Next Article in Journal
UAV Inspections of Power Transmission Networks with AI Technology: A Case Study of Lesvos Island in Greece
Previous Article in Journal
Multi-Site Wind Speed Prediction Based on Graph Embedding and Cyclic Graph Isomorphism Network (GIN-GRU)
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Energies
Volume 17
Issue 14
10.3390/en17143517
energies-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Revisiting the Application of Ultrasonic Technology for Enhanced Oil Recovery: Mechanisms and Recent Advancements

by
Huan Zhang
1,2,*,
Chunyang Gao
3,4,
Hongli Zhang
1,
Naijian Song
1 and
Qiang Cao
1
1
College of Chemistry and Material, Weinan Normal University, Weinan 714099, China
2
College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Shaanxi Province Key Laboratory of Environmental Pollution Control and Reservoir Protection Technology of Oilfields, Xi’an Shiyou University, Xi’an 710065, China
3
State Key Laboratory of Petroleum Pollution Control, Beijing 102206, China
4
CNPC Research Institute of Safety and Environmental Technology, Beijing 102206, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Energies 2024, 17(14), 3517; https://doi.org/10.3390/en17143517
Submission received: 17 May 2024 / Revised: 7 July 2024 / Accepted: 10 July 2024 / Published: 17 July 2024
(This article belongs to the Section H: Geo-Energy)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Ultrasonic technology, which has been receiving increasing attention from the petroleum industry, has emerged as a promising environmentally-friendly technology due to its high adaptability, simple operation, low cost, and lack of pollution; the mechanisms of this technology are clarified herein. At the same time, this paper presents a comprehensive review of the impact of ultrasound on enhanced oil recovery (EOR) by removing plugs, reducing oil viscosity, and demulsifying crude oil, while highlighting the latest advancements in this field. Lastly, this paper delves into the challenges and prospects associated with the industrial implementation of power ultrasound. The objective of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview of recent advancements, serving as a valuable reference for future investigations on ultrasound-assisted EOR. Oil field results demonstrate that oil production increased by 26.5% to 100%, water cut decreased by 5% to 96%, the success rate ranged from 75% to 90%, and the effect can last for a duration of 4 h to 12 months.

1. Introduction

The production of a reservoir will gradually decrease during the development process; therefore, the development of enhanced oil recovery technologies is becoming an increasingly important global challenge [1]. Various oil recovery methods can be divided into primary, secondary, and tertiary. Primary oil recovery refers to the simple use of rock expansion, natural gas expansion, and other natural energy expansion for oil recovery. The remaining oil after primary production is difficult to exploit due to scaling and sediment deposition, oil viscosity increase, pore plugging, and other reasons, which lead to lower borehole permeability and low fluidity [2,3]. During secondary oil recovery, reservoir pressure is maintained by water drive or gas injection. The implementation of these secondary recovery methods leads to an augmentation in the ultimate recovery rate, reaching a range of 40–50% [3]. However, a significant proportion of crude oil, ranging from 60% to 67%, remains unrecovered even after implementing secondary recovery techniques [4,5,6]. The addition of steam or water to the reservoir can result in the formation of a stable emulsion with polar hydrocarbon compounds during secondary recovery [7]. The tertiary oil recovery method, also referred to as EOR, is primarily focused on the extraction of residual oil from reservoirs subsequent to primary and secondary recovery techniques. Advanced EOR techniques are purported to enhance oil extraction by up to 50% [8]. EOR technologies play an important role in the reservoir production.
Currently, EOR technologies are primarily focused on chemical and physical processes. Traditional chemical processes include the injection of polymers, surfactants, or bases into reservoirs to increase displacement fluid viscosity, thereby enhancing fluidity [9,10,11,12,13]. Although this approach has demonstrated promising outcomes in oil fields, its long-term application may lead to the contamination of oil fields and ecosystems, desertification, and a decline in oil recovery. The hydraulic fracturing technique is widely employed as the predominant physical EOR method. This approach utilizes reservoir pressure to enhance crude oil production by two to three times [14]. Nevertheless, the operation necessitates the utilization of four to eight units of heavy machinery within the well, along with packaging and wellhead equipment. All these factors contribute to costly physical EOR techniques. Therefore, improving the existing process and developing new procedures has become a research hotspot.
Over the past four decades, researchers have conducted extensive investigations into the application of ultrasound for stimulating and enhancing oil production. The diagram illustrating the ultrasonic oil recovery is presented in Figure 1 [15]. The utilization of ultrasound presents an environmentally sustainable alternative to conventional secondary processes [16]. Consequently, the disruption of physical bonds within the boundary layer between rock pores and fluid alters the rheological properties of the fluid by disintegrating intermolecular connections among viscous and macromolecules present in heavy oil. This process facilitates enhanced mobility of solid constituents (such as resins, paraffins, and asphaltenes) while also disturbing mineral deposits and promoting dehydrocarbination.
This review comprehensively elucidates the ultrasonic mechanisms employed in EOR, encompassing cavitation, coalescence, and Bjerknes force. Furthermore, a detailed analysis of the application of ultrasonics for EOR is provided with a specific focus on plug removal, oil viscosity reduction, and crude oil demulsification. Finally, an outlook on the industrialization potential of power ultrasound is discussed.

