DEP SPECIFICATION

SEAWATER INJECTION FACILITIES

Copyright Shell Group of Companies. No reproduction or networking permitted without license from Shell. Not for resale

DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.

February 2016

DESIGN AND ENGINEERING PRACTICE

© 2016 Shell Group of companies

All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, published or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior
written permission of the copyright owner or Shell Global Solutions International BV.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 2

PREFACE

DEP (Design and Engineering Practice) publications reflect the views, at the time of publication, of Shell Global Solutions
International B.V. (Shell GSI) and, in some cases, of other Shell Companies.
These views are based on the experience acquired during involvement with the design, construction, operation and
maintenance of processing units and facilities. Where deemed appropriate DEPs are based on, or reference international,
regional, national and industry standards.
The objective is to set the standard for good design and engineering practice to be applied by Shell companies in oil and
gas production, oil refining, gas handling, gasification, chemical processing, or any other such facility, and thereby to help
achieve maximum technical and economic benefit from standardization.
The information set forth in these publications is provided to Shell companies for their consideration and decision to
implement. This is of particular importance where DEPs may not cover every requirement or diversity of condition at each
locality. The system of DEPs is expected to be sufficiently flexible to allow individual Operating Units to adapt the
information set forth in DEPs to their own environment and requirements.
When Contractors or Manufacturers/Suppliers use DEPs, they shall be solely responsible for such use, including the
quality of their work and the attainment of the required design and engineering standards. In particular, for those
requirements not specifically covered, the Principal will typically expect them to follow those design and engineering
practices that will achieve at least the same level of integrity as reflected in the DEPs. If in doubt, the Contractor or
Manufacturer/Supplier shall, without detracting from his own respons bility, consult the Principal.
The right to obtain and to use DEPs is restricted, and is typically granted by Shell GSI (and in some cases by other Shell
Companies) under a Service Agreement or a License Agreement. This right is granted primarily to Shell companies and
other companies receiving technical advice and services from Shell GSI or another Shell Company. Consequently, three
categories of users of DEPs can be distinguished:
1) Operating Units having a Service Agreement with Shell GSI or another Shell Company. The use of DEPs by these
Operating Units is subject in all respects to the terms and conditions of the relevant Service Agreement.
2) Other parties who are authorised to use DEPs subject to appropriate contractual arrangements (whether as part of
a Service Agreement or otherwise).
3) Contractors/subcontractors and Manufacturers/Suppliers under a contract with users referred to under 1) or 2)
which requires that tenders for projects, materials supplied or - generally - work performed on behalf of the said
users comply with the relevant standards.
Subject to any particular terms and conditions as may be set forth in specific agreements with users, Shell GSI disclaims
any liability of whatsoever nature for any damage (including injury or death) suffered by any company or person
whomsoever as a result of or in connection with the use, application or implementation of any DEP, combination of DEPs
or any part thereof, even if it is wholly or partly caused by negligence on the part of Shell GSI or other Shell Company. The
benefit of this disclaimer shall inure in all respects to Shell GSI and/or any Shell Company, or companies affiliated to these
companies, that may issue DEPs or advise or require the use of DEPs.
Without prejudice to any specific terms in respect of confidentiality under relevant contractual arrangements, DEPs shall
not, without the prior written consent of Shell GSI, be disclosed by users to any company or person whomsoever and the
DEPs shall be used exclusively for the purpose for which they have been provided to the user. They shall be returned after
use, including any copies which shall only be made by users with the express prior written consent of Shell GSI. The
copyright of DEPs vests in Shell Group of companies. Users shall arrange for DEPs to be held in safe custody and Shell
GSI may at any time require information satisfactory to them in order to ascertain how users implement this requirement.
All administrative queries should be directed to the DEP Administrator in Shell GSI.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 4
1.1 SCOPE........................................................................................................................ 4
1.2 DISTRIBUTION, INTENDED USE AND REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS ......... 4
1.3 DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................. 4
1.4 CROSS-REFERENCES ............................................................................................. 5
1.5 SUMMARY OF MAIN CHANGES ............................................................................... 5
1.6 COMMENTS ON THIS DEP ....................................................................................... 6
1.7 DUAL UNITS ............................................................................................................... 6
1.8 NON NORMATIVE TEXT (COMMENTARY) .............................................................. 6
2. RESERVOIR REQUIREMENTS TO WATERFLOODING ......................................... 7
2.1 BACKGROUND .......................................................................................................... 7
2.2 INJECTIVITY IMPAIRMENT AND FORMATION DAMAGE....................................... 7
2.3 SCALING .................................................................................................................... 7
2.4 RESERVOIR SOURING ............................................................................................. 8
3. BASIS FOR WATERFLOOD DESIGN ....................................................................... 8
3.1 GENERAL ................................................................................................................... 8
3.2 WATER INJECTION VOLUME ................................................................................... 8
3.3 NUMBER AND GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION OF INJECTION WELLS ................... 9
3.4 WELL INJECTION FLOWRATE AND PRESSURE ................................................... 9
3.5 INJECTION WATER QUALITY................................................................................... 9
3.6 CHARACTERISTICS OF SEAWATER..................................................................... 10
3.7 FACILITY LIFECYCLE PLANNING .......................................................................... 11
4. SURFACE FACILITIES FOR SEAWATER TREATMENT ...................................... 11
4.1 GENERAL ................................................................................................................. 11
4.2 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR CONVENTIONAL SEAWATER
TREATMENT ............................................................................................................ 12
4.3 LOW SALINITY FLOODING ..................................................................................... 15
4.4 SEAWATER FLOODING WITH SULPHATE REMOVAL ......................................... 19
4.5 RAW SEAWATER INJECTION ................................................................................ 20
4.6 GENERIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................. 21
5. REFERENCES ......................................................................................................... 27

APPENDICES
APPENDIX A OPTIONS TABLE FOR CONVENTIONAL SEAWATER TREATMENT
AND INJECTION LINE-UPS ........................................................................... 28
APPENDIX B OPTIONS TABLE FOR PROCESS LINE-UPS THAT INCLUDE LSF
AND/OR SRU .................................................................................................. 29

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 4

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 SCOPE
This DEP specifies requirements and gives recommendations for the design of the surface
facilities for waterflood projects in upstream production facilities where seawater is used as
the water source, for both onshore and offshore application. The scope of equipment
covered includes water filtration, water deoxygenation by mechanical and chemical
removal, and water conditioning equipment.
For waterflood projects with produced water injection, refer to DEP 39.01.40.31-Gen.
This DEP addresses the selection of technology alternatives within the seawater injection
system configuration. It also prescribes the minimum technical requirements for the
technology selected within the configuration. Detailed mechanical and process equipment
design requirements to meet the functional requirements herein are beyond the scope of
this DEP.
This DEP is intended to augment DEP 39.01.10.11-Gen. and DEP 39.01.10.12-Gen., which
are the basis of waterflood system design for all items that are not addressed specifically in
this DEP.
This DEP supersedes report SR.12.11073; Treatment facilities for sea water injection and
low salinity flooding.
This is a revision of the DEP of the same number dated February 2014; see (1.5) regarding
the changes.

