014) contended that every naturally
occurring chemical is beneficial at some concentration, beyond which it
becomes toxic (see the top graph in Figure 2.2) On the other hand, what
is perceived as non-essential (as per Weber and Rutala, 2001, most heavy
metals are non-essential although there is almost yearly discovery that these
Beneficial
Optimal
Limiting
Natural
Unnatural metals
Harmful metals
Metal ion concentration
Figure 2.2 The usefulness of metal depends on its concentration as well as source (Figure
adapted from Islam et al., 2016 and Weber and Rutala, 2001).
metals are also essential, albeit at a very small concentrations. The concept
that unnatural metals, i.e., the ones processed through non-sustainable
techniques is inherently toxic to the organism is new but it answers all
the question regarding how toxicity functions within an organic body. As
discussed by Islam and Khan (2018), the presence of artificially processed
metal is akin to introducing a cancer cell that continues to wreck havoc to
the organism.
In ancient times, only the upper graph of Figure 2.2 Existed because all
processes were sustainable from both mass and energy perspectives (Khan
and Islam, 2016). Today, it has become a common practice to lump chem-
icals that had been in use since the ancient time with those discovered in
later era, for which there is no longer a natural processing technique avail-
able. For instance, many clinical studies have lumped cadmium, lead, mer-
cury, thallium, bismuth, arsenic, antimony and tin in the same vein. Yet,
cadmium was discovered in 1872 (just before the invention of electricity in
1979), thallium was discovered in 1861 whereas other metals were either
used in their natural form (ore) or processed through natural means (e.g.
open fire, natural additives). The first metal to be smelted in the ancient
Middle East was probably copper (by 5000 BCE), followed by tin, lead,
and silver. To achieve the high temperatures required for smelting, fur-
naces with forced-air draft were developed; for iron, temperatures even
higher were required. Smelting thus represented a major technological
achievement. Charcoal was the universal fuel until coke was introduced in
18th-century England (Islam et al., 2010).
Many forms of mercury exist in nature, including elemental mercury,
inorganic mercury, and organic mercury (Weber and Rutala, 2001). From
ancient times onward, organic mercury1 compounds have been used as

antiseptics, antibacterials, fungicides and other disinfectants. These are
highly toxic beyond very low concentration. It means their optimal con-
centration (Figure 2.2) is quite low. Beyond the optimal concentration,
organic mercury can produce toxicity through skin absorption, ingestion,
or inhalation. They are also associated with gastrointestinal, renal, and neu-
rologic toxicity. Thimerosal (merthiolate; 2(9-ethylmerucrio-thio) benzoic
acid sodium salt has been widely used as a bactericide at concentrations
of 0.001% to 0.1%. It has also been used as preservatives in pharmaceuti-
cals and cosmetics, including in vaccines, eyedrops, contact lens cleaning
and storage solutions, cosmetic creams, toothpaste, mouthwash, etc. (Van’t
Veen and Joost, 1994). While this is widely recognized, few are aware of the
fact that the chemicals that are used in modern industry are not chemicals
that are naturally occurring, they are instead synthetic. Therefore, they are
toxic even below the optimal concentration, meaning the lower graph of
Figure 2.2 Should be consulted. This same principle also applies to mer-
cury vapour. For instance, today’s mercury vapor lamps use an arc through
vaporized mercury in a high-pressure tube to create very waves (of various
wavelengths) directly from its own arc. This is different from fluorescent
lightbulbs, which use the mercury vapor arc to create a weaker light that
mainly creates UV light to excite the phosphors. This usage is just one of
many alterations of original usage of mercury.
In Figure 2.3, relative output spectra of low- and medium pressure mer-
cury arc lamps are shown. The ‘medium pressure’ refers to lamps for which
the internal pressures are in the range of 2 to 5 bar and that operate at
temperatures ranging from 700-900 C. The important aspect of the figure
is the fact that UV output is a strong function of internal pressure of the
lamp generate characteristic wavelengths of a broad spectrum. With con-
ventional mass and energy balance treatment that disconnects the tran-
sition between mass and energy such dependence of relative irradiance
on pressure cannot be quantified or predicted qualitatively. However, the
technique (using the ‘galaxy’ model) proposed by Islam (2014) and later
used by Khan and Islam (2016) makes it possible to account for alteration
in the subatomic level to be coupled with tangible expression, such as light
intensity. The next feature of this figure is the fact that different irradi-
ance level of UV will kill different types of bacteria. Once again, such anti-
bacterial effects can be described with the galaxy model that allows for
1
Organic mercury compounds, sometimes called organomercurials, are those containing
covalent bonds between carbon and mercury. Examples are methylmercury, dimethyl-
mercury and methylmercury chloride (methylmercuric chloride).
500
400
Relative 300
Irradiance
200
100
320
0 300
E 280
D 260
C 240 Wavelength
Medium B 230
A (nm)
Pressure Low 200
Lamp type Pressure
Figure 2.3 Relative output spectra of low- and medium pressure mercury arc lamps in the
germicidal UV range. A=2 kW, 100 W/in; B=3.5 kW, 150 W/in; C=5 kW, 150 W/in; D=
6.4 kW, 150 W/in; E=7 kW, 200 W/in (from Blachley III and Peel, 2001).
different wavelengths to destroy different types of bacteria (based on their