2. Ultrasonic Mechanisms

2.1. Cavitation

Acoustic cavitation refers to the formation and expansion of bubbles with sinusoidal sound pressure fluctuations [17,18]. The instability and subsequent collapse of these bubbles occur once they reach a critical size, resulting in the release of energy (Figure 2) [19].
Therefore, in order for cavitation to occur, the magnitude of negative pressure within the rarefied region must surpass the inherent cohesive forces present within the liquid. Thus, the conversion of sound into thermal energy leads to the generation of heat and boundary friction within the porous media [20]. Hence, cavitation can lead to an augmented chemical reaction in the liquid due to the occurrence of primary and secondary radical reactions (Equations (1)–(8)). Reaching a reduction in the relative molecular mass of crude oil can thus be accomplished. For instance, Kim et al. [21] conducted a comprehensive investigation on the application of cavitation for selective upgrading of heavy oil. According to their findings, cavitation was found to convert n-hexadecane into two distinct fractions: R1 fraction (<C16) and R2 fraction (>C16), with a yield of 4.46%. Cavitation has the capability to disrupt the crystal structure of wax in heavy oil and subsequently polarize asphaltene molecules, thereby reducing the overall length of branching chains [22]. In addition, the presence of high pressure can hinder the occurrence of cavitation; however, the existence of impurities and dissolved gases in the fluid can facilitate cavitation [15].
H 2 O → u s H · + · O H       ( US   =   Ultrasonic   Wave )
O 2 → u s 2 O ·
H · + O 2 → H O O ·
O · + H 2 O → 2 · OH
H · + H · → H 2
· O H + · O H → H 2 O 2
2 H O O · → H 2 O 2 + O 2
H · + H O O · → H 2 O 2

2.2. Coalescence

The phenomenon of ultrasound-induced coalescence involves the amalgamation of multiple oil droplets into a larger, more mobile drop, which transforms into a continuous stream under the influence of ultrasound [23]. The occurrence of this phenomenon is attributed to the relative kinetic energy surpassing the increase in potential energy [24]. Thus, the coalescence theories are based on the collision of non-encapsulated droplets approaching each other at a constant velocity. This process begins with the deformation of the droplet surface and ends with it achieving a spherical shape [25]. Consequently, when ultrasound is applied to oil droplets in a porous medium, expansion occurs and the oil droplets approach each other while undergoing expansion (Figure 3a). Prior to droplet contact, the adjacent drop surface undergoes flattening, resulting in the entrapment of liquid in between (Figure 3b). As the trapped liquid drains, electrostatic and van der Waals attractions become increasingly dominant (Figure 3c) until the separation distance reaches a critical threshold. Therefore, the instability leads to a rupture of the interface and subsequent merging of droplets (Figure 3d). The oil droplet undergoes coalescence and initially assumes an ellipsoidal shape; however, owing to the influence of surface tension, it eventually relaxes into a spherical configuration (Figure 3e). Consequently, the process of coalescence can expedite the gravitational phase separation within porous media, thereby enhancing the relative permeability of oil [26].

