Issues in the Modeling of the Atmospheric Dispersion of Hydrogen Sulfide Emissions

Kaiser, G.D.

doi:10.2118/25948-ms

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As its definition, solution should be a uniform and stable system. In fact, just as G.D.Kaiser [14] stated, density difference will not cause H 2 S congregation at ground level. The density of mixture with H 2 S is often less than air density.…”

Section: ) Influence Of Gas Compositionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Study on Wellsite Toxic Gas Leakage and Dispersion of High Temperature High Pressure Gas Wells with High Sulfur Content

Huang¹,

Lin²,

Gao³

2010

2010 4th International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedical Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the drilling, completion and testing of gas well with high temperature, high pressure and high sulfur content, toxic gas leakage is dangerous and may bring severe consequences. It's important for the safety of personnel and assets to ascertain the leaking position and research the leakage characteristics. Focusing on the wellsite-scale space, this paper discussed the key position of leakage for different well procedures, and calculated the dispersion of leaked gas with the software FLUENT based on three dimension methods of computational fluid dynamics. Characteristics of toxic gas dispersion is discussed, and influence of wind speed, toxic gas components, leakage flowrate, temperature and wellsite obstacles is considered, which would help to optimize the monitoring locations. New proposal was put forward in simulation of multicomponent gas disperion on wellsite, as well as in explaination of toxic gas accumulation around obstacles.

show abstract

Section: ) Influence Of Gas Compositionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Study on Wellsite Toxic Gas Leakage and Dispersion of High Temperature High Pressure Gas Wells with High Sulfur Content

Huang¹,

Lin²,

Gao³

2010

2010 4th International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedical Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The EPA Risk Management Program Regulations and Their Applicability to Oil and Gas Operations

Freedman¹

1995

All Days

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The views presented in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Abstract Oil and gas operations will be impacted by the risk management program regulations to be promulgated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA). In part, the CAA requires facilities with certain hazardous substances above threshold quantities to conduct hazard assessments, implement accident prevention and emergency response programs and prepare risk management plans. The EPA has published final lists of toxic and flammable substances; hydrogen sulfide and several hydrocarbons were listed. The risk management program regulations have been proposed. This paper provides an overview of the statutory requirements for accidental release prevention in section 112(r) of the CAA. The applicability of the final lists to the oil and gas industry is described and the proposed risk management program regulations are summarized. Examples of analyses illustrating potential effects of accidental releases of "sour" gas, methane, propane and pentane are presented. The paper concludes with a brief discussion of some major issues raised in public comments to the proposed rule. Introduction Section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA), contains several provisions for the prevention of accidental chemical releases. In part, these provisions:–Establish a general duty for owners and operators of stationary sources producing, processing, handling or storing extremely hazardous substances–Require the EPA to promulgate an initial list of at least 100 substances, including 16 mandatory substances as specified in the CAA–Require the EPA to establish a threshold quantity for each listed substance–Require the EPA to promulgate regulations to require P. 569

show abstract

Simulation Investigation of the Feasibility of Simultaneous Hydrogen Sulfide-Water Injection to Improve Oil Recovery

Shedid

Abed

2004

SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past several years, considerable attention has been devoted to the dangers of hydrogen sulfide during different phases of the oil industry, including drilling, completion, work-over operations, processing and transportation. These dangers are well understood and have been the subject of numerous field case histories and scientific studies. On the other side, a little or almost no attention is devoted to investigate the possible positive applications of hydrogen sulfide in the oil industry as an injectant to improve oil recovery. A variety of techniques have been used to improve oil recovery from reservoirs in which there is no longer oil flow by natural forces. Water and/or gas injection(s) have been used successfully to improve the oil recovery of depleted reservoirs. The major goals of this simulation study are to investigate the feasibility of water, sour gas, and simultaneous hydrogen sulfide-water injection into oil reservoirs to improve oil recovery. Furthermore, the influences of water injection rate, hydrogen sulfide concentration and applied gas injection rate on oil recovery are studied. To achieve these purposes, a three-dimensional simulation model was developed using actual field data of an oil field in the United Arab Emirates. This simulation model was used to test the feasibility of simultaneous hydrogen sulfide-water injection to increase the oil recovery. The results indicated that injection of water, or sour gas (hydrogen sulfide), or simultaneous hydrogen sulfide-water into oil reservoir increased oil recovery. This increment in the oil recovery due to hydrogen sulfide and/or simultaneous hydrogen sulfide-water injections were attributed to higher molecular weight of hydrogen sulfide in comparison to methane and increment of reservoir potential. The increase of gas concentration and/or injection rate increased the oil recovery. The application of the suggested technique is expected to increase oil recovery and also maintain reservoir pressure. Introduction Sour gas injection has been applied in one reservoir where it is originally producing sour hydrocarbon fluids. Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) is a colorless gas with a very characteristic "rotten egg" smell, which can even be noticed at low concentrations. It is flammable and highly toxic (more than hydrogen cyanide). Hydrogen sulfide is widespread in most of oil and gas production operations. The dry gas is not very corrosive, but the presence of wet hydrogen sulfide may result in various materials problems. Many sour hydrocarbon reservoirs, especially sour gas reservoirs were developed and are producing normally under strict practices. Sour gas cycling has been implemented to maintain the reservoir pressure. The experience gained in development, production and operation of the subsurface and surface facilities is relatively unique where production, processing and injection of sour gas become a routine practice.

show abstract

Issues in the Modeling of the Atmospheric Dispersion of Hydrogen Sulfide Emissions

Cited by 3 publications

References 1 publication

Study on Wellsite Toxic Gas Leakage and Dispersion of High Temperature High Pressure Gas Wells with High Sulfur Content

Study on Wellsite Toxic Gas Leakage and Dispersion of High Temperature High Pressure Gas Wells with High Sulfur Content

The EPA Risk Management Program Regulations and Their Applicability to Oil and Gas Operations

Simulation Investigation of the Feasibility of Simultaneous Hydrogen Sulfide-Water Injection to Improve Oil Recovery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About