1.2 DISTRIBUTION, INTENDED USE AND REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS

Unless otherwise authorised by Shell GSI, the distribution of this DEP is confined to Shell
companies and, where necessary, to Contractors and Manufacturers/Suppliers nominated
by them. Any authorised access to DEPs does not for that reason constitute an
authorization to any documents, data or information to which the DEPs may refer.
This DEP is intended for use in facilities related to exploration and production facilities. This
DEP may also be applied in other similar facilities.
When DEPs are applied, a Management of Change (MOC) process shall be implemented;
this is of particular importance when existing facilities are to be modified.
If national and/or local regulations exist in which some of the requirements could be more
stringent than in this DEP, the Contractor shall determine by careful scrutiny which of the
requirements are the more stringent and which combination of requirements will be
acceptable with regards to the safety, environmental, economic and legal aspects. In all
cases the Contractor shall inform the Principal of any deviation from the requirements of
this DEP which is considered to be necessary in order to comply with national and/or local
regulations. The Principal may then negotiate with the Authorities concerned, the objective
being to obtain agreement to follow this DEP as closely as possible.

1.3 DEFINITIONS
1.3.1 General definitions
The Contractor is the party that carries out all or part of the design, engineering,
procurement, construction, commissioning or management of a project or operation of a
facility. The Principal may undertake all or part of the duties of the Contractor.
The Manufacturer/Supplier is the party that manufactures or supplies equipment and
services to perform the duties specified by the Contractor.
The Principal is the party that initiates the project and ultimately pays for it. The Principal
may also include an agent or consultant authorised to act for, and on behalf of, the
Principal.
The word shall indicates a requirement.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 5

The word should indicates a recommendation.

1.3.2 Specific definitions

Term Definition
Waterflood Waterflood is a method of recovery in which water is injected into the
reservoir to displace additional oil and/or to help maintain reservoir pressure.
Low salinity Injection water with a low salinity which results in increased mobility of oil.
Typical salinity of low salinity water is 1500 mg/l total dissolved solids (TDS).
Depending on the field conditions the required TDS could be as high as
4500 mg/l.

1.3.3 Abbreviations

Term Definition
EOR Enhanced Oil Recovery
HRG Hydroxyl Radical Generator
IOR Improved Oil Recovery
LSF Low Salinity Flooding
MMF Multimedia Filter
NPSH Net Positive Suction Head
OPEX Operating Expense
ppbw Parts per billion by weight
ppmv Parts per million by volume
RAM Reliability, Availability, Maintenance
RO Reverse Osmosis
SRB Sulphate Reducing Bacteria
SRU Sulphate Removal Unit
TDS Total Dissolved Solids
THPS Tetrakis Hydroxymethyl Phosphonium Sulphate
TSS Total Suspended Solids
UF Ultrafiltration
UV Ultra-violet

1.4 CROSS-REFERENCES
Where cross-references to other parts of this DEP are made, the referenced section or
clause number is shown in brackets ( ). Other documents referenced by this DEP are listed
in (5).

1.5 SUMMARY OF MAIN CHANGES

This DEP is a full revision of the DEP of the same number dated February 2014. The
requirements have been extensively re-worded for clarification and it is not practical to list
all of the changes. The following are some of the main, non-editorial changes.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 6

Section/Clause Change
1 Clarifications only.
2 Pressure surge included as potential cause of injectivity impairment
and clarifications. Clarify roles
3 Split previous section 3.5 in two sections, 3.5 Injection Water Quality
and 3.6 Characterisation of Seawater. In addition, clarifications to the
content.
4 Full revision of content.
Appendices Added Appendix A and Appendix B

1.6 COMMENTS ON THIS DEP

Comments on this DEP may be submitted to the Administrator using one of the following
options:

Shell DEPs Online Enter the Shell DEPs Online system at

https://www.shelldeps.com
(Users with access to
Shell DEPs Online) Select a DEP and then go to the details screen for
that DEP.
Click on the “Give feedback” link, fill in the online
form and submit.

DEP Feedback System Enter comments directly in the DEP Feedback

(Users with access to System which is accessible from the Technical
Shell Wide Web) Standards Portal http://sww.shell.com/standards.
Select “Submit DEP Feedback”, fill in the online form
and submit.

DEP Standard Form Use DEP Standard Form 00.00.05.80-Gen. to record

(Other users) feedback and email the form to the Administrator at
[email protected].

Feedback that has been registered in the DEP Feedback System by using one of the above
options will be reviewed by the DEP Custodian for potential improvements to the DEP.

1.7 DUAL UNITS

This DEP contains both the International System (SI) units, as well as the corresponding
US Customary (USC) units, which are given following the SI units in brackets. When
agreed by the Principal, the indicated USC values/units may be used.

1.8 NON NORMATIVE TEXT (COMMENTARY)

Text shown in italic style in this DEP indicates text that is non-normative and is provided as
explanation or background information only.
Non-normative text is normally indented slightly to the right of the relevant DEP clause.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 7

2. RESERVOIR REQUIREMENTS TO WATERFLOODING

2.1 BACKGROUND
1. When defining the design basis for water flooding, the following factors should be
addressed and mitigated using specific studies:
a. Injectivity impairment and formation damage
b. Scaling (fluid-fluid compatibility)
c. Reservoir souring.
These general assessments have a direct impact on water quality and the system
design, specifically equipment selection and production chemicals.

2.2 INJECTIVITY IMPAIRMENT AND FORMATION DAMAGE

The sustainable reservoir injectivity depends on the specific characteristics of the
injected water as well as the reservoir properties.
1. As a minimum, definition shall be provided on:
a. Suspended solids levels and size distribution in the injected water
b. Type of solids (sand, silt, clay, algae)
c. Temperature of the injected water at the injection well
d. Rock fluid compatibility
2. The Reservoir Engineer and the Production Technologist shall determine sustainable
well injectivity flow rates into a reservoir as a function of the characteristics of the
injected water.
Pressure surges in the water injection system, resulting from (sudden) flow
variations also affects other injection wells. Flow variation could be due to shut-in
of the injection well, closure of other valves along the water injection system, or
start-up/trip of the injection pumps.
The pressure surge travels along the injection system and can even cause solids
from the reservoir (unconsolidated sands) to migrate towards the near well bore
area, resulting in injectivity impairment, or into the well itself.
3. The Production Technologist, Flow Assurance Engineer and Concept Engineer shall
assess the consequences of pressure surges along the water injection system, i.e.
integrated system of injection pump, flow lines and wells), including migration of fines
into the near well bore area.
4. This assessment shall include the influence of injection pump trips/stops and operating
procedures that can result in low pressures and unintended cross flow between
injection wells.
5. System design and operating procedures shall prevent pressure surges that result in
migration of fines into the near well bore area.