characteristic length).2
Knowledge of cinnabar (HgS) is traced back to ancient Assyria and
Egypt, but also to China (Wang, 2015). It had value for both medicinal
and alchemy applications. In traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), cin-
nabar has been a high value medicinal component. Wang (2015) pointed
out Shennong’s Classic of Materia Medica claims that cinnabar can treat
practically all ailments involving the five yang organs3, namely, heart, liver,
spleen, lung and kidney. Cinnabar reportedly has calming and revitaliz-
ing effects, which help build one’s strength and improve vision, and kill
“evil spirits”. The term “evil spirit” has been known to imply inexplicable
ailments, including mental illness (Islam et al., 2017). There have been
reports of improvement of lungs and hearts owing to ‘moistening actions’
of cinnabar while consumed orally or even applied externally. Most signifi-
cantly, cinnabar was known to be a cure of convulsion and epilepsy, as well
as fetal toxicity and pox virus. It was also considered to prevent malaria
(Wang, 2015).
One such compound is mercury sulphide (cinnabar), which is known in
ancient Chinese (called zhūshā, ), Greek and Arabic (called zinjafar,
2
For details of the galaxy model, see Islam (2014).
3
On the yang side of the yin-yang are six organs, namely, gall bladder, stomach, small
intestine, large intestine, bladder and triple burner.
) culture with universal use in medicine as well as general alchemy.

Cinnabar has been used in traditional Chinese medicine as a sedative for
more than 2000 years (Huanga et al., 2007). In addition to being used for
insomnia, cinnabar is thought to be effective for cold sores, sore throat,
and some skin infections.
Cinnabar is generally found in a massive, granular or earthy form and
is bright scarlet to brick-red in color, has the highest refractive index of
any mineral (King, 2002).
It turns out that mercury compounds continued to be used in Europe
during 15th through 20th century. In the era before synthetic antibiotics,
sexually-transmitted diseases were of great concern. In search for a cure,
various forms of mercury were tried. As such, mercury was the remedy of
choice for syphilis in Protestant Europe. Paracelsus (1493-1541) formu-
lated mercury as an ointment because he recognised the toxicity and risk of
poisoning when administrating mercury as an elixir. Mercury was already
being used in Western Europe to treat skin diseases.
The dominating medical use of Hg, (in metallic form and as calomel,
Hg2Cl2), in Sweden in the second half of the 19th century indicates that
some persons were highly exposed to Hg, mainly for treatment of syphilis,
and 0.3-1% of the population of 3.5-5 millions were treated for venereal
diseases (10,000-50,000 patients).
Sublimate (HgCl2) is in certain countries still used as an antiseptic for
wounds. It was used in large quantities during the World Wars, triggered
by the largely increased use of Hg in explosives. Sublimate was also used
for preserving wood.
In the 1830 s, dental restorative material, called ‘amalgam’ was intro-
duced to the United States. This amalgam was developed in England and
France and contained silver, tin, copper, zinc and mercury. The amalgam
fillings were not openly embraced by organized dentistry in America,
and in 1840, members of the American Society of Dental Surgeons were
required to sign pledges not to use mercury fillings. By this time, the cur-
rent methods of refining metals (including mercury) have been in place.
Mercury and its compounds used in dental practice may be responsible
for release of mercury into the oral cavity. Compounds of mercury tend
to be much more toxic than the element itself, and organic compounds of
mercury (e.g., dimethyl-mercury) are often extremely toxic and may be
responsible in causing brain and liver damage.
Recently, Wang et al. (2013) conducted an interesting study. They orally
administered various doses of cinnabar for 10 consecutive days, then stud-
ied the mercury levels. They discovered that the mercury level in serum
and tissues are significantly higher than that of vehicle control (Table 2.2).
Table 2.2 Mercury contents after cinnabar and HgCl2 administration for 10 days
(From Wang et al., 2013).
Group Serum (ng/ml) Brain (ng/g) Liver (ng/g) Kidney (ng/g)
Vehicle 1.39 ± 0.05 2.96 ± 1.24 11.19 ± 4.31 14.24 ± 2.97
HgCl2 401.94 ± 30.3 190.25 ± 11.8 5571.91 ± 1211 23592.40 ± 446
0.01 g/kg
Cinnabar 4.10 ± 0.47 10.63 ± 2.53* 25.58 ± 5.97 70.00 ± 18.02
0.01 g/kg
Cinnabar 14.63 ± 0.59 11.07 ± 2.10 32.73 ± 6.96 82.69 ± 20.02
0.05 g/kg
Cinnabar 26.75 ± 6.98 12.20 ± 1.44 84.75 ± 9.47 271.10 ± 49.25
0.1 g/kg
Cinnabar 75.30 ± 9.24 13.27 ± 2.22 89.47 ± 10.02 455.88 ± 76.93
1 g/kg
The serum mercury levels in the cinnabar groups were increased in a dose‐
dependent manner. However, the serum mercury content for the cinnabar
group was only about 1/100 of that of the HgCl2 group at the same dose. The
mercury levels in the brain tissue of the cinnabar group were raised slowly
with the increasing dose and were about 1/19 of HgCl2 group at the same
dose. Similar to the pattern of the HgCl2 group, mercury accrued more in
kidney than in liver. However, in the HgCl2 group, mercury accumulation
was about 330 times higher than that of the cinnabar group.
Meanwhile, there were no significant differences in the tissue distribu-
tion patterns between the cinnabar and pure HgS groups (Table 2.3) except
that the pure HgS group accumulated mercury in the kidney ~2 times
higher than that of the cinnabar group.
Table 2.3 Mercury contents after cinnabar and HgS administration for 10 days
(From Wang et al., 2013).
Group Serum (ng/ml) Brain (ng/g) Liver (ng/g) Kidney (ng/g)
Vehicle 1.52 ± 0.02 1.83 ± 0.49 5.71 ± 1.69 16.29 ± 1.19
Cinnabar 24.62 ± 1.55 12.12 ± 1.19 77.57 ± 10.17 206.21 ± 33.76
0.1 g/kg
HgS 0.1 g/kg 27.44 ± 3.29 8.03 ± 1.98 41.39 ± 9.78 454.56 ± 70.68
This study indicates that cinnabar is remarkably different from HgCl2 in

mercury absorption and tissue distribution. This finding is profound
because up until recently synthetic chemicals were considered to be the
same as natural chemicals (Khan and Islam, 2016). As will be discussed in
latter chapters, this marks a bifurcation point in terms of natural chemicals
following a different pathway from artificial chemicals.
2.2.2 Sal Ammoniac

