IBP1130_12 MITIGATION OF NAPHTHENATE RELATED PRODUCTION UPSETS IN HIGH TAN CRUDE OIL Nik Ostojic1, Pieter Vijn2, Robert

Reiners3

Copyright 2012, Brazilian Petroleum, Gas and Biofuels Institute - IBP

This Technical Paper was prepared for presentation at the RioOil & Gas Expo and Conference 2012, held between September, 1720, 2012, in Rio de Janeiro. This Technical Paper was selected for presentation by the Technical Committee of the event according to the information contained in the final paper submitted by the author(s). The organizers are not supposed to translate or correct the submitted papers. The material as it is presented, does not necessarily represent Brazilian Petroleum, Gas and Biofuels Institute opinion, or that of its Members or Representatives. Authors consent to the publication of this Technical Paper in the Rio Oil & Gas Expo and Conference 2012 Proceedings.

Abstract
This paper describes a strategy for prediction, evaluation and mitigation of calcium naphthenate related production problems. Developing fields with acidic crude in the North Sea, West Africa, Bohai Bay (China) and Brazil is becoming more common in recent years. The high acid crude contains a considerable amount of naphthenic acids, typically having a Total Acid Number (TAN) higher than 0.5 mg KOH/g. Formation of either hard type calcium naphthenate precipitates or soft type sodium carboxylate/emulsions during crude oil production can lead to severe flow assurance and separation problems. In severe cases this may lead to production shutdowns to clean-up the equipment. A number of different naphthenate mitigation approaches have been published but no one particular approach is considered to be the most efficient as it depends significantly on the particular field conditions. Initially, this problem was addressed by deploying large volumes of (usually organic) acid, but more recently high efficiency low dose naphthenate inhibitors have been introduced. For predicting naphthenate scaling potential, methods were developed to determine the concentration of 1230 Dalton naphthenic tetra acid (ARN acids) in either deposit or crude oil and this information can be used to locate and potentially isolate the problem to a certain reservoir. Also, methods were developed to design suitable low dose naphthenate inhibitors. As these inhibitors are field tested, monitoring is required to ensure the product is performing most efficiently. In cases of tight emulsions however, this is less difficult as the oil dehydration and water quality is affected instantly. Methods were developed to allow monitoring of the calcium naphthenate deposition in field trails, thus allow trending and evaluation of the chemicals performance. After detailed analyses and discussions of the developed methods, a North Sea case history is presented reviewing several years of treating history on commingled oil from several tie-back fields.

1. Introduction and History of Naphthenates on Gryphon

The Gryphon A FPSO produces naphthenic crude oil of 22-23 API gravity and 4.5 mg KOH/g TAN and it is located in the UK sector of the North Sea. The Gryphon A FPSO processes oil from the Gryphon field and several other tie back fields in the area. The oil has a predisposition to form naphthenate deposits in topside process streams. During early life of the Gryphon field (1993-95), there were reports of solids (naphthenates) forming in the process. At the time, no further investigations were carried out in order to confirm the naphthenates or assess mitigation techniques. Beyond 1995, the naphthenate issue diminished most likely due to water cut increase. Maclure and Tullich fields came on line in 2002 and reports of naphthenates started in late 2006 and increased during 2007 causing severe process upsets and several production shut downs in order to clean out the deposits from the process. The calcium naphthenates are formed and deposited in Gryphon topside process, principally in the flow streams, separation vessels, transfer pumps and heat exchangers as the fluids heat up and depressurize. Untreated, the soft textured naphthenates are able to block transfer pump strainers in minutes. At the start of 2007, an off the shelf calcium naphthenate inhibitor was applied in the field in order to assess naphthenate deposit mitigation efficiency. The reason for deploying this product was the requirement for urgent

_________________________________ 1 MSc, Senior Production Chemist - Maersk Oil 2 ING, Organic Chemistry - Champion Technologies Europe BV 3 ING, Chemical Engineer - Champion Technologies Europe BV