2.3 SCALING
Seawater flooding related scaling issues are:
a. Self-scaling potential of the injected water
b. Scaling due to incompatibility of the injected water with the formation water
c. Self-scaling potential of the produced fluids following water breakthrough
1. The Production Chemist/Flow Assurance Engineer shall conduct a scaling assessment
to identify scaling potential and severity of scaling.
2. Options to mitigate and/or control scaling shall be defined.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 8

3. The scaling control strategy shall be decided upon by the project team, based on a
lifecycle cost evaluation for the applicable project conditions.

2.4 RESERVOIR SOURING

1. The Souring Potential Assessment, refer to DEP 25.80.10.18-Gen., shall be executed
to identity if any reservoir souring is expected.
2. When the Souring Potential Assessment concludes that there is a risk of reservoir
souring, the Production Chemist (Souring Expert) shall predict the H2S concentration
in the reservoir and the produced reservoir fluids as a function of time.
3. Options to mitigate and/or control reservoir souring shall be defined.
4. In case nitrate injection into the injected water is selected for souring control, the
corrosion assessment and materials selection shall evaluate the increased corrosion
risk of the injection system.
5. The souring control strategy shall be decided upon by the project team, based on a
lifecycle cost evaluation for the applicable project conditions.

3. BASIS FOR WATERFLOOD DESIGN

3.1 GENERAL
1. The following elements of the water flood shall be defined at the onset of the design:
a. Water injection volume (annual basis)
b. Number and location of injection wells
c. Injection flow rate per well
d. Injection pressure
e. Injection water quality requirements
f. Design life/expandability.

3.2 WATER INJECTION VOLUME

1. Requirements for water injection volumes on an annual basis shall be defined by the
Reservoir Engineer in terms of production/injection forecasts.
2. A Reliability, Availability and Maintenance (RAM) study shall be documented to assess
the availability for a given injection system, taking into account the specific availability
issues associated with all elements in the seawater treatment and injection system
including the sparing of critical elements, as well as alternative water source treatment
and injection system.
3. The RAM study shall:
a. Utilize country, field and organisational specific data on equipment and system
availability, where available;
b. Consider subsurface, wells, infrastructure and process and utility system
constraints.
4. A design margin (or surge factor) should be included on the fluid flowrate, to provide
an allowance for surging and uncertainties in the basic data. The surge factor used
should be confirmed by the Principal.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 9

3.3 NUMBER AND GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION OF INJECTION WELLS

The number and geographical location of injection wells, in combination with the
injection pressure, is relevant for the design of the injection pumps and the distribution
piping network.
1. The number and geographical location of the injection wells shall be defined.
2. The impact of reservoir geometry, sweep, well injection flow rates and water quality
should be considered.

3.4 WELL INJECTION FLOWRATE AND PRESSURE

The injection pressure is defined by the injection regime, and in case of fractured
injection, by the maximum allowable fracture growth.
1. The Production Technologist shall define the following:
a. The range of the well injection flow rates (minimum, normal and maximum).
b. The minimum required injection pressure over the design life at maximum well
injection flow rate,
c. The maximum allowable injection pressure.
2. The maximum allowable injection pressure shall not exceed the pressure that
corresponds to the limit defined by the top seal integrity; refer to
DEP 25.80.10.22-Gen.
3. The injected water flow rate in each well shall be controlled in terms of rate and
pressure.
4. The allocated volume of water injected into a well shall be recorded by appropriate
metering.

3.5 INJECTION WATER QUALITY

1. Specification of the injected or water quality shall, as a minimum, include the
parameters listed in Table 1.

Table 1 Seawater injection quality specification parameters

Parameter Specification Seawater injection

Suspended TSS Maximum √ M (ppmv)
Solids
Particle size Maximum √ M (micron or mils)
Ionic TDS Maximum √ P (mg/l)
composition
Note 1
Minimum √ P (mg/l)
Sulphate Maximum √ P (mg/l)
Hardness Maximum √ P (mg/l)
Oxygen Maximum √ M (µg/l)
Bacteria count Maximum √M
Temperature Maximum √P
Minimum √P
Chemicals Nitrate Minimum √P
Note 2

√ P = possible requirement

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 10

√ M= mandatory
NOTES: 1. For specific ions
2. Country or regional legislation may set requirements for maximum level of
production chemicals injected into reservoirs.
2. The water quality requirements shall be defined including tolerable excursions
(including frequency and duration) of specification parameters in Table 1.
The water quality specification for seawater injection is defined by the Production
Technologist at the entrance of the reservoir (well bore). Corrosion products,
scale, biofouling, etc. formed between the last treatment step and the well bore
lead to deterioration of the injected water quality.
3. The Concept Engineer shall assess impact of distribution and injection system
downstream of the last treatment step on the water quality.
4. The water quality requirements from the mitigations concluded upon by the injectivity
impairment and formation damage (2.2), scaling (2.3) and souring assessments (2.4)
shall be included.

3.6 CHARACTERISTICS OF SEAWATER

1. Location of the seawater intake point shall be such that there is minimal interference
with the disposal of drilling cuttings, produced water, RO or SRU reject water and other
reject streams to sea.
2. The prevailing currents shall be taken into account in determining the preferred
location of the seawater intake point.
3. A representative water sampling programme shall be carried out to cover possible
intake location, depth and seasonal variations, including algae bloom occurrence. The
requirements shall be defined by the Production Chemist.
4. As a minimum the sampling campaign shall contain the following elements:
a. Measurements at site:
i. pH
ii. temperature
iii. TSS
iv. particle size distribution
v. alkalinity /bicarbonate content
vi. dissolved O2 content
vii. total salinity from conductivity measurements
viii. chlorine demand
b. Measurements in the laboratory:
i. microbiological type and concentration for relevant groups of bacteria
ii. plankton net analysis
iii. full ionic composition, cations and anions
iv. phosphorus
v. ammonia
vi. salinity, by summation of ions

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 11

3.7 FACILITY LIFECYCLE PLANNING

1. The requirement for future capacity expansion and additional treatment equipment
shall be considered as part of the initial design.
The Field Development Plan defines the future recovery strategies for specific
reservoirs and field.
2. Subsurface disciplines and the Concept Engineer shall work together to understand
the possible future EOR and IOR strategies.
3. An assessment shall be conducted to define the design requirements of the seawater
injection system associated with future EOR and IOR strategies.
The conclusion of such an assessment may be to:
• Design the seawater injection system such that facilities are designed for
future EOR or IOR strategies, i.e. concept select of pre-investments.
• Design the seawater injection system such that facilities can be easily
expanded for EOR and IOR strategies.
• Discard the impact of the potential EOR and IOR strategies.