Sal ammoniac is a naturally occurring substance, mainly containing
NH4Cl. It is the best known of the ammonium-bearing minerals. It forms
in natural fumaroles, where gas vents from underground from volcanic
activity. It also forms from the process of the burning of coal in coal depos-
its. The formation of Sal ammoniac is unique, as it is created from subli-
mation, meaning it crystallizes directly from gaseous fumes and bypasses
a liquid phase. Sal ammoniac is highly soluble in water. It is known for its
utility in many applications, ranging from fertilizer, to colouring agent to
medical usage.
Sal ammoniac (naturally occurring Ammonium Chloride) has reported
to be first found in the wastelands of Central Asia, from which it was used
by Muslim Alchemists of the medieval age, primarily for distillation of
organic materials (Multhauf, 1965). In later centuries, there is evidence
that Sal ammoniac was being produced through solar distillation of camel
urine and other organic products, in proportion of five parts urine, one
part common salt, and one-half part soot, which was also derived from
natural products (Malthauf, 1965). Soot in general is a common source of
heavy metals. Whenever soot is formed, they contain heavy metals that
act as the nucleation site within the powdery soot. It is also reported that
soot collected from the chimney of camel dung furnaces in Egypt con-
tained natural ammonium chloride. This is expected as any herbivorous
animal would have natural supply of salt in its diet. The concept of combin-
ing ammonia (then known as volatile alkali) and hydrochloric acid (then
known as ‘spirit of salt’) wasn’t invented until late 18th century (Malthauf,
1965). The now well-known synthesis process was:
NH3 + HCl → NH4Cl (2.1)
This synthesis process was deemed to be cheaper than the ‘decomposi-

tion, which used decomposition of soot (including organic material), sul-
furic acid and salt. By the mid-nineteenth century the synthetic process
had superseded all others for the manufacture of sal ammoniac, and it was
accomplished with utter simplicity through the addition of hydrochloric

acid to the “ammonia liquor”, which was a residue from coal distillation.
Later on, another process evolved. It involved double decomposition of
ammonium sulfate and sodium chloride:
(NH4)2CO3 + CuSO4 → CuCO3 + (NH4)2S04 (2.2)
(NH4)2S04+ 2NaCl → Na2SO4+ 2NH4C1 (2.3)
Ammonium carbonate refers to smelling salts, also known as ammonia

inhalants, spirit of hartshorn or sal volatile. Today, this chemical is known
as baker’s ammonia – the source of gaseous ammonia. It is also the form
taken by ammonia when distilled from carbonaceous material without
drying. Similarly, copper sulfate can be derived from naturally occurring
blue vitriol, other sulfates, such as calcium sulfate (gypsum in its natural
state). In Equation 2.2, the requirement is that an insoluble carbonate be
formed, permitting the separation of the ammonium sulfate. The separa-
tion of the sal ammoniac in the second reaction was accomplished either
by its sublimation or by differential crystallization.
Even later, came the double decomposition of ammonium carbonate
and magnesium chloride (bittern), following the reaction:
(NH4)2CO3 + MgCl2 → MgCO3 + 2NH4Cl (2.4)
This involved one step less than the preceding process and moreover uti-
lized as a source of magnesium chloride the waste mother liquor, “bittern,”
which is the waste of brine after production of common salt and is rich
in magnesium chlorides, sulfates, bromides, iodides, and other chemicals
present in the original sea water. This process was introduced commercially
by the well-known hydrometer inventor, Antoine Baume, only a year after
the establishment of the Gravenhorst factory, and we have a circumstantial
account of his works written in 1776, while it was still in operation.
2.2.3 Sulphur
As per New Science, sulfur is the tenth most abundant element in the uni-
verse, has been known since ancient times. Table 2.4 Shows abundance
numbers for various elements in the universal scale. On earth, this sce-
nario changes. Table 2.4 lists the most abundant elements found within the
earth’s crust.
Table 2.4 Abundance number for various elements present in the universe
(from Heiserman, 1992 and Croswell, 1996).
Mass fraction, Abundance
Element Atomic number ppm (relative to silicon)
Hydrogen 1 739,000 40,000
Helium 2 240,000 3,100
Oxygen 8 10,400 22
Neon 10 4,600 8.6
Nitrogen 7 960 6.6
Carbon 6 1,090 3.5
Silicon 14 650 1
Magnesium 12 580 0.91
Iron 26 10,900 0.6
Sulfur 16 440 0.38
Wexler (2014) points out that the use of sulphur has been popular since
the ancient Greek period in production of chemical ‘weapon’. As early as
420 BC, toxic aerosol was created with natural pitch and sulphur powder.
This tradition was continued by the Roman, who often added other natural
chemicals to increase the deadly effect of the toxic cloud. Similarly, Both
ancient Chinese and Indian cultures used sulphur for warfare. They, how-
ever, added combustible chemicals, such as explosive saltpeter or nitrate
salts, and/or a variety of plant, animal, or mineral poisons, such as arsenic
and lead, in making smoke and fire bombs. In even the new world and in
India, the seeds of toxic plants and hot peppers have been in use to rout
attackers (Wexler, 2014).
When it comes to using sulphur for material processing or medici-
nal needs, Muslim scientists of the medieval era are the pioneers (Islam
et al., 2010). As pointed out by Norris (2006), the Sulfur–Mercury theory
of metal composition by these scientists is paramount to understanding
sustainable material processing. This theory is in the core of the so-called
exhalation theory that includes continuous transition between solid and
gaseous phases. Norris (2006) identified the main strengths of the mineral
exhalation theory as compositional flexibility and upward mobility: the
mixing of protometallic vapours, which could vary compositionally and

