prevention of mic

15
Prevention of MIC Subtitel Prevention of MIC A Case Study In Pipelines Transporting Water Condensate Aleida de Vos van Steenwijk ISMOS-2 ,19 th June 2009

Upload: others

Post on 16-May-2022

0 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Prevention of MIC

Prevention of MICSubtitel

Prevention of MICA Case Study In Pipelines Transporting Water Condensate

Aleida de Vos van SteenwijkISMOS-2 ,19th June 2009

Page 2: Prevention of MIC

Overview presentation

I t d ti• Introduction• What is MIC?• Case Study• Case Study

– Aim: reduce risks of SRB growth in pipeline system– ApproachApproach– Results– Intake protocol

• In conclusion

Page 3: Prevention of MIC

Nederlandse Aardolie Maatschappij

• NAM is the biggest producer of natural gas and oil in the Netherlandsg

• NAM produces 50 billion m³ natural gas a year, of which 27 billion m³ (54%)

f th G i fi ld comes from the Groningen field.

Source: NAM

Page 4: Prevention of MIC

Bioclear

Bioclear is dedicated to working on biological Bioclear is dedicated to working on biological solutions for soil, energy and the environment

– Founded in 1988Founded in 1988

– Team of 27 people

– Multidisciplinary, e.g. environmental t h l t h l h i t technology, process technology, chemistry, microbiology, biotechnology, ecology, hydrology, environmental sciences

– International

– quality system

Page 5: Prevention of MIC

Fields of application

• Biological Soil Remediationg• Energy & Environment

• MIC• Space research (ESA)

Mi i• Mining• Horticulture• BiofoulingBiofouling• Biofiltration• Microbial safety and hygiene

Page 6: Prevention of MIC

Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion

• A complex processes requiring interdisciplinary approachMicrobiology Electrochemistry Metallurgy etcMicrobiology, Electrochemistry, Metallurgy, etc.

• Dynamic processSituation can change rapidly and is unpredictableSituation can change rapidly and is unpredictable

• Limited awarenessDon’t always believe in or understand MIC

• No ‘one solution’ to the problem...

Page 7: Prevention of MIC

MIC is essentially a Biological Process

• Many bacteria can be involved such as:• Many bacteria can be involved, such as:– Sulphate Reducing Bacteria (SRB)– Sulphur Oxidising Bacteria (SOB)– Iron Reducing Bacteria (IOB)– Iron Reducing Bacteria (IRB)

Bi fil h i fl• Biofilms have a great influence– Change local conditions drastically (aerobic anaerobic)– Keep micro-organisms and metabolites in close proximityKeep micro organisms and metabolites in close proximity

• Micro-organisms can produce corrosive metabolites– Organic and inorganic acids, EPS, etc.g g , ,

Page 8: Prevention of MIC

Sulphate Reducing Bacteria (SRB)

Page 9: Prevention of MIC

Case Study

• By-products formed when processing natural gas are y p p g gtransported through pipelines to a treatment facility.

• Transport of these by-products possibly leads to MIC

Aim: Set-up an intake protocol for pipelines to reduce the risks of SRB growthrisks of SRB growth

Page 10: Prevention of MIC

Approach

• Are micro-organisms relevant to MIC present?

• What are the environmental conditions?• What are the environmental conditions?

• What are growth requirements of SRB?

• Are there risks of increased SRB growth and MIC?

Page 11: Prevention of MIC

Are relevant micro-organisms present?

Microscopy/FISHFISH

Q-PCR

DGGE

Page 12: Prevention of MIC

Results

• Microbial analysesy– SRB predominant– Other relevant micro-organisms identified (biofilm, IOB,

IRB t )IRB, etc.)

• Environmental conditions– Most conditions favourable for SRB growth (carbon source,

temperature, oxygen, sulphate availability, salt concentrations etc )concentrations, etc.)

– Except pH: indication that slight differences in pH may lead to increased activity of SRB

Page 13: Prevention of MIC

How to reduce risks of MIC?

• SRB greatest risk factor– Present throughout system– Conditions mostly favourable

• Impossible to ‘sterilise’ entire pipeline system, so....

• Ensure conditions within pipeline are kept unfavourable for SRB growth reducing risks of MIC

Page 14: Prevention of MIC

Intake Protocol to minimise SRB growth

A – Most probablyB – ProbablyC – Possible, but unlikelyD – UnlikelyE – Very unlikely

Page 15: Prevention of MIC

In Conclusion

• Monitoring of pipeline using intake protocol since 2005g p p g p• No internal MIC defects since that time

Furthermore:• Increased awareness of MIC and the possibilities for

di i it i d tidiagnosis, monitoring and prevention

Th k fThank you for your attention!your attention!