4. SURFACE FACILITIES FOR SEAWATER TREATMENT

4.1 GENERAL
1. The seawater treatment system shall be designed to meet the required water quality
by selection of equipment that is proven for the specific application and include the
following:
a. waste streams;
b. impact of start-up, maintenance, non-routine operations and possible upsets;
c. regulatory requirements and environmental impact related to discharge of
backwash, reject, pump minimum flow, and start-up/off-specification disposal
streams.
2. The following aspects should be considered in the design:
a. Impact of chemicals injected on downstream system.
b. Achieving water quality with the minimum use of chemicals.
c. Seawater treatment system is robust (i.e. meet seawater specification) against
uncertainty in the seawater characteristics and associated impact on
equipment performance.
3. The Concept Engineer shall provide justification for the selected process line-up, which
shall include evaluation of equipment as identified in the option table in (Appendix A)
and (Appendix B), as relevant, and consideration of (4.1, Item 1 and 2).
a. The process line-ups presented in (4.2), (4.3) and (4.4) serve as a starting
point for equipment selection and should be adapted based on operating
conditions and water characteristics.
b. In the Assess Phase these line-ups should be tailored (i.e. number of
treatment steps) to the source water composition and the injection water
specification.
These tailored line-ups, without detailed evaluation of alternatives, may
provide sufficient definition in the Assess Phase of an opportunity.
For specific opportunities where technical feasibility related to the
achievable injection water specification has to assessed, more analysis
may be required.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 12

The process line-ups and associated option tables included in the

(Appendix A) and (Appendix B) are based on deployable, or proven,
technologies/equipment (i.e. either operating satisfactorily in Shell or
supported by a development release).
4. Equipment classified as new technology shall be managed through the Principal’s
development release procedures; appropriate disciplines shall be consulted, for review
and approval, e.g. process engineering, water treatment and production chemistry.
In Shell this process is coordinated by PTI.
5. In event of periodic poor intake water quality, e.g. seasonal algae bloom, the Concept
Engineer shall evaluate the cost effectiveness of seawater system shut-in versus
additional treatment equipment.
Table 2 provides an overview of the process line-ups presented in (4.2), (4.3) and
(4.4).
Table 2 Overview of process line-ups presented and treatment specifics of the
line-ups

Process line-up Figure Section Water quality parameters affected

Solids Oxygen Divalent Monovalent
ions ions
Conventional 1 4.2.1 √ √ N/A N/A
seawater flood
Low Salinity 4 4.3.2 √ √ √ √
Flood RO+Blend Note 1
Low Salinity 5 4.3.2 √ √ √ √
Flood SRU/RO
Seawater 8 4.4.1 √ √ √ √
treatment with Note 2
Sulphate
Removal

Notes:
1. RO membranes also result in removal of most divalent ions. The permeate
sulphate concentration would in principle prevent scaling and reservoir souring.
However, due to blending with seawater to tailor the ionic composition, the
stringent sulphate specification required to prevent souring or scaling is generally
not achieved.
2. SRU membranes also result in salinity reduction by the rejection of the majority of
divalent and some of the monovalent ions.

4.2 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR CONVENTIONAL SEAWATER TREATMENT

4.2.1 Typical process line-up
The advised line up for conventional seawater flooding topsides equipment is shown in
Figure 1.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 13

Figure 1 Conventional seawater flood line-up

The individual elements in the process line-up are discussed in the following Sections.
An options table, giving an overview of alternative solutions for the various elements of a
conventional seawater injection line-up, is included in (Appendix A).
4.2.2 Seawater lift pumps
1. Refer to DEP 37.05.10.10-Gen. for the requirements for seawater intake.
2. Refer to DEP 31.29.06.31-Gen. and DEP 37.05.10.10-Gen. for the requirements for
seawater lift pumps.
3. In the discharge of the seawater pump or in the common seawater header, an inline
screen filter (1 mm (0.04 in) mesh) shall be provided.
4. The intake depth of seawater shall be selected to a depth where the raw seawater
properties are optimal given the treatment steps required.
Seawater properties (such as TSS, algae, temperature, and oxygen content) vary
significantly with depth.
4.2.3 Solids filtration
1. The decision diagram for filtration represented in Figure 2 should be followed.
Specific project conditions may lead to a different filtration configuration.
2. The decision to select the filtration options in Figure 2 shall be based on the following:
a. Raw seawater composition;
b. Injection water quality specification;
c. Location of equipment;
d. Requirements of downstream treatment.
3. Consideration shall be given to alternative equipment and special membrane material
when maximum seawater operating temperature exceeds 35 °C (95 °F).
The maximum seawater operating temperature for ultrafiltration membranes
without a need for special membrane material is constrained at 35 °C - 40 °C
(95 °F - 104 °F).
4. To reduce solids loading on cartridge filters the upstream self-cleaning screen filters
should consider a smaller mesh size, 10-20 micron (0.39-0.78 mils) filter.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 14

5. For all filter types, the capacity and number of filters shall provide suitable redundancy
to ensure effective solids removal during backwashing, filter element change out as
well as maintenance and inspection.
6. The design shall allow for the effect of backwash on downstream flow conditions and
process stability, with the objective of maintaining constant forward flow.
7. A project specific assessment shall be conducted to verify that untreated discharge to
sea of the acid and base waste stream is acceptable without further treatment.
Membrane filtration packages use chemicals (hypochlorite, acid and base) to
clean the membranes. The waste cleaning fluid is discharged to sea.

Filtration required

Yes Product spec No

Max. particle
size < 1 µm

TSS
Yes No
seawater
consistently
< 1mg/l

Yes Location of No
equipment
offshore

SCSF + UF SCSF + CF SCSF + UF SCSF +UF

SCSF + MMF +
CF

Figure 2 Decision diagram for filtration configuration selection

4.2.4 Deaeration
1. To achieve effective protection against corrosion and reduce biofouling risk, deaeration
systems shall be designed to produce injection water with a maximum oxygen content
of 10 µg/l.
2. The stripping gas deaeration process should not be considered for new designs unless
the oxygen and chlorine contaminated hydrocarbon gas can be recovered cost
effectively or used as fuel gas.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 15

4.2.5 Seawater injection pumps

1. Refer to DEP 31.29.02.11-Gen. and DEP 31.29.02.31-Gen. for the requirements for
the centrifugal pumps.
2. Pump characteristics should be matched to the reservoir requirements. Control
systems should be installed to prevent the wellhead pressure from exceeding the
specified maximum value.
3. Booster pumps should be installed upstream of the injection pumps to provide
adequate NPSH – net positive suction head - for injection pumps.
4. Pump design should be tolerant for the amount, size and type of solids in the
seawater.

5. Designs shall not allow solids to settle out in pumps during operation.

4.3 LOW SALINITY FLOODING

4.3.1 General
1. The decision diagram for defining the low salinity flooding (LSF) line-up represented in
Figure 3 should be followed.
Specific project conditions may lead to a different configuration.

Figure 3 LSF facility decision diagram with seawater

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 16

4.3.2 Typical process line-ups

The advised line up, “RO+Blend”, for Low Salinity Flooding, where a stringent sulphate
specification in the injected water is not applicable, is shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4 Process line-up LSF treatment process “RO+Blend”

Figure 5 shows the advised line up, “SRU/RO”, for Low Salinity Flooding, where a
stringent sulphate specification is applicable to prevent scaling or reservoir souring.