react with other mineral matter during their movement through subter-
ranean regions, seemed sufficient for producing a plurality of metals and
ores. The Muslim scientists considered metals to be of composite material.
Among their most important conceptual advances in this field is the idea
that metals, and many minerals, are composed of compositional principles
likened to sulfur and mercury. In this theory, the Sulfur generally corre-
sponds to the dry and solid qualities of a metal, while the Mercury pro-
vides the moisture and metallic character. It has been suggested that the
Sulfur–Mercury theory may have been derived by generalising the process
by which cinnabar congeals when sulfur and mercury are combined under
appropriate conditions (Principe, 1998). These substances, often referred
to as “sophic” or “philosophic” sulfur and mercury in later literature, were
hypothetical materials qualitatively. This term is no longer in use. In the
New Science era, the focus has been on tangible aspects and materials are
characterized based on their tangible features, irrespective of the source
of the material (Islam, 2014). Khan and Islam (2012) introduced the
Avalanche theory that leaves room for counting all entities in a material.
Islam (2014) extended that theory and introduced the galaxy theory that
includes the entire history of the individual ‘particles’ within any material
body. It was a restoration of original theory developed by Muslim scholars
of the medieval era and a departure from the ‘science of tangibles’ that
has dominated the New science, which emerged from sixteenth and sev-
enteenth centuries.
Another possible physical analogue would seem to be the process
of smelting sulphide ores, with the consequent generation of sulfurous
fumes and earthy dross, and a molten metal considered as a type of mer-
cury. Avicenna (Ibn Sīnā) held a similar view as we know from his work
that he considered metallic mercury being “solidified by sulfur vapour”.
During his epoch materials were considered to be whole and the elemen-
tal consideration was unfathomable. The general theme was material is
inherently a composition of various matters and cannot be reconstituted
from ‘refined’ materials. The mercury-sulphur theory added to this con-
text the notion that every component nature, irrespective of its physi-
cal or external appearance, pays a role in the nature of the final product
(Norris, 2006).
This principle also applies to Avicenna’s work that theorize the produc-
tion of precious metals by combining base metals with various “solidifi-
cations” of mercury treated with one or more kinds of sulphur (Newman,
2014). Remarkably, none of the Muslim scholars of that era believed that
a scheme outside of natural processes can be initiated, let alone sustained.
Newman (2014) points to another important point. That is material

processing and refining were routine except that at no time artificial or
synthetic material was used. These processes may appear to be crude or
unsanitary in today’s standard, but they were nevertheless wholly organic.
For instance, he mentions about the use of vinegar, and sour milk, and
goats’ whey, and water of chickpeas and boys’ urine during boiling and sub-
limation. Avicenna was known to recognize water as the mother material
whereas earth materials were today’s equivalent of catalysts. For instance,
quicksilver is considered to be composed of a watery moisture united with
a subtle earth. Avicenna had described this inherent earth within mercury
as being “sulphurous.” As discussed in previous sections, this characteriza-
tion amounts to the intangible designation, the term ‘intangible’ covering
trace elements as well as vapour phase. When this principle is applied to
say, heating cinnabar in a current of air and condensing the vapour, the
following equation emerges in conventional sense. The equation for this
extraction is
HgS + O2 → Hg + SO2 + (2.5)
In this equation, contains information regarding intangibles (called

‘sulphurous’ by Avicenna)
In true scientific form, this equation should be written as

Cinnabar + air + natural additives Natural Heating quicksilver +
(2.6)
In this format, any process can be described with its sustainability consid-
erations intact. It also implicitly recognizes the role of water as the mother
substance (ubiquitous), thus “humidity” being an intrinsic property of
matter. This process was the hallmark of Medieval Muslim scientists, such
as Avicenna and and Al-Rāzī. For instance, Al-Rāzī’s Kitāb al-Asrār is filled
with similar recipes for refining a host of mineral products ranging from
sal ammoniac and orpiment to boraxes and alkalis (Newman, 2014). Islam
(2014) recognized this process as the tangible-intangible yin-yang – a form
that was later used by Islam et al. (2018) to formulate a new characteriza-
tion technique for crude oil. Norris (2006) saw it as mercury and sulphur
combination, thought to be equivalent to water-oil version for minerals. In
later centuries, the theory of double unctuosity4 was introduced in order
recognize the existence of intrinsic contents within bulk material. Unlike
4
‘Intangible’ would be the closest meaning of this word.
Muslim scientists, none of these scientists recognized the existence of water

