Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 INTRODUCTION
2 PHASE I - COMPARISON OF EPA METHODS 413.1 AND 1664
3 PHASE II - SURVEY OF CANDIDATE METHODS
4 PHASE III - LABORATORY PERFORMANCE TESTING
      - Laboratory Performance Testing
      - Instrument Calibration
      - Working Range
      - Precision
      - Effect of Water Soluble Organics
      - Effect of Iron on Direct Reading UV Analyses
5 CONCLUSIONS
APPENDIX A - A COMPARISON OF EPA METHOD 413.1 AND EPA METHOD
             1664 FOR THE DETERMINATION OF OIL AND GREASE IN
             PRODUCED WATER FROM OFFSHORE PRODUCTION
             OPERATIONS
APPENDIX B - A REVIEW OF TECHNOLOGIES TO MEASURE THE OIL AND
             GREASE CONTENT OF PRODUCED WATER FROM OFFSHORE
             OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION OPERATIONS
Figure 4-1 - Measured vs. Defined Concentration: UV
             Instrument B, Calibrated with Crude #2 Simulated
             Produced Water, Measuring Oil and Grease in
             Crude #1 and Crude #2 Simulated Produced Water
Figure 4-2 - UV Instrument A Calibrated with Crude #4
             Simulated Extracts: Measured Oil and Grease
             Concentrations in Crude #3 and #4 Simulated
             Extracts
Figure 4-3 - Crude #1 Concentration vs. RFUs
Figure 4-4 - Average Measured Oil and Grease Concentration
             from Simulated Extracts, Determined by IR-ABS,
             vs. Defined Concentration
Figure 4-5 - Comparison of IR-HATR and IR-ABS Oil and Grease
             Concentrations Measured in Simulated Produced
             Water Samples Containing Crude #2
Figure 4-6 - Concentration Ration vs. Ferric Ion Concentration
Table 2-1 - Produced Water Oil and Grease Data from Five
            Offshore Platforms (mg/L)
Table 2-2 - Summary Statistics for the Phase I Produced Water
            Data
Table 3-1 - Analytical Instruments for Oil and Grease
            Measurement
Table 4-1 - UV Analysis of Simulated Produced Water Samples
            Using Instruments Calibration with Crude #2
            Simulated Produced Water
Table 4-2 - Oil and Grease in Produced Water Samples from
            Platforms SPW and CPW
Table 4-3 - Averages and Standard Deviations for Replicate
            Samples
Table 4-4 - Oil and Grease Concentrations Determined by UV
            Instrument A Calibrated with Crude #4 Simulated
            Extracts
Table 4-5 - Correlation of Fluorescence Units and Crude #1
            Concentrations with Dye Concentrations Used to
            Calibrate Instruments A
Table 4-6 - Analyses of a Natural Produced Water Using
            Instrument A With a Dye Calibration and Various
            Analytical Factors
Table 4-7 - Goodness of Fit for Fluorescence Analyses of a
            Natural Water
Table 4-8 - Comparison of Fluorescence Analyses on a Natural
            Water Sample Analyzed Directly and by Extraction
Table 4-9 - Comparison of EPA Method 1664 Results to UV
            Fluorescence Results on Defined Concentrations of
            Crude Oil in Hexane
Table 4-10 - Oil and Grease Concentrations Determined by
             IR-ABS, Calibrated with Crude #1 in Hexane
Table 4-11 - Comparison of UV Instrument A vs. IR-HATR in the
             Analyses of Oil and Grease in Actual Produced
             Water Samples
Table 4-12 - Comparison of IR-HATR and IR-ABS Methods in
             Analyzing Oil and Grease in Simulated Produced
             Water Samples Containing Crude #2
Table 4-13 - Precision Study of UV Instrument A
Table 4-14 - Precision Study of IR-ABS and IR-HATR
Table 4-15 - Sample Matrix for WSO Studies
Table 4-16 - Effect of Ferric Ion on Direct Reading UV
             Determination by Instrument A, Recorded as Raw
             Fluorescent Units
Table 4-17 - Effect of Ferric Ion on Direct Reading UV
             Determination by Instrument A, Recorded as Oil
             and Grease Concentration
Table 4-18 - Effect of Ferric Ion on UV Instrument A
             Determinations of Oil and Grease in Simulated
             Produced Water Samples
Table 4-19 - Ratio of Measured to Defined Oil and Grease
             Concentration at Various Ferric Ion
             Concentrations

Abstract

Addresses three practical alternative methods for routine offshore monitoring of oil and grease in produced waters: 1) an infrared absorption method in which reflected infrared radiation is measured and correlated to the oil and grease content; 2) an infrared absorption method in which transmitted infrared radiation is measured and correlated to the oil and grease content; and 3) an ultraviolet fluorescence (UV) method in which the fluorescent radiation from the sample or sample extracts is measured at a specific wavelength and correlated to the oil and grease content.

General Product Information

Published
Document Type	Standard
Status	Current
Publisher	American Petroleum Institute
Pages
ISBN