Figure 5 Process line-up LSF treatment process “SRU/RO”

An options table, giving an overview of alternative solutions for the various elements of
the LSF treatment line-ups, is included in (Appendix B).
4.3.3 Seawater lift pumps
1. Refer to (4.2.2) for requirements.
4.3.4 Solids filtration
1. The decision diagram for solids filtration represented in Figure 6 should be followed.
Specific project conditions may lead to a different filtration configuration.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 17

Filtration required

Yes Water No
depth > 500m &
intake depth
> 100m

SCSF + CF SCSF +UF

Figure 6 Decision diagram for filtration configuration selection

2. A project specific assessment of the filtration configuration should consider the

following aspects:
a. seawater composition;
b. seawater temperature;
c. water quality specification for RO and SRU membranes;
d. impact of seawater quality on SRU and RO performance and OPEX.
3. For all filter types, the capacity and number of filters shall provide suitable redundancy
to ensure effective solids removal during backwashing, filter element change out as
well as maintenance and inspection.
4. To reduce solids loading on cartridge filters, the upstream self-cleaning screen filters
should consider a smaller mesh size.
5. The design shall allow for the effect of backwash on downstream flow conditions and
process stability, with the objective of maintaining constant forward flow.
4.3.5 Deaeration
Deaeration upstream of the SRU or RO membranes has the advantage that removal of
the oxygen reduces the potential for biological build-up due to slower growth of
anaerobic bacteria and is therefore likely to result in extended membrane life.
However, this advantage comes at a cost since locating deaeration upstream of the
SRU or RO membranes means that the deaerator tower also has to treat the membrane
reject stream.
1. Refer to (4.2.4) for requirements.
2. The decision diagram for deaeration represented in Figure 7 should be followed.
Specific project conditions may lead to a different filtration configuration.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 18

Figure 7 Decision diagram deaeration location relative to membrane unit

3. The system design shall allow for the slower reaction of oxygen scavenger with
oxygen in low salinity water.
Oxygen scavenger reaction with oxygen is slower at low pH. Commercial oxygen
scavengers have a low pH. In low salinity water, the salt content is insufficient to
buffer the pH so the injection of oxygen scavenger reduces the pH of the water
stream, resulting in a slower reaction.
4.3.6 Reverse osmosis and sulphate removal unit
1. The LSF facility shall be designed such that the salinity of the treated water is tuneable
over the range of TDS values as defined in (3.5).
2. The capacity of the upstream seawater system shall be sized to allow for the high
reject water streams from RO and SRU membranes.
3. RO and SRU reject streams shall not be mixed with treated produced water.
4. A salinity dispersion assessment shall verify that the environmental impact of RO and
SRU reject stream disposal is acceptable.
5. Energy recovery of the reject streams should be considered for RO membranes.
6. For a “SRU/RO” line-up, the SRU should be designed for future conversion of the SRU
into an RO system.
7. Dosed hypochlorite shall be removed upstream of the RO and SRU membranes by
dosing oxygen scavenger. Oxygen scavenger injected shall not contain catalyst.
Specific chemicals, hypochlorite, antifoam and biocide THPS, used in seawater
systems, affect SRU and RO membranes performance and integrity.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 19

8. The selected biocide chemicals injected upstream of the membranes shall be

compatible with the supplied membranes.
9. Antifoam shall not be injected upstream of the membrane unit.
4.3.7 Seawater injection pumps
1. Refer to (4.2.5) for requirements.

4.4 SEAWATER FLOODING WITH SULPHATE REMOVAL

4.4.1 Typical process line-up
Figure 8 shows the advised line up for seawater treatment with sulphate removal SRU,
where a stringent sulphate specification is applicable to prevent scaling or reservoir
souring.

Figure 8 Seawater treatment process line up with SRU

An options table giving an overview of alternative solutions for the various elements of
the seawater treatment line-ups with SRU is included in (Appendix B).
4.4.2 Seawater lift pumps
1. Refer to (4.2.2) for requirements.
4.4.3 Solids filtration
1. Refer to (4.3.4) for requirements.
4.4.4 Deaeration
1. Refer to (4.3.5) for requirements.
4.4.5 Sulphate removal unit
1. The capacity of the upstream seawater system shall be sized to allow for the high
reject water streams from SRU membranes.
2. SRU reject streams shall not be mixed with treated produced water.
3. An assessment shall be made of the expected environmental impact of SRU reject
stream disposal.
4. For a “SRU” line-up, the SRU system should be designed for future conversion of the
SRU into an RO system.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 20

5. Dosed hypochlorite shall be removed upstream of the RO and SRU membranes by

dosing oxygen scavenger.
Specific chemicals, for instance antifoam and biocide THPS, commonly used to
prevent biofouling in seawater systems, affect SRU membranes performance and
integrity.
6. The selected biocide chemicals injected upstream of the membranes shall be
compatible with the supplied membranes.
7. Antifoam shall not be injected upstream of the membrane unit.
4.4.6 Seawater injection pumps
1. Refer to (4.2.5) for requirements.

4.5 RAW SEAWATER INJECTION

Reference is made to Figure 1, conventional seawater line-up. A raw seawater line-up
would be similar, but without the deaeration step. The solids filtration step removes
larger particles only.
Raw seawater injection could have significant cost, weight and footprint benefits. The
oxygenated water requires corrosion resistant materials and increases the risk of
biofouling and reservoir souring.
1. Raw seawater injection should be considered for a specific reservoir and/or field as a
potential development concept.
2. Potential cost, weight and space benefits shall be evaluated against the impact of the
raw seawater quality on reservoir and facilities.
3. For longer injection well step-outs, the location of the raw water injection package on
the seabed near the injection wells should be considered as an alternative to topsides
location.
Such a package would conceptually consist of:
a. A still chamber for gravity bulk solids removal (particles larger than 50 µm)
with sufficient residence time for disinfection via electro-chlorination (EC).
The unit can be equipped with a jet solids removal system, operating on
motive recycle flow from the injection pump.
b. An oxidation step in the shape of a flow through Hydroxyl Radical
Generator (HRG), combined with periodic biocide shock dosing,
c. Automatic back flushing or self-cleaning filters, removing particles down to
50 µm (2 mils),
d. A multistage centrifugal injection pump and motor,
e. Control and instrumentation interface,
f. Protective structure and foundation,
g. Power supply from the main processing facility via cable and transformers.
4. As an alternative to subsea electro-chlorination, supply of hypochlorite from the host or
subsea storage should be considered.
5. The installation of an umbilical from the host platform should be considered for supply
of chemicals.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 21

4.6 GENERIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

4.6.1 Operability
1. The Operations Philosophy shall address the seawater injection facilities and clearly
define how these will be managed operationally.
Specific requirements that are typically addressed or specified as part of the
Operations Philosophy are:
a. Water quality requirements.
b. Water treatment requirements.
c. Metering, testing and monitoring requirements (4.6.2).
d. Uptime requirements, load shedding and sparing philosophy.
e. Maintenance and inspection philosophy.
f. Commissioning and start-up.
g. Off-specification water
h. Organisational and staffing requirements.
i. KPIs to be recorded.
j. Accounting methods, reconciliation structure and deferment recording.
2. Any design requirements resulting from the Operations Philosophy shall be included in
the design.