as the mother material, whose concentration cannot be reduced to nil irre-
spective of the refining process carried out. Nevertheless, European scien-
tists went ahead and used the concept of a double humidity, one of which is
flammable, with a common reference to distillation of ethanol from wine.
The logic here is: just as wine contains a highly volatile, combustible mate-
rial that can be distilled off (ethanol), and a less volatile component that is
not combustible, so too does the metallic intangible, sulphur. These scien-
tists saw normal sulphur as having a burning unctuosity that blackens and
burns metals when it is fused and dropped on them. For this reason, Albert
adds, alchemists Eventually, this principle would lead to modern refining
techniques with the addition of synthetic chemicals as the catalysts (one
type of intangibles or unctuous material). For quicksilver, they accepted
Avicenna’s claim that it contains a liquid component along with a ‘sub-
tle earth’. However, Avicenna described the ‘subtle, unctuous, humidity’ as
‘water’, whereas European scientists envisioned the ‘moist’ component as
mercury. Furthermore, the likes of Albertus Magnus have introduced three
forms of intangibles, rather than two. The Wyckoff (1967) translation offers
the following quote:
We know, therefore, that the ability of metals to be burnt is [due

to] the Sulphur, and not to the Quicksilver by itself. Furthermore,
we also know that in anything that contains very unctuous mois-
ture mixed with earthiness, the moisture is of three kinds. One
of these is extremely airy and fiery, adhering to the surface, as a
consequence of the [upward] motion of those elements [Fire and
Air], so that they always rise to the surface of things in which they
are mixed and combined. The second, close beneath this, contains
more wateriness floating about among the parts of the thing. The
third has its moisture firmly rooted and immersed in the parts and
bounded in the combination; and therefore this is the only one that
is not easily separated from the combination, unless the thing is
totally destroyed. And therefore this must be the nature of Sulphur.
(p. 197-198)
Here we can see that Albertus Magnus has divided the extrinsic moisture
into two types while retaining the unitary character of the third, intrinsic
humidity. His goal in making this new bifurcation probably lay in the desire
to have both a flammable and a non-flammable type of unfixed humid-
ity. Thus, the first extrinsic moisture is fiery and airy, hence combustible,
while the second is not, being composed of “ wateriness” (Newman, 2014).
Whatever the intention of Albertus was, this point about distinguishing
‘fiery’ element from others is of profound implication. In later centuries,

this formed the basis of considering energy as a form, discrete from mass,
thereby creating opacity in maintaining natural energy sources.
The original form of the mass energy transformation theory of Avicenna
is depicted in Figure 2.4. This figure shows how any matter will have tangi-
ble and intangible components, the intangible component being the driver
for so-called chemical reactions. For instance, the intangible component
will include energy source as well as the presence of trace elements, includ-
ing catalysts. Just like components of energy source are not traceable, com-
ponents of catalysts are considered to be insignificant in determining final
mass of various reaction products. New science, in essence, focuses on the
tangibles and adds the effect of intangibles through tangible expressions.
For instance, heating is evaluated through the temperature and catalysts
are measured by there mere presence and for both cases no determina-
tion is made as to how the pathway changes in presence of two sources of
temperature (or catalytic reaction) that are different while have the same
external expression (for instance, temperature or mass of catalyst).
Another important aspect of Islamic scholars was the recognition of
water as the mother and ubiquitous phase. Islam (2014) recognized this
observation and reconstituted the material balance equations to develop
new characterization of materials as well as energy. Tichy et al. (2017) dis-
cussed an interesting aspect of water content and sustainability. They stud-
ied the role of humidity on the behavior of insects. Optimal functionality
is a direct function of humidity optimization within an organic body. This
optimization is necessary for metabolic activities, as well as overall survival
abilities. From an evolutionary perspective, this need of optimum humid-
ity can explain the existence of hygroreceptors very likely. Interestingly,
these hygroreceptors are associated in antagonistic pairs of a moist and a
dry cell in the same sensillum with a thermoreceptive cold cell. Although
the mechanism by which humidity stimulates the moist and dry cells is
little known, it is clear that the duality that Avicenna envisioned persists
Being
Tangible Intangible
Passive Active
Quantity Quality
Figure 2.4 Scientific pathway of a chemical reaction modified from Kalbarczyk (2018).
in all levels of natural functions. Also of significance is the fact that the
moist cell and the dry cell appear to be bimodal in that their responses to
humidity strongly depend on temperature. Either modality can be changed
independently of the other, but both are related in some way to the amount
of moisture in the air and to its influence upon evaporation (Tichy et al.,
2017). This scientific model was altered by subsequent European scholars,
who recognized the natural refining process through the ‘theory of three
humidities’ (Newman, 2014).
2.2.4 Arsenic Sulphide

Arsenic sulphide, in its natural form has been in use for longest time.
Similar to any other natural products, Arsenic trisulfide had a wide range
of industrial use, including tanning agent, often with with indigo dye.
Orpiment is found in volcanic environments, often together with other
arsenic sulfides, mainly realgar (“ruby sulphur” or “ruby of arsenic”).
Similar to mercury, this naturally occurring chemical was used through-
out history as a potent poison or a medicine (Frith, 2013). Arsenic was
used in traditional Chinese as well as Indian medicine. In addition, it was
popular as a cosmetic product in eye shadow in the Roman era. In tra-
ditional Chinese medicine, preparations can be obtained in the form of
coated or uncoated pills, powder or syrups. Different studies have shown
that the majority of traditional Chinese medicines, such as Chinese herbal
balls, show high doses of As varying between 0.1 and 36.6 mg per tablet,
causing patients to get intoxicated by the high As dose and Indian ayurve-
dic herbal medicine products are also known to cause lead, mercury and
As intoxication.
Avicenna recommended arsenic with the gum of pine for asthma.
He also prescribed arsenic in honey water, for a wide range of remedies,
including for herpes esthiomenos of the nose (Aegineta, 1847). Avicenna
discussed the use of white, red, and yellow arsenic, all being used in their
natural state. It was much later that ‘refined’ arsenic emerged. For instance,
arsenic was known as early as the fourth century B.C., when Aristotle
referred to one of its sulfides as “sandarach,” or red lead (now known
as As4S4). It was only in 1250 that Albertus Magnus, a German philoso-
pher and alchemist that isolated the element. Of course, the word arsenic
comes from the Persian word “zarnikh,” which means “yellow orpiment,”
which the Greeks adopted as “arsenikon”. This is commonly denominated
as Arsenic trisulfide (As2S3), although natural state contains other chem-
icals that are in perfect balance with the molecular form. Of course, the
more common form is crystalline oxides, As2O3 (white arsenic). The most
common form, however, is the Arsenopyrite (FeAsS), an iron arsenic sul-