Rio Oil & Gas Expo and Conference 2012 treatment and the fact that it has a history of successful deployment in the North Sea in fields with similar issues and the impact on Gryphon process was minimal. To design an optimal chemical treatment to mitigate naphthenates and to lower the calcium level in crude, demulsifiers, naphthenate inhibitors and acid combinations were tested on site in laboratory conditions using fresh crude samples in 2007. The best performing chemical package was also verified by independent consultants using a pressurized naphthenate test rig prior to field application. During field data gathering, the onset of naphthenate formation in the process was assessed and this aided with the recommendation of chemical injection and side stream filter locations. A field trial was performed in 2008 to optimize the performance of the selected naphthenate inhibitor in conjunction with incumbent chemicals. A side stream filter unit was used to provide real time indication of the rate of naphthenate formation within the process. Treatment with 30ppm demulsifier, 60ppm calcium naphthenate inhibitor and 125ppm acetic acid, significantly reduced the formation of naphthenate deposition in the Gryphon process and reduced manual handling to clean the pump strainers. The operator commenced applying the recommended chemical treatment on a continuous basis and maintains to assess the impact of new production / wells on naphthenate formation. Through joint industry projects (JIP), evaluation tests have been developed to measure: the effect of inhibitors on, the naphthenic acid depletion in the oil phase, the gel strength of the deposit formed and the interfacial reaction of calcium with naphthenic acids. Not only is the inhibition evaluated but importantly the inhibitor can be tailored not to interfere with top-side processes, such as water content in crude oil and oil in water concentration, or the integrity of the equipment. These procedures are very useful in selecting intermediates for inhibitors and this might be developed further during onsite testing or laboratory screening of crude oil emulsions.

2. Investigation of Problem
Analytical tests were carried out on the deposit and the crude to characterize the samples in further detail. In particular, the naphthenic acid analysis provided information about the molecular weight distribution of naphthenic acid and determined if these molecules have single or several carboxylic groups. This method allowed calculation of the mono - tetra acid ratio of crude from different risers, which indicates the risk of calcium naphthenate deposition. This data was also used to determine the water-oil compatibility of commingling of streams in the Gryphon process. 2.1. Naphthenate Identification - Deposit Analysis Two types of deposit, a soft and a hard, were found on the perforated screen filter element of the water return pump filter of Gryphon A in 2007 and are shown in Picture 1.

Soft deposit Light, brown grey sludge

Hard deposit Hard dark brown deposit

Picture 1: Gryphon Deposit Analyses To confirm if the deposit contains naphthenic tetra acid (ARN acid), the deposits were treated with acid and the resulting naphthenic acids were dissolved in solvent. The extract was analyzed with LC-MS to identify the organic components in the deposit. According the LC-MS both samples contained C80 tetra acid (Mwt 1230) but also contained C12-C60 mono acid and C40 di-acids (Mwt 615 = double charged C80). Furthermore the deposit was analyzed with XRF to determine the inorganic content. Based on these measurements, the acid insoluble part deposit contained significant amounts of sand, some calcite/gypsum scale, some corrosion products and minor amounts of barium sulfate scale. The insoluble part of the hard deposit contains less calcium based material but significantly more clays and more barium sulfate scale. The conclusion for the analysis was as follows: The deposit contains both C80 tetra acid which is the precursor for calcium naphthenate formation. In addition to tetra acid the deposits contained mono acids of a varying molecular weight, scale and corrosion products. The soft scale was treated and inhibitor molecules were detected in the deposit which can explain the soft texture of the treated deposit. The mono acids have a higher abundance in the hard deposit and likely contribute in the deposition process. 2

Rio Oil & Gas Expo and Conference 2012 The absence of inhibitor molecules indicate that this deposit was formed before an inhibitor treatment was applied to suppress the calcium naphthenate formation. 2.2. Naphthenate Identification - Crude Analysis Previous publication identified that the naphthenic acid with a Mwt of 1230 Dalton is primarily responsible for forming the calcium naphthenate deposit. In order to determine which oil stream contains the ARN type of naphthenic acid, crude from different flow lines were analyzed. The Gryphon A FPSO processes crude from the Gryphon field but also has tie-in fields from neighboring fields Tullich and Maclure. Because the concentration of C80 tetra acid is very low, (in the range of 5-50ppm despite a high TAN) the C80 tetra acid was extracted from the crude and concentrated using alkaline extraction and analyzed by direct injection in the MS. The obtained mass spec were analyzed for naphthenic acid content and compared to the theoretical Mwt and the number of acid groups per molecules. This procedure generates 50 to 250 peaks and for easy comparison a graph of m/z versus the number of acid groups per molecule is used to compare the naphthenic acid content for different crude types. The diameter of the sphere represents the abundance of the peak.