4.6.2 Monitoring and control

1. A monitoring programme shall be established and the structure of the monitoring
programme shall be tailored to the specifics of the project and include consideration of:
a. The nature of the source water.
b. The reservoir properties.
c. The equipment performance.
d. The effectiveness of production chemicals
e. The plant location
f. Organisational capability
g. Project status – commissioning, normal operations, pilot testing, etc.
2. The monitoring programme shall specify the requirements to monitor water quality, see
Table 1, and chemicals performance, refer to (4.6.9), including:
a. Monitoring parameters.
b. Monitoring locations.
c. Monitoring frequency.
d. Analysis method.
e. Online monitoring requirements
f. Manpower requirements – compatible with the appropriate (normally high)
degree of automation.
Online continuous analysers allow reductions in manning and improved
process control (manual sampling will not detect short term variations and
any problems with operation of the plant is likely to go un-noticed). A need
will remain for manual calibration, instrument and plant troubleshooting,
and quality control.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 22

3. The monitoring programme shall be included in the maintenance plan.

4. Facilities for manual testing and calibration shall be provided.
4.6.3 Co-mingling of produced water and seawater
1. If injection of both produced water and seawater is to be employed then separate
injection wells and headers should be provided.
2. Co-mingling of seawater and produced water at surface conditions is not normally
advisable due to increased scaling and souring potential, which shall be addressed by
compatibility studies, see (2.3) and (2.4).
Nevertheless, there may be major cost savings to be made if mixing is possible.
For example, if a seawater injection system could gradually blend in more and
more production water as it becomes available this would save on injection
pumps and piping.
3. Each stream shall be treated to the required specification prior to Co-mingling that is
done upstream of the seawater/produced water injection pumps.
4.6.4 Conversion from seawater to produced water treatment
1. As the volume of produced water increases, wells and equipment originally used for
seawater treatment and injection should be used for produced water treatment and
injection.
2. If this change over from seawater to produced water is applicable, the seawater and
produced water system design shall allow for this conversion.
4.6.5 Waste streams
The main focus of seawater injection system designs is the quality of the injection water
stream. The contaminants removed from the seawater are in the waste streams of the
treatment process. These waste streams are:
• Seawater treatment equipment reject streams, e.g. SRU and RO membranes.
• Seawater treatment equipment backwash streams, e.g. ultrafiltration, self-
cleaning screen filters.
• Oxygen contaminated hydrocarbon gas stream of the hydrocarbon gas stripping
unit.
1. The water treatment facility should include treatment facilities to treat the waste
streams to the required disposal or discharge specifications
4.6.6 Turndown
Turndown is prolonged operation at less than the design flow rate. For a specific field, it
could be required that the seawater injection system operates at high turndown, at 25%
or less of the design flow rate. However, in many fields a lower annual injection flow rate
can be accommodated by temporary shut-in of the injection system and thereby
avoiding the need for prolonged operation at high turndown.
1. The performance of the seawater injection system shall be assessed against turndown
operation, specifically columns, control valves and pumps.
Turndown of SRU and RO membranes is typically limited to ~10%.
2. The design of SRU and RO membrane packages should accommodate turndown
requirements by shut-in of membrane trains, or disposal of excess treated water.
4.6.7 Off-specification water
Exceptional local environmental circumstances (e.g., algae bloom or storm) may result
in changed seawater characteristics affecting equipment performance.
A number of routine operations (e.g., system start-up, equipment maintenance) may
result in off-specification injection water.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 23

1. Each operation shall be analysed for water quality excursions and its impact to the
facilities, wells and subsurface.
2. If the water quality excursion from operations is unacceptable to equipment or the
reservoir, one of the following shall be done:
a. Change the system design to eliminate or minimise excursions to acceptable
levels;
b. Stop injection of water.
3. The design shall include provisions to dispose off-specification water during start-up.
4.6.8 Use of warm seawater from seawater cooling system
Warm seawater from the seawater cooling system could be used as feed for the water
injection system, which reduces the total seawater flowrate to be lifted.
1. For offshore structures where cooling of process streams by seawater cooling is likely
to be implemented, the warm seawater return flow rate should be considered.
2. Seawater directly used to cool hazardous process coolers shall be segregated from
the seawater treatment and injection system, refer to DEP 37.05.10.10-Gen.
4.6.9 Chemical injection
4.6.9.1 General
1. Refer to DEP 31.01.10.10-Gen. for the chemical injection system requirements.
2. The production chemist shall specify the chemical treatment requirements, chemical
selection, chemical concentration, injection point location and sampling points.
3. The seawater injection system shall evaluate alternative processing equipment and
chemicals to eliminate or reduce chemical treatment requirements, for those chemicals
screened as yellow or red in the risk assessment according to HSSE & SP Control
Framework Product Stewardship Manual.
Over- or underdosing of chemicals may result in the generation of additional
solids (such as scale, biomass).
4. Injection rates should be automatically varied in proportion to the corresponding
seawater flow rate.
4.6.9.2 Injection points locations
The injection points for chemicals in the advised line ups of Figure 1, Figure 4, Figure 5
and Figure 8, indicate typical chemical injection requirements. Project specific
requirements may result in additional injection points, but also justify deleting certain
injection points.
1. Injection points shall be into a part of the process where mixing readily takes place so
that the dosed chemical can be fully effective.
2. Compatibility between chemicals should be defined to determine the minimum
distance between injection points.
Although production chemicals may be compatible at in-stream concentrations
(typically a few mg/l each), they may not be compatible at higher concentrations.
4.6.9.3 Biological control
4.6.9.3.1 General
1. Both macro biological and microbial control is essential in seawater injection systems
and shall be included in the design.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 24