fide, also called mispickel.
Nowadays, the therapeutic use of As is making a comeback in modern
medicine. Arsenic-trioxide, for instance, is used in treating patients with
relapsed acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL). However, the notion of nat-
ural state of arsenic being different from synthetic one’s is absent.
Long before being hailed as “the arsenic that saved” in early 20th century
(Vahidnia et al., 2007), Muslim scholars considered Arsenic sulphide as a
chemical of crucial pharmaceutical value. The word arsenic is derived from
the Persian zarnikh and Syriac zarniqa, later incorporated into ancient
Greek as arsenikon, which meant “masculine” or “potent” and referred
primarily to orpiment, or yellow arsenic. The word became arsenicum in
Latin and arsenic in old French, from which the current English term is
derived (Vahidnia et al., 2007).
In post-Renaissance Europe, the use of arsenic as a poisoning agent
became common. Its application in getting rid of wealthy people became
so popular that by the 17th century France, white arsenic became known
as poudre de succession, the ‘inheritance powder’ (Vahidnia et al., 2007).
In the 19th century, the same tactic was used to commit insurance fraud.
During that era, one of the most infamous case was that of Goeie Mie
(‘Good Mary’) of Leiden, The Netherlands, who poisoned at least 102
friends and relatives between 1867 and 1884, distributing arsenic-trioxide
(ATO) in hot milk to her victims after opening life insurance policies in
their names. Of the 102 people poisoned, 45 persons became seriously ill,
often with neurological symptoms and 27 persons died; 16 of whom were
her own relatives (De Wolff and Edelbroek, 1994).
Research during that period led to the development of post-mortem
detection of poison, followed by decrease in incidents of poisoning with
arsenic. During the 19th century, European women applied arsenic pow-
der to whiten their faces as well as to their hair and scalp to destroy vermin.
It was also thought that arsenic consumption by women gave “beauty and
freshness” to the skin. For the first time in Europe, medicinal applications
of arsenic are found in late 18th century, when various chronic disorders
were being treated with arsenic (Bentley and Chasteen, 2002). Arsenic
continued to be used in cosmetics well into the early twentieth century
and this was a common source of accidental poisoning.
When arsenic is heated, it oxidizes and releases an odor similar to that of
garlic. Striking various arsenic-containing minerals with a hammer might
also release the characteristic odor. At ordinary pressure, arsenic, like car-
bon dioxide, does not melt but sublimes directly into vapor. Liquid arsenic
only forms under high pressure.
Curiously, alchemists gave emphasis on characterizing material in terms