2.3. Bjerknes Force

The oscillation of bubbles within an acoustic field induces radiation pressure on adjacent cavitation bubbles, resulting in either attractive or repulsive interactions between them. The attraction or repulsion is contingent upon the positioning of the drop relative to the ultrasound field. Consequently, when the oscillations are in phase, they exhibit an attractive phase, whereas when they are out of phase, a repulsive phase is observed [27]. The Bjerknes forces are referred to as primary when they arise from an external sound field [28]. The phenomenon in which bubbles smaller or larger than the resonant size exhibit a tendency to migrate along a pressure gradient and accumulate at either the pressure node or antinodes is referred to as the primary Bjerknes force. On the other hand, the attractive or repulsive interaction between oscillating bubbles, whether in phase or out of phase with each other, is determined by the secondary Bjerknes force [29]. Hence, the Bjerknes force acting on a minute oil droplet within a propagating sound wave can be mathematically formulated as follows:
F = − V ∇ P
where V represents the volume of the oil droplet and P represents the acoustic pressure gradient on the bubble. The phenomenon of mutual attraction, acoustic cavitation, and coalescence is attributed to the secondary Bjerknes force [30]. However, Yoshida et al. [31] experimentally demonstrated a distinct separation distance between two bubbles at which the direction of secondary Bjerknes force reverses. The threshold distance, in addition, is subject to variation based on the radius of the attached bubble.

3. Application of Ultrasonic in Enhanced Oil Recovery

The main mechanisms of ultrasonic EOR can be classified as plug removal, oil viscosity reduction, and crude oil demulsification.