2. A maximum acceptable level of biological activity shall be defined based upon a

specified monitoring program.
The purpose of a biological control or anti-fouling system is to provide protection
of the water intake pumps in seawater injection systems from blocking or damage
due to growth of algae, shellfish and other marine organisms and to protect the
downstream systems from biological growth.
3. UV radiation shall not be used to control biological growth.
4. Copper ion anti-fouling system, also in combination with hypochlorite, should not be
deployed to control biological growth.
Microbial activity is generally stimulated by the accumulation of solids and debris
in stagnant areas, like tank bottoms.
5. During the design of the seawater injection system, stagnant areas in equipment and
piping systems should be avoided.
6. In case stagnant areas cannot be prevented (e.g. branches for sample points and
drain connections) and remain present, suitable facilities shall be included in the
design to flush the contaminated fluids and/or settled solids out of the process.
4.6.9.3.2 Sodium hypochlorite
Sodium hypochlorite dosing is the standard treatment for biological control. It is usually
continuously dosed to low concentrations of typically 0.5 – 2.0 mg/l, according to the
chlorine demand, to give a residual concentration of typically 0.5 – 0.8 mg/l as free
chlorine.
Apart from normal continuous dosing, the sodium hypochlorite system is designed for a
shock dosing operation. The actual system design shock dosing concentration is based
on chlorine demand.
1. Refer to DEP 37.05.10.10-Gen. Section 3.3.3 for the sodium hypochlorite system
requirements.
2. The injection point for sodium hypochlorite dosing shall be situated far enough
upstream in the system to ensure sufficient protection in the coarse filtration section
and the intake structure itself.
The preferred location is the suction of the seawater lift pumps, as close to the
intake location as practicable.
3. An additional injection point shall be located in the discharge of the seawater lift
pumps.
4. Consideration should be given to design facilities with sodium hypochlorite soaking
possibility for specific equipment and piping systems.
5. As a minimum an injection point shall be provided for sodium hypochlorite injection into
the deaeration column, enabling sodium hypochlorite soaking.
Sodium hypochlorite soaking of equipment and piping systems is regarded as the
most effective method to gain control over biological activity in a biologically
contaminated system.
4.6.9.3.3 (Organic) Biocide
Biological control is provided by continuous application of hypochlorite up to the
entrance of the deaeration system or the first injection point of oxygen scavenger,
whichever comes first. Protection of the deaerator and downstream injection system is
by periodic treatment with organic biocide.
1. Periodic biocide injection shall be employed both before and after the deaerator
vessel.
Oxygen scavenger results in complete scavenging of the chlorine present in the
seawater.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 25

It is difficult to gain control over the biofouling if following a reactive approach,

where biofouling is allowed to occur and controlled by applying biocides.
Best microbiological control is achieved by shock dosing of biocide for certain
limited time (typically once or twice a week for 3-4 hours each treatment) at a high
enough injection rate (typically 300 ppmv active component) that exceeds the kill
dose for selected biocide.
2. The selection of the biocide shall be based on actual seawater and tested for
effectiveness with sessile bacteria.
Other factors such as process inspection (internal) can also be used, e.g.,
biofouling evidence or MIC, to evaluate biocide injection requirement.
3. As part of operating instructions project shall specify that biocide selection has to be
evaluated periodically. For greenfield projects this is required shortly after start-up.
4. As part of operating instructions project shall specify that the frequency, duration and
applied concentration of biocide shock dosing has to be modified based on regular
monitoring of the occurring bacterial growth in the system.
Biocide injection is intended to prevent biological activity in the surface facilities,
for instance SRB, and therefore, the injection of biocide indirectly impacts
reservoir souring. Reservoir souring is discussed in (2.4).
4.6.9.4 Oxygen scavenger
nd
The recommended injection point for oxygen scavenger is below the last stage, the 2
or 3rd recycle stream of the vacuum deaerator tower, or the bottom sump in case of a
gas stripper.
1. Unless a Chemical Only Deaeration process is selected, oxygen scavenger chemicals
shall be applied to seawater injection systems as a polishing treatment to remove the
last amounts of oxygen that remain after mechanical deaeration.
2. The chemical oxygen scavenger treatment shall not induce scaling problems as a
result of precipitation of calcium sulphite minerals.
3. The capacity of the oxygen scavenger injection pump capacity should allow for the
increased oxygen scavenger injection required when the seawater system is treated
with a shock dosing concentration of hypochlorite.
4.6.9.5 Scale inhibitor
1. Scale inhibitor dosing shall always be applied upstream of any location anticipated to
be susceptible to scale deposition.
The strategy for controlling scale could specify scale inhibitor injection in the
seawater injection system.
2. Scale inhibitor injection may be required to mitigate incompatibility between injected
seawater and formation water in the reservoir.
Common practise is to pre-flush the first 0.1-0.2 million m3 (~0.5 -1 million barrels)
of injected seawater in each injection well with seawater containing scale inhibitor.
3. The injection point shall be selected to prevent unnecessary waste of chemical and
potential environmental non-compliances.
4. The injection point location for scale inhibitor shall be downstream of the seawater
injection pumps and downstream of any recycle or overboard line.
5. The design should consider dedicated scale inhibitor injection into each injection well
flow line.
4.6.9.6 Nitrate
1. In case nitrate injection is selected for souring control purposes, at least 50 mg/l of
active nitrate shall be maintained.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 26

2. Nitrate should be injected as close as possible to the injection well.

3. Nitrate shall be injected downstream of the last produced water treatment step, e.g. in
the discharge of the seawater injection pump.
4. Nitrate should not be injected upstream of pipelines.
4.6.9.7 Antifoam
Operational problems are sometimes experienced due to foam in the deaerator. Foam
is caused by specific non-oxidizing biocides in combination with a high liquid load in
the deaerator.
1. Either antifoam or a special version biocide THPS (with low foaming tendency) should
be injected upstream of the deaerator to mitigate foam.
4.6.10 Sample points
1. Sufficient sampling points, as defined by the Production Chemist, shall be included to
monitor the effectiveness of the chemical injection systems and to evaluate equipment
performance.
4.6.11 Materials of construction
1. Refer to DEP 37.05.10.10-Gen. and DEP 31.01.10.11-Gen. for the materials selection
requirements of the seawater injection system.
2. Refer to DEP 39.01.10.11-Gen. and DEP 39.01.10.12-Gen. for materials selection for
upstream facilities in a broader sense.
3. See Table 3 for reference for materials of construction for the various main elements in
a seawater flood.
Table 3 Preferred materials of construction

Item DEP reference

Seawater Inlet caisson DEP 39.01.10.12-Gen. Section 3.4.1.7
Seawater Lift pump DEP 39.01.10.12-Gen. Section 3.4.1.2
Piping, low pressure DEP 37.05.10.10-Gen. Section 4.3
Filter vessels DEP 39.01.10.12-Gen. Section 3.4.1.5
Vessel internals DEP 39.01.10.12-Gen. Section 3.4.1.5
Deaerator DEP 39.01.10.12-Gen. Section 3.4.1.5
Injection pumps DEP 39.01.10.12-Gen. Section 3.4.1.5
Piping, high pressure DEP 39.01.10.12-Gen. Section 3.4.1.5

4. Alloy 400/401 shall not be selected.

5. Selection of coating materials to prevent corrosion on vessels shall mitigate the
potential for coating damage.
Frequent opening could cause damage of the coating at or near the sealing
surface. For instance, cartridge filters need to be opened frequently to change-out
filter cartridges.
6. Corrosion management should focus on the selection of appropriate materials of
construction.
7. Corrosion inhibitors shall not be used to control corrosion in seawater injection
systems.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 27

5. REFERENCES
In this DEP, reference is made to the following publications:
NOTES: 1. Unless specifically designated by date, the latest edition of each publication shall be used,
together with any amendments/supplements/revisions thereto.
2. The DEPs and most referenced external standards are available to Shell staff on the SWW (Shell
Wide Web) at http://sww.shell.com/standards/.