of mercury and arsenic. Mercury, lead and arsenic are effective mitotic poi-
sons (turbagens) at particular concentrations, due to their known affinity
for thiol groups and induce various types of spindle disturbances. New
Science classifies these clastogenic effects to be S-dependent. The avail-
ability of cations affect the number of aberrations produced quantitatively.
Plants, following lower exposure, regain normalcy on being allowed to
recover (Patra et al., 2004). However, as usual New Science does not dis-
tinguish between natural arsenic and processed arsenic, thereby obscuring
any usefulness of the research findings.
Historically, New Scientists5 have focused on medicinal effects of arsenic
when it comes to finding any positive aspect of arsenic. Citations of medic-
inal applications range from Ancient China to Ancient Greece through
Ancient India (Doyle, 2009). Hippocrates (469–377 BC) recommended
arseniko as a tonic whilst Dioscorides (c. 54–68AD) recommended it
for asthma. A Greek surgeon‐herbalist working in Nero’s army, he made
extensive observations on asthma, including the use of realgar mixed with
resin, inhaled as a smoke for the relief of cough or taken as a potion for
asthma. Reportedly, it was used to kill Britanicus in 55 AD during the reign
of Emperor Nero (37–68AD).
Egyptologists claim that ancient Egyptians used arsenic to harden cop-
per at least 3000 years ago. This was confirmed by Islam et al. (2010), who
reviewed ancient technologies and found them to be totally sustainable
because they used no artificial mass or energy source. They also discussed
the fact that such chemicals were added in the embalming fluid during
processing of mummies. Of course, the Medieval Islamic golden era saw
numerous applications through alchemy. However, the role of arsenic
in material processing has drawn little attention from New Scientists. In
Europe, during the New Science era, the use of arsenic is synonymous with
processed derivatives of arsenic, rather than naturally occurring version.
Graeme and Pollack (1998) described how artificial processing of arsenic
can render both mercury and arsenic into toxic agents. They pointed out
that Greeks and Romans continued to use natural arsenic throughout the
Medieval era for various medical purposes. Even during the 1800s, arsenic
remained in use for medical purposes in treating leukemia, psoriasis, and
asthma. Of interest is the fact that the Fowler’s solution was not withdrawn
from the US market until the 1950s. Meanwhile, Erlich and Bertheim
5
This term is applied to Newton and scientists of the post-Newtonian era that are believ-
ers of New Science, which is premised on the ‘infallibility’ of Newtonian description of
mass and energy.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
grace, her form all of beauty to me who opposite sat and was
watching her dextrous fingers.
The manufacture of flax into linen material was ever felt to be of
vast importance, and was encouraged by legislation from earliest
colonial days, but it received a fresh impulse in New England
through the immigration of about one hundred Irish families from
Londonderry. They settled in New Hampshire on the Merrimac about
1719. They spun and wove by hand, but with far more skill than
prevailed among those English settlers who had already become
Americans. They established a manufactory according to Irish
methods, and attempts at a similar establishment were made in
Boston. There was much public excitement over spinning. Women,
rich as well as poor, appeared on Boston Common with their wheels,
thus making spinning a popular holiday recreation. A brick building
was erected as a spinning-school, and a tax was placed in 1737 to
support it. But this was not an industrial success, the excitement died
out, the public spinning-school lost its ephemeral popularity, and the
wheel became again simply a domestic duty and pride.
For many years after this, housewives had everywhere flax and
hemp to spin and weave in their homes, and the preparation of these
staples seems to us to-day a monumental labor. On almost every
farm might be seen a patch of the pretty flax, ripening for the hard
work of pulling, rippling, rotting, breaking, swingling, and combing,
which all had to be done before it came to the women’s hands for
spinning. The seed was sown broad-cast, and allowed to grow till the
bobs or bolls were ripe. The flax was then pulled and spread neatly
in rows to dry. This work could be done by boys. Then men whipped
or threshed or rippled out all the seed to use for meal; afterwards the
flax stalks were allowed to lie for some time in water until the shives
were thoroughly rotten, when they were cleaned and once more
thoroughly dried and tied in bundles. Then came work for strong
men, to break the flax on the ponderous flaxbreak, to get out the
hard “hexe” or “bun,” and to swingle it with a swingle knife, which
was somewhat like a wooden dagger. Active men could swingle forty
pounds a day on the swingling-board. It was then hetchelled or
combed or hackled by the housewife, and thus the rough tow was
gotten out, when it was straightened and made ready for the spruce
distaff, round which it was finally wrapped. The hatchelling was
tedious work and irritating to the lungs, for the air was filled with the
fluffy particles which penetrated everywhere. The thread was then
spun on a “little wheel.” It was thought that to spin two double skeins
of linen, or four double skeins of tow, or to weave six yards of linen,
was a good day’s work. For a week’s work a girl received fifty cents
and “her keep.” She thus got less than a cent and a half a yard for
weaving. The skeins of linen thread went through many tedious
processes of washing and bleaching before being ready for weaving;
and after the cloth was woven it was “bucked” in a strong lye, time
and time again, and washed out an equal number of times. Then it
was “belted” with a maple beetle on a smooth, flat stone; then
washed and spread out to bleach in the pure sunlight. Sometimes
the thread, after being spun and woven, had been washed and
belted a score of times ere it was deemed white and soft enough to
use. The little girls could spin the “swingling tow” into coarse twine,
and the older ones make “all tow” and “tow and linen” and “harden”
stuffs to sell.
To show the various duties attending the manufacture of these
domestic textiles by a Boston woman of intelligence and social
standing, as late as 1788, let me quote a few entries from the diary
of the wife of Col. John May:—
A large kettle of yarn to attend upon. Lucretia and self rinse
our through many waters, get out, dry, attend to, bring in, do
up and sort 110 score of yarn, this with baking and ironing.
Went to hackling flax.
Rose early to help Ruth warp and put a piece in the loom.
Baking and hackling yarn. A long web of tow to whiten and
weave.
The wringing out of this linen yarn was most exhausting, and the
rinsing in various waters was no simple matter in those days, for the
water did not conveniently run into the houses through pipes and
conduits, but had to be laboriously carried in pailfuls from a pump, or
more frequently raised in a bucket from a well.
I am always touched, when handling the homespun linens of olden
times, with a sense that the vitality and strength of those enduring
women, through the many tedious and exhausting processes which
they had bestowed, were woven into the warp and woof with the flax,
and gave to the old webs of linen their permanence and their
beautiful texture. How firm they are, and how lustrous! And how
exquisitely quaint and fine are their designs; sometimes even
Scriptural designs and lessons are woven into them. They are,
indeed, a beautiful expression of old-time home and farm life. With
their close-woven, honest threads runs this finer beauty, which may
be impalpable and imperceptible to a stranger, but which to me is
real and ever-present, and puts me truly in touch with the life of my
forbears. But, alas, it is through intuition we must learn of this old-
time home life, for it has vanished from our sight, and much that is
beautiful and good has vanished with it.
The associations of the kitchen fireside that linger in the hearts of
those who are now old can find no counterpart in our domestic
surroundings to-day. The welcome cheer of the open fire, which
graced and beautified even the humblest room, is lost forever with
the close gatherings of the family, the household occupations, the
homespun industries which formed and imprinted in the mind of
every child the picture of a home.
Transcriber’s Notes
Minor punctuation errors have been silently corrected.
Page 100: “take the the case” changed to “take the case”
Page 162: “promply sailed” changed to “promptly sailed”
Page 302: “was was set outside” changed to “was set outside”
Spelling and punctuation quoted from original sources has been left as-is.
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK COLONIAL
DAMES AND GOOD WIVES ***
Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions

will be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright
in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and
distribute it in the United States without permission and without
paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General
Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and
distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the
PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project
Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if
you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the
trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the
Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such
as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and
printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in
the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright
law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially
commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the

free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this
work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase
“Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of
the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or
online at www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand,
agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual
property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to
abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using
and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for
obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms
of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only

be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by
people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.
There are a few things that you can do with most Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the
full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There
are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™
electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and
help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright
law in the United States and you are located in the United
States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying,
distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works
based on the work as long as all references to Project
Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will
support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free
access to electronic works by freely sharing Project
Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this
agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms
of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with
its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it
without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside
the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to
the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying,
displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works
based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The
Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright
status of any work in any country other than the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project

Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project
Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed,
viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United

States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it
away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg
License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United
States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to
anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges.
If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of
paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use
of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth
in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and
distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder.
Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™
License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright
holder found at the beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files
containing a part of this work or any other work associated with
Project Gutenberg™.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute
this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1
with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the
Project Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if
you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project
Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or
other format used in the official version posted on the official
Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at
no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a
means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other
form. Any alternate format must include the full Project
Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™
works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or

providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that
s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and
discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project
Gutenberg™ works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project

Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different
terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain
permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™
trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3
below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on,
transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright
law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite
these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the
medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,”
such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt
data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other
medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES -

Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in
paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic
work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for
damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU
AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE,
STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH
OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH
1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER
THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR
ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE
OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF
THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If

you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of
receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you
paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you
received the work from. If you received the work on a physical
medium, you must return the medium with your written
explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the
defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu
of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or
entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.
If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund
in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set

forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’,
WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR
ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this
agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this
agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the
maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable
state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of
this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the

Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless
from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that
arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project
Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or
deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect
you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new
computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of
volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project
Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™
collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In
2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was
created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project
Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your
efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the
Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-
profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the
laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by
the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal
tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and
your state’s laws.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500

West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact
links and up to date contact information can be found at the
Foundation’s website and official page at
www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission
of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works
that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form
accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated
equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly
important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws

regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of
the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform
and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many
fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not
solicit donations in locations where we have not received written
confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
www.gutenberg.org/donate.
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states

where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know
of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from
donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot

make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations
received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp
our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current

donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a
number of other ways including checks, online payments and
credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Section 5. General Information About Project

Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could
be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose
network of volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several

printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by
copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus,
we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any
particular paper edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new
eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear
about new eBooks.

Economically and Environmentally Sustainable Enhanced Oil Recovery Islam Full Chapter

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

Economically and Environmentally Sustainable Enhanced Oil Recovery Islam Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Economically and environmentally

sustainable enhanced oil recovery

Wiley Global Headquarters

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Printed in the USA

2.5.1 Are Natural Resources Finite and

5 Fundamentals of Reservoir Characterization in View

6.3.3 Chemical Injection 466

7.7 Downhole Refinery 657

8.8.4 Zero Use of Toxics (Processes and Products) 712

paper by mathematician Benoît Mandelbrot, first published in Science in 5 May 1967.

1.1 Opening Remarks

1.2 The Prophets of the Doomed Turned

M. R. Islam. Economically and Environmentally Sustainable Enhanced Oil Recovery,

1.3 Paradigm Shift in Sustainable Development

The current book is a continuation of our research group’s work that

Myth 1: Natural resources are limited, human greed is infinity;

Myth 2: There is no universal standard for sustainability, therefore, total

Myth 3: Environmental integrity must come with a cost and compromise

Myth 4: Human intervention is limited to adding artificial or synthetic

Myth 5: 3 R’s (Reduce, Recycle, Reuse) is the best we can do;

Myth 9: Synthetic chemicals can be a replacement of natural chemicals as

Myth 10: Zero-waste is an absurd concept; and

1.4 Questions Answered in This Book

1.4.2 How Do Energy and Mass Evolve in Sustainable System?

1.4.3 What Real Natural Resource Do We Have?

Total remaining recoverable resources

233 years 178 years

Coal Natural Gas Oil

we know capitalism is more wrong-headed than dogma; socialism is more

1.4.4 Can the Current Reserve be Expanded without Resorting

1.4.5 How Do We Characterize Complex Reservoirs?

1.4.6 When Should We Plan for EOR?

1.4.7 How to Achieve Environmental and

1.4.8 Do We Need to Sacrifice Financially to Assure

M. R. Islam. Economically and Environmentally Sustainable Enhanced Oil Recovery,

Consideration of complex rheology

Sustainable Revisit risk Addition of 4th

Figure 2.1 Various steps involved in petroleum technology.

In this chapter, a delinearized history of energy developments in rela-

2.2 Pre-Industrial Revolution Period

mainly focused on medicinal applications. It was the case in ancient Orient

Table 2.1 Classification of the procedures use by Al-Razi in Book of Secrets.

seven alchemical procedures and techniques involved: sublimation and

ancient times onward, organic mercury1 compounds have been used as

different wavelengths to destroy different types of bacteria (based on their

) culture with universal use in medicine as well as general alchemy.

This study indicates that cinnabar is remarkably different from HgCl2 in

2.2.2 Sal Ammoniac

NH3 + HCl → NH4Cl (2.1)

This synthesis process was deemed to be cheaper than the ‘decomposi-

accomplished with utter simplicity through the addition of hydrochloric

(NH4)2CO3 + CuSO4 → CuCO3 + (NH4)2S04 (2.2)

(NH4)2S04+ 2NaCl → Na2SO4+ 2NH4C1 (2.3)

Ammonium carbonate refers to smelling salts, also known as ammonia

(NH4)2CO3 + MgCl2 → MgCO3 + 2NH4Cl (2.4)

mixing of protometallic vapours, which could vary compositionally and

Newman (2014) points to another important point. That is material

HgS + O2 → Hg + SO2 + (2.5)

In this equation, contains information regarding intangibles (called

Muslim scientists, none of these scientists recognized the existence of water

We know, therefore, that the ability of metals to be burnt is [due