Gryphon 9/18 A28Z crude; 84 identified peaks

Maclure crude; 107 acid peak fits

Figure 1: Gryphon acid groups numbers The graph gives an impression of the naphthenic acid range present in the crude oil. Most important for our purpose is absence of the 1230 Mwt tetra acid. The original Gryphon crude and Tullich crude both contained 1230 tetra acid. Whereas the other analyzed crude samples did not show the 1230 Mwt naphthenic acid. Mono acids are as expected the main constituent of the naphthenic acid extract, but the crude extract also contains a range of di, tri and tetra acid in the crude. This explains why the TAN is not a reliable measure to predict deposition or emulsion problems as it determines the number of acidic equivalencies rather than provide information about the structure of the naphthenic acids. The role of the other multivalent naphthenic acid is not understood so far and requires further investigation. Table 1: ARN identification in several crude types

Crude Gryphon P25 Gryphon 9/18 A28Z Maclure Tullich North Gryphon

ARN 1230.06 No Yes Yes, slight Yes No

Tetra/Mono ratio 0.04-0.06 0.06-0.08 0.04-0.06 0.03-0.06 0.03

Previous publications point out that the mono acids may combine with the tetra acid and inhibit the formation of calcium naphthenate deposits; therefore, the tetra to mono acid ratio was calculated. The tetra/mono acid ratio from another North Sea field was 0.6, which is 10 fold higher, and this field has a slightly higher naphthenate deposition rate. The naphthenic acid analyzed showed that the naphthenate potential is more with the initial Gryphon field and less with Tullich and Maclure fields.

Rio Oil & Gas Expo and Conference 2012 2.3. Onshore lab tests - Calcium Naphthenate Inhibitor formulation Traditional calcium naphthenate inhibitor (CNI) selection is performed predominately by crude dehydration or bottle testing. The general approach in developing low dosage inhibitor is to focus on the prevention of partitioning of naphthenic acid (as bulk) to the water phase; this in some papers is referred as interfacial crowding. In practice, the selection is based on selecting an inhibitor that does not affect the dehydration properties and shows naphthenate inhibiting properties. These properties are evaluated carrying out extensive bottle tests and is largely based on visual observation by skilled analysts. In order to refine the selection procedure, additional techniques were used to evaluate properties of the naphthenate inhibitor. A solvent/brine model system was used with synthetic tetra acid dissolved in the solvent phase and calcium salt dissolved in the brine phase. The model allowed determining the reduction of the tetra acid from the solvent (bulk depletion), the delay in formation rate of a calcium naphthenate on the solvent-brine interface and the effect of inhibitors on the calcium tetra acid reaction on the oil/water interface. Interfacial rheology was applied to evaluate the formation of calcium naphthenate on the interface of a solventbrine system. The gel strength on the interface relates to inhibition of the calcium naphthenic tetra acid (ARN) reaction. The graph below shows the test results of a measurement without inhibitor and several inhibitor intermediates.

Figure 2: ARN identification in several crudes As can be observed in Figure 2, without inhibitor a strong gel phase is formed right after starting the measurement, whereas the addition of inhibitors B, C, and D delay the formation of calcium naphthenate gel. Furthermore the inhibitor also affects the gel strength. In this case, the gel strength decreases for inhibitor A, B, C and inhibitor D does not build gel strength at all within the 3 hour test. A long delay in gel strength development and a low gel strength is desired for a good performing inhibitor. The interfacial tension (IFT) test shows the effect of the addition of calcium to a solvent-brine system (Figure 3). The ARN acid was dissolved in the solvent phase. In the test without inhibitor the IFT increased after adding calcium, which is an indication that calcium and ARN acid react on the solvent-brine interface. In the second graph Inhibitor D is added. Upon adding the inhibitor the surface tension is lower than the blank, which shows the inhibitor has a preference to migrate to the interface and consequently reduces the interfacial tension. After an initial low interfacial tension, the curve is moving slowly upward indicating that the surfactant slowly migrates into the bulk phase. Upon adding calcium after 300 seconds, the interfacial tension does not change very much and therefore prevents the reaction of the model ARN and calcium.

Rio Oil & Gas Expo and Conference 2012

Blank

With inhibitor D

Figure 3: The effect of inhibitor on the calcium ARN reaction on a solvent/brine interface The depletion test is measuring the decrease of ARN acid in the oil phase. As a result it is transferring to the interfacial region or partitioning into the water phase. By comparison with a solvent-brine system with and without naphthenate inhibitor the ability of a naphthenate inhibitor to prevent partitioning is determined. The graph below shows the result of such a comparison.