SHELL STANDARDS
DEP feedback form DEP 00.00.05.80-Gen.
Hydrogen sulphide prediction for produced fluids from new and DEP 25.80.10.18-Gen.
existing wells in oil and gas fields
Top-seal integrity assessment for primary recovery, waterflood, EOR DEP 25.80.10.22-Gen.
and CO2 storage
Chemical injection systems for upstream production facilities DEP 31.01.10.10-Gen.
Corrosion prevention and control of water injection systems DEP 31.01.10.11-Gen.
Pumps – Selection, testing and installation DEP 31.29.02.11-Gen.
Sealless Centrifugal Pumps (amendments/supplements to API 685) DEP 31.29.02.31-Gen.
Seawater lift pumps DEP 31.29.06.31-Gen.
Design of seawater systems for offshore and onshore DEP 37.05.10.10-Gen.
Selection of materials for life cycle performance (Upstream DEP 39.01.10.11-Gen.
equipment) - Materials selection and corrosion management process
Selection of materials for life cycle performance (Upstream DEP 39.01.10.12-Gen.
equipment) – including H2S-containing environments (amendments
and supplements to ISO 15156:2009)
Produced water treatment and injection facilities DEP 39.01.40.31-Gen.
HSSE & SP Control Framework Product Stewardship Manual HSSE & SP CF
https://eu001-sp.shell.com/sites/AAAAA8432/CF/Web/ProductStewardship.aspx

TECHNICAL PAPERS
Treatment Facilities for Seawater Injection and Low Salinity Flooding SR.12.11073
Issued by: Shell Global Library, May 2012

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 28
APPENDIX A OPTIONS TABLE FOR CONVENTIONAL SEAWATER TREATMENT AND INJECTION LINE-UPS
Seawater source Seawater treatment Seawater injection

Pump type Seawater intake depth Combine lift pumps Heating of seawater Solids filtration Oxygen removal Seawater injection pumps
with seawater for
cooling Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Principle Pump type Driver
Options Submerged pump Shallow No No Inline screens Self cleaning screen Ultrafiltration Vacuum stripping unit Centrifugal Electromotor -fixed
filters membranes (UF) speed

Sea chest pump Moderate Yes Use of warm Cartridge filters (CF) Hydrocarbon gas Positive displacement Gas turbine
seawater of cooling stripping unit pump
water system

Deep > 100m Other heating Multimedia Filters + Chemical Only Internally geared pump Electromotor - variable
Cartridge Filter (MMF (COOORS) speed drive
+CF)

Horizontal ESP's Gas engine

Diesel engine

Remarks Type of structure. In deepwater (500m Possible difference in Reduce total To be applied by To be applied by See selection diagram Vacuum stripping unit
On fixed platforms water depth) generally head requirements seawater lift capacity default default in DEP Shell best practice
submerged pumps, seawater taken form fro both systems to and enhance oxygen
whereas on floaters deep is cleaner. be considered removal
pumps could pump Seawater is also colder
form sea chest.

Selection Selection criteria: Selection criteria: CAPEX, CAPEX, Injection water quality, CAPEX, OPEX, Injection water flow CAPEX, weight, foot
criteria CAPEX, operability, Seawater temperature, weight/footprint, weight/footprint, downstream weight/footprint, rate, head print, selected pump
maintainability, seawater composition effectiveness of equipment, availability of gas, requirements, CAPEX, type, environmental
space/weight (solids, bacteria, algae, oxygen removal, ion weight/footprint, outlet for oxygenated reliability, OPEX, weight footprint, gas
etc.) removal fouling, equipment CAPEX, HC gas, downstream and footprint availability, volume
operability and facility location equipment (mainly /head variation required
selectivity (onshore versus membranes), injection
offshore), seawater water quality
characteristics(TSS), specification
operator intensity

Note: The options table represents an illustration of the main decisions and the most common options.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26
 DEP 39.01.40.30-Gen.
February 2016
Page 29
APPENDIX B OPTIONS TABLE FOR PROCESS LINE-UPS THAT INCLUDE LSF AND/OR SRU
Seawater source Seawater treatment Seawater injection

Pump type Seawater intake Combine lift Heating of Solids filtration Oxygen removal Ionic composition Seawater injection pumps
depth pumps with seawater
seawater for Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Principle Ion removal Ion adjustment Energy recovery Oxygen removal Dilution of reject Discharge of reject Pump type Driver
cooling membranes location streams stream
Options Submerged pump Shallow No No Inline screens Self cleaning screen Ultrafiltration Vacuum stripping None None None Upstream ion None Direct overboard Centrifugal Electromotor -fixed
filters membranes (UF) unit removal step speed

Sea chest pump Moderate Yes Use of warm Cartridge filters (CF) Hydrocarbon gas SRU CaCl2 injection Yes Downstream ion Dilute with Disperse Positive Gas turbine
seawater of stripping unit removal step seawater from displacement pump
cooling water cooling system
system
Deep > 100m Other heating Multimedia Filters + Chemical Only SRU/RO Produced water Dilute with Disposal wells Internally geared Electromotor -
Cartridge Filter (COOORS) mixing produced water pump variable speed drive
(MMF +CF)

RO Seawater Horizontal ESP's Gas engine

RO retentate Diesel engine

Remarks Type of structure. In deepwater (500m Possible difference Reduce total To be applied by To be applied by See selection Vacuum stripping Adjust ionic Use high pressure See selection Local marine life is potentially affected
On fixed platforms water depth) in head seawater lift default default diagram in DEP unit Shell best composition to retentate to diagram in DEP but discharge of high salinity (& no
submerged generally seawater requirements fro capacity and practice mitigate clay increase pressure of oxygen) waste streams
pumps, whereas taken form deep is both systems to enhance oxygen swelling feed stream
on floaters pumps cleaner. Seawater is be considered removal pressure
could pump form also colder
sea chest.
Selection Selection criteria: Selection criteria: CAPEX, CAPEX, Injection water CAPEX, OPEX, Scaling risk, souring Availability of CAPEX, energy CAPEX, OPEX, Legislative requirements, environmental Injection water flow CAPEX, weight, foot
criteria CAPEX, Seawater weight/footprint, weight/footprint, quality, downstream weight/footprint, risks streams and their intensity, weight, weight, footprint, impact rate, head print, selected pump
operability, temperature, effectiveness of equipment, availability of gas, LSF benefit --> composition, footprint, OPEX biofouling, requirements, type, environmental
maintainability, seawater oxygen removal, weight/footprint, outlet for economic criteria water quality membrane life --> CAPEX, reliability, footprint, gas
space/weight composition (solids, ion removal equipment CAPEX, oxygenated HC gas, (NPV, UTC, UDC) and requirement, OPEX, injection OPEX, weight and availability, volume
bacteria, algae, fouling, operability facility location downstream UR. CAPEX, OPEX, water quality footprint /head variation
etc.) and selectivity (onshore versus equipment (mainly operability specification required
offshore), seawater membranes), (sulphate),
characteristics(TSS), injection water environmental
operator intensity quality specification impact

Note: The options table represents an illustration of the main decisions and the most common options.

This document has been supplied under license by Shell to:

UOP Honeywell [email protected] 19/01/2018 10:31:26