3.1. Plug Removal

Plug removal has perpetually posed a technical challenge in conventional oil production. The types of oil production plugs primarily encompass paraffin deposition plugs, polymer-based plugs, inorganic scaling plugs, and so on. Currently, the primary approach for removing paraffin deposition plugs involves injecting chemical agents into the reservoir. Although some progress has been made in field applications, this method is associated with drawbacks such as complex implementation, high costs, secondary pollution to the reservoir, and significant environmental damage [32,33]. In contrast, ultrasonic plugging removal technology offers advantages including strong adaptability, simplified operation procedures, cost-effectiveness, and environmental friendliness. Xu et al. [34] conducted an investigation on the impact of ultrasonic power, frequency, processing time, core initial permeability, and other parameters on the efficacy of paraffin deposition removal using ultrasound. After ultrasonic treatment for 60 min, the cores with permeabilities of 30 mD, 80 mD, and 150 mD exhibited maximum recovery rates of 29.95%, 27.38%, and 24.36%, respectively. It was observed that the greater the ultrasonic power, the more effective the descaling process becomes. The blockage caused by paraffin deposition is highly influenced by temperature, and the thermal effect becomes more pronounced with higher ultrasonic frequencies, thereby facilitating the removal of paraffin deposition blockage. However, further verification is required to determine whether this will impact the effective plugging distance of ultrasonic waves. The ultrasonic removal of paraffin deposition blockage is primarily attributed to physical stimulation, including cavitation, thermal effects, and mechanical vibration, which induce alterations in the properties of both reservoir rock and fluid. After undergoing ultrasonic treatment, the well experienced a significant increase in daily fluid volume by 1.08 m3, accompanied by a substantial rise in daily oil production from 0.61 t to 1.25 t, resulting in an impressive cumulative oil increase of 115.2 t over a valid period of 180 days. Zhou et al. [35] conducted a study on the application of ultrasonic technology for paraffin removal. They also found that temperature has great influence on removing paraffin deposition blockage. In addition, ultrasonic frequency is a crucial factor in effectively removing paraffin blockage, and it should be maintained within an optimal range rather than set excessively high. The higher the power of the transducer, the greater the efficiency of ultrasonic paraffin deposition plug formation. However, the removal efficiency of paraffin deposition after ultrasonic treatment deteriorates with the increase in core permeability. To reduce construction costs and protect the reservoir, ultrasonic treatment technology can replace chemical injection methods for removing paraffin plugs. It was worth noting that the effect of ultrasonic and chemical agent combined technology on removing paraffin deposition blockage is obviously better than that of chemical agent injection or ultrasonic treatment alone. Roberts et al. [36] conducted experiments utilizing ultrasonic technology to mitigate the impact of organic sediment and polymer on near-well formations. At a frequency of 20 kHz, an applied sound energy of approximately 1.4 kJ effectively eliminated all precipitated paraffin from the initial 6.35 cm core segment and significantly enhanced the permeability of the subsequent 5.08 cm core segment by a remarkable 100%. The primary physical mechanism appears to involve an augmented re-suspension or dispersion of paraffin, attributed to mechanical agitation induced by ultrasound. The efficacy of ultrasound in mitigating osmotic damage caused by polymers is limited. It was highlighted that the effectiveness of utilizing ultrasonics as a sole approach to alleviate polymer damage, without complementary chemical treatments, is questionable at best.
In the other experimental study conducted by Xu et al. [37], the greater the ultrasonic power, the more effective the polymer unplugging effect becomes. However, a higher ultrasonic frequency leads to faster energy attenuation and consequently results in a less desirable unplugging effect. Under experimental conditions, the recovery rate of core permeability can reach 16−20% after 60 min. For cores with permeability of 30 × 10−3, 80 × 10−3, and 150 × 10−3 μm2, the maximum permeability recovery rates of unplugging are 13%, 15%, and 29%, respectively. This is in agreement with the results of other researchers, who showed that ultrasonic treatment helps polymer removal [38]. However, Shi et al. [38] reported that ultrasonic frequency is positively correlated with the polymer cleaning effect. In fact, the intricate dynamic mechanisms underlying the cleaning action of ultrasonic waves are multifaceted. Hence, it is imperative to carefully select the appropriate ultrasonic frequency based on specific conditions. The primary mechanisms responsible for permeability damage are the elongation of polymer chains and the formation of precipitates induced by polymers. They also found that the synergistic combination of acid, oxidant, and ultrasonic treatment yields a remarkable efficacy in polymer removal. This is attributed to the synergistic effect of acid, oxidizer, and ultrasonic technology, which facilitates the degradation of high molecular weight polymers and promotes the elimination of iron ion precipitates and solids while also prolonging chemical activation time through ultrasonic waves to enhance reaction rates and improve byproduct removal.
The occurrence of near-well blockage due to asphaltene deposition is a common phenomenon encountered during the process of crude oil exploitation. Xu et al. [39] investigated the sonochemical removal of near-well plugging caused by asphaltene deposits. It was concluded that the optimal frequency and power for ultrasonic plugging removal are 20 kHz and 1000 W, respectively. This process effectively clears obstructions in the oil flow pathway and creates a favorable environment for enhancing crude oil mobility. Dehshibi et al. [40] studied the effect of ultrasonic waves on asphaltene removal. They found that the propagation of ultrasound waves not only induces asphaltene instability and eliminates deposition but also effectively reverses the deposited asphaltene particles. This imparted wave energy leads to emulsion formation on the pore walls. Salehzadeh et al. [41] investigated the introduction of ultrasound radiation employed to inhibit the generation of asphaltene deposits in an oil sample, as it has been observed that ultrasonic radiation does not effectively remove these deposits. In field, it is crucial to resuscitate a dead oil well using ultrasound though asphaltene removal. The application of ultrasound has been demonstrated in numerous studies to alleviate asphaltene-related issues during production, primarily due to its mechanism of vibration effects. A correlation can be observed between the propagation impacts caused by earthquakes and ultrasonic waves, as both induce vibration effects. Uetani et al. [42] proposed a relationship between earthquake occurrences and the mitigation of asphaltene problems in a Japanese oil field study. In their investigation, significant formation damage resulting from asphaltene deposition was observed in two wells within the field, leading to reduced production rates. This particular oil field is situated in an area prone to frequent seismic activity. Following earthquakes with a seismic intensity greater than three, improved productivity was identified in the affected wells. The prevalent circumstances within the field included severe asphaltene problems and reduced well pressure, which were mitigated by these earthquakes. The authors concluded that enhanced well productivity directly correlates with stimulation from vibrational waves generated by earthquakes. This study provides valuable insights into the potential applicability of ultrasound for resolving challenges related to asphaltene encountered in oil wells. Additionally, Brian Champion et al., through rigorous field testing and comprehensive theoretical research [43], have validated the feasibility of ultrasonic plug removal.
It is widely known that inorganic scales are one of the most important causes of formation damage. In order to address the issue of plug removal, Taheri-Shakib et al. [44] conducted a study on the utilization of ultrasonic waves for removing inorganic scale plugs (KCl) (Figure 4). The researchers discovered that the application of ultrasonic waves induced structural distortions in the crystal lattice of KCl scales, resulting in subsequent cracking and delamination. In addition, the application of ultrasonic waves resulted in an increase in the solubility of scales in water, thereby enhancing the recovery of permeability in the samples. Taheri-Shakib et al. [45] also found that the mechanical effects of ultrasonic waves result in the disintegration of NaCl crystals. Experimental studies on removing inorganic scaling and plugging using ultrasonic wave were carried out by Zhang et al. [46]. Through discussion and analysis, it can be inferred that the microdynamic mechanism of inorganic scale removal through high-power ultrasonic treatment encompasses the fragmentation of the inorganic scale body, induction of ultrasonic cavitation, generation of ultrasonic friction, and facilitation of ultrasonic peristaltic transport operation, as well as promotion of ultrasonic fracture formation and enhancement of permeability.