Figure 4: Concentration (%) of naphthenic tetra reacted from the solvent phase for several inhibitors. The depletion of tetra acid (TA) was measured after 1 and 5 minutes. Some inhibitor (A and E) showed a much lower depletion of TA, although no inhibitor prevents partitioning completely. These methods give insight into how the inhibitor intermediates behave in a model system, and are useful for the selection and combination of inhibitor intermediates offshore. For example Inhibitor D which delays gel strength development can be combined with Inhibitor A which reduces depletion. This information can be applied offshore during inhibitor Development. On site inhibitor testing is preferable as it incorporates all factors of the actual application: process conditions, oil characteristics, actual naphthenic acid concentration, pH development and water chemistry. 2.4. Offshore lab tests - Naphthenate screening During 2007, numerous process upsets and production shut downs were occurring as a result of naphthenate solids build up in the process streams, mainly in following areas: 2nd stage separator Produced water return line and pump strainers, downstream 2nd stage separator and coalescer Crude oil transfer pump strainers upstream coalescer Figure 5 shows the Gryphon FPSO topside process flow schematic.

Rio Oil & Gas Expo and Conference 2012

Figure 5: The Gryphon FPSO topside process schematic. A field survey was followed by offshore inhibitor selection testing where the first requirement was to sample a representative crude emulsion without chemical contamination and with sufficient naphthenic acid in the crude oil to carry out a justified selection. For this purpose relatively dry crude was sampled from the test separator, chemicals (demulsifier, acid and naphthenate inhibitor) were injected to the crude and then produced water was added. After shaking, an emulsion was formed by the reaction of the naphthenic acid in crude oil and calcium in the produced water. This approach was practiced in combination with traditional demulsifier tests in order to observe calcium naphthenate patches on the interface as shown in Picture 2 and the effect of low dose naphthenate inhibitor performance.

Blank: Crude + 30% produced water = significant amount of CAN

Crude + 30% PW + Inhibitor and Acetic Acid = some CAN

Crude + 30% PW + Inhibitor = trace CAN

Crude + 30% PW + Acetic acid = some CAN

Picture 2: Calcium Naphthenate patches on the oil/water interface, with and without treatment chemicals The test without acid and naphthenate inhibitor treatment the oil/water interface is crowded with patches of calcium naphthenates; the addition of acid and naphthenate inhibitor reduced the size and amount of patches. Inhibitor D showed to be most effective inhibitor of calcium naphthenates minimal emulsion patches on the interface and good water quality. 2.5. Onshore lab tests - Naphthenate inhibitor verification In order to verify the results from the in-field screening, the selected naphthenate inhibitor was submitted to a specialized laboratory for conformation testing using a dedicated naphthenate test rig. This rig mixes the actual crude oil and calcium containing synthetic brine, made up according to the Gryphon produced water under low pressure separator conditions. After mixing the emulsion is pumped to a glass cell to review the separation. Furthermore the fluids are pumped through an online filter to review deposition potential by observing the pressure differential (dP) over the filter. This procedure simulates the field very closely and allows evaluation of naphthenate inhibition chemicals potential. In this particular case the produced water contains about 2000 ppm calcium ions, 22000 ppm sodium and 500ppm bicarbonate. 6

Rio Oil & Gas Expo and Conference 2012 All crude samples were pre-filtered in order to run the deposition test. In the absence of calcium naphthenate treatment chemicals, the Gryphon crude with water added showed significant plugging, whereas Tullich showed minor plugging and Maclure did not show any considerable signs of plugging. The same trend is also observed in the separation test, where deposits are observed and the interface is rather webby. In the case of Tullich and Maclure crude emulsions, the plugging rate is minor and the oil-brine interface is sharp.

Picture 3: Images recorded during the test with Gryphon crude 50% BS&W at pH 7.3 The samples that were treated with naphthenate inhibitor with and without acetic acid to bring the pH to 5.9, show minor to no plugging rate with constant or almost constant dP. Please see Figure 6 below

Figure 6: Pressure differential over the filter. Gryphon crude 50% BS&W at pH 7.3 (untreated), with 80ppm naphthenate inhibitor at pH 7.3 and with naphthenate inhibitor and acetic acid at pH5.9 In addition, a sharp interface and good quality water was observed, as seen in the picture below, which is a positive indication that the chemicals were effective in controlling the deposition rate and treating naphthenate stabilized emulsions.

Picture 4: Images recorded during the test with Gryphon crude 50% BS&W with 80 ppm naphthenate inhibitor and 15 ppm demulsifier at adjusted pH 7

Rio Oil & Gas Expo and Conference 2012

Overall the naphthenate rig test confirmed the chemical treatment is effective to inhibit Gryphon calcium naphthenate formation at low pressure and low pH (5.9) conditions. The findings in this report also indicate that the quality of the crude sample is crucial to achieve valid results. I.e., if the naphthenic acid (in particular the 1230 Mwt ARN acid) is already depleted from the bulk oil phase, it would not be possible to perform a meaningful screening of naphthenate inhibitors.

3. Offshore field trails

The formation of naphthenate deposits on Gryphon A is suspected to begin with the pressure drop between the first and second stage separators. This pressure drop (from about 10 bar to 0.5 bar) results in the evolution of carbon dioxide from the water, causing the pH to increase making conditions more suitable for calcium naphthenate formation. In particular the crude oil transfer (COT) pump and the water return pump (WRP) strainers accumulated significant amounts of deposits. The key objective of the field trial was to evaluate the performance of newly developed calcium naphthenate inhibitor D in Gryphon process system and achieve reduction of naphthenate deposits. During the trial the following parameters were monitored: - Mass of removed deposits from pump strainers and frequency of removal - Presence of naphthenates building up in the process by side stream filtration - Fluid analysis Injection of inhibitor D commenced with the initial treatment rate being 26ppm into the production header and 54ppm upstream of the heat exchangers at the interstage, as this was the treatment of the incumbent off the shelf inhibitor at the time of the trial. The inhibitor D application was then altered over the following days in an attempt to find the optimum dosage and injection point location for inhibitor D. Figure 7 illustrates the concentration of inhibitor D injected into each injection point throughout the trial and based on daily production values.

Figure 7: Inhibitor D injection throughout trial period Prior to the trial, the mass removed in the COT Strainer B was 15.5kg/24 hours (three strainers online). During application of inhibitor D, the total deposition was 9.9kg over 5 days. The deposit removed during this trial likely included aged deposits that have been mobilized by the new naphthenate inhibitor, as described in Section 2.1 (Deposit Analyses). In preparation for the trial a side stream filter unit was set up at the interstage, upstream 2nd stage separator. Prior to the trial commencing with inhibitor D, filter tests were performed and a 50% filter blockage was observed after 5 minutes with this increasing to 64% blockage after 10 minutes. During the trial with inhibitor D, the blockage observed after 5 minutes was either 0% or very low whilst the blockage observed at 10 minutes ranged from 9-17%. This suggests that there was a reduced mass of naphthenate deposits in the fluid stream, downstream of the pressure drop location at the interstage. The most critical fluid samples that were monitored and analyzed, were the produced water from the downstream enhancement vessel and the oil outlet of the coalescer. The oil in water (OIW) limits are strictly governed by environmental legislation to a <30mg/l. The outlet coalescer oil is also important as this is the last separation vessel 8

Rio Oil & Gas Expo and Conference 2012 the oil passes through before it is stored in the cargo tanks prior to offload. The slightly higher OIW results during the trial were due to slops processing and the inhibitor D injection upstream 1st stage separator. Once injection was optimized, OIW concentrations were consistently within the legislative limits.

Figure 8: Produced Water Re-Injection OIW The coalescer is the final separation vessel in the system before the oil is transferred to the crude oil storage tanks prior to offload. A water content of 1-2% is the target for the oil leaving the coalescer. Figure 8 shows the BS&W of crude oil from outlet coalescer for the whole trial period. It takes into consideration the upsets in 1st stage separator and inhibitor D dosage changes as part of the scope of work during which the BS&W was over 2%. When inhibitor D was injected only at heat exchangers, the BS&W was measured to be <2%. Further water separation takes place in the cargo tanks prior to offloading, typically resulting in off take crude containing <0.1% water.

Trial commenced

Figure 9: Coalescer Oil BS&W (trial period) Preheater MH-0401 operation The MH-0401 preheater is located downstream 1st stage and upstream the 2nd stage separator heater MH-0402. Throughout the trial period the differential pressure across the unit has been generally in range between 0 bar to a maximum of 2 bar which indicated stable throughput. On one occasion a dP of 3.2 bar was recorded, during a process upset in 1st stage separator during the trial, however, the side stream filters and pump strainers have indicated that no CAN deposits were forming and that this was due to an emulsion. pH measurements Subsequent field trials in 2008 have indicated that controlling the pH in the produced water at 2nd stage separator is critical for naphthenate control and should remain in range 5.8 to 6.2.

Rio Oil & Gas Expo and Conference 2012

4. Conclusions & treatment performance monitoring

The naphthenic acid analysis on the deposit and crude confirmed that the material is calcium naphthenate, and provides a basic understanding of the underlying deposition mechanism. Laboratory studies on gel strength development and interfacial reactions on model molecules provide insight on the behavior and principal properties of the naphthenate inhibitors. Understanding the inhibition mechanism proved essential in offshore laboratory testing to identify and formulate the best performing naphthenate inhibitor. This performance was confirmed by simulated calcium naphthenate deposition testing on a naphthenate rig. Using this design and analyses route proved very effective as the field test demonstrated the desired inhibition and prevention of calcium naphthenate deposit and achieved the following benefits: Lower risk of naphthenate related process upsets that could lead to unplanned shutdowns and deferred oil production. Significant reduction of operator manual handling due to less frequent requirement for strainer cleaning. Reduced acetic acid and naphthenate inhibitor consumption. Maintenance cost benefit due to reduced process downtime. The recommended chemical treatment and operational monitoring to provide efficient dehydration and calcium naphthenate mitigation on Gryphon has been in application for 3 years with no associated production losses due to naphthenates. The treatment is summarized below: Apply naphthenate inhibitor and acetic acid at 1st stage separator oil outlet, upstream naphthenate onset point. Maintain an injection rate of 60ppm of naphthenate inhibitor. Inject 125 ppm acetic acid in order to maintain the pH in range 5.8 to 6.2, mainly in the produced water at outlet low pressure vessel (2nd stage), This acid injection rate has also proved efficient to reduce the calcium in crude which is a crude export specification. Keeping a log of amount of removed naphthenate solids from pump strainers. As production varies (i.e. during production curtailment or when a new well comes on line), adjust injection rates of chemicals accordingly to maintain the required dosages and enhance the monitoring regime by deploying the side stream filters at interstage to get indication of naphthenate build up.

5. Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank the management of Maersk Oil North Sea and Champion Technologies Europe for the permission to publish this data. In addition the Authors would like to thank the support of many people that where involved in the knowledge development, and especially like to mention of Helen Williams of Scale Solutions Ltd, Johan Sjoblom, Sebastiaan Simon, Erland Nordgard and Iva Kralova of the Ugelstad laboratory in Trondheim, Paul Baker, Stuart Robertson, Gryphon Alpha onshore and offshore teams of Maersk Oil North Sea and Sen Ubbels of Champion Technologies Europe BV.

6. References
BROCART, B., BOURREL, M., HURTEVENT, C., VOLLE, J.L., ESCOFFIER, B. ARN-Type Naphthenic Acids in Crudes: Analytical Detection and Physical Properties, Journal of Dispersion Science and Technology, 28:331337, 2007. BRANDAL, ., HANNESETH, A.M.D., HEMMINGSEN, V., SJOBLOM, J., KIM, S., RODGERS, R.D., MARSHALL, A.G. Isolation and Characterization of Naphthenic Acids from a Metal Naphthenate Deposit: Molecular Properties at Oil-Water and Air-Water Interfaces, Journal of Dispersion Science and Technology, 27:1 11, 2006. UBBELS S.J., VENTER P.J., NACEe V.M. Low Dose naphthenate inhibitors, Patent WO 2006/025912 A2, 2004 BRETHERTON, N., SMITH, R., KEILTY, G., UBBELS, S.J. Naphthenate control, Is Acetic Acid Injection the Answer? SPE 95115, 2005. VINDSTAD, J.E., BYE, A.S., GRANDE, K.V., HUSTAD, B.M., HUSTEVEDT, E., NERGARD, B. Fighting Naphthenate Deposition at the Heidrun Field, SPE 80375, 2003 MELVIN, K., CUMMINE, C., YOULES, J., WILLIAMS, H.L., GRAHAM, G.M., DYER, S.J. Optimising Calcium Naphthenate Control in the Blake Field, SPE 114123, 2008. WILLIAMS, H., Scaled Solutions, Maersk Gryphon Field Naphthenate Screening Study No 0465, Final report (v1.1) 8th February 2008. 10