3.2. Oil Viscosity Reduction

Heavy crude oil and bitumen are facing challenges on several fronts including production, transportation, reservoir, and refining due to their high density and viscosity (greater than 1000 cp). Asphaltene is a heavy and complex molecule, which exhibits solubility in aromatics but insolubility in paraffin. It represents the heaviest and most polar constituents within crude oil. Asphaltenes tend to precipitate and agglomerate from crude oil. The size of asphaltene particles in oil affects the interactions between asphaltene particles, and the rheological characteristics of the system may change. To our knowledge, heavy oil viscosity grows exponentially with asphaltene content [47]. Thus, the key to crude oil viscosity reduction is preventing serious agglomeration of asphaltenes. The viscosity of heavy oil can be reduced by simultaneously heating the heavy crude and the pipeline [48,49], blending or dilution with light hydrocarbon fluids or adding a viscosity reducer [50,51].
The technique of ultrasonic cavitation is employed to enhance the reduction in crude oil viscosity by inducing the fragmentation of large molecules present in heavy oil into lighter hydrocarbon molecules. In 1981, Sokolov et al. [52] conducted experiments with respect to viscosity reduction of heavy oils with ultrasonic technology. They found that the viscosity was reduced by 20–25% with 30–60 min. Abramov et al. [53] carried out a field experiment in Tatarstan and found a viscosity reduction of 16% in 4 h and an increase in oil production of 26.5%. The observed outcomes can be ascribed to the influence of ultrasonic cavitation on the rheological characteristics of oil.
The effect of various ultrasonic irradiation time and ultrasonic power on the viscosity of heavy oil are well worth our greatest attention. Bjorndalen et al. [54] investigated the effect of exposure times on the viscosity of crude oil, asphaltene, and paraffin wax. For both asphaltene and crude oil, the viscosity decreased with an increase in ultrasound exposure time from 30 s up to 60 s, beyond which the viscosity increased at longer exposure time. For paraffin oil, there was an increase in viscosity. Similar results were reported in the literature [55]. An increase in ultrasonic exposure time could increase the temperature and cause a decreased viscosity. On the other hand, an increase in exposure time resulted in the re-orientation of molecular structures. Gao et al. [56] conducted a study of the effect of ultrasound on the viscosity of heavy crude oil from an oil field in western China. A maximum viscosity reduction of more than 80% was observed for the irradiation time of 6 min. This finding can be explained by the fact that interrupting long chains decreased heavy components (Figure 5). However, when the irradiation time reached 12 min, the viscosity increased, and exceeded the original viscosity. These results can be attributed to the volatilization of some light components at high temperatures and pressures [57,58]. However, other researchers had an opposite view. They found that the higher temperature caused by ultrasonic irradiation cannot lead to the breakdown of asphaltene molecules and other physical and chemical changes [59]. Salehzadeh et al. [41] reported that the smaller asphaltene particle size was achieved at optimum radiation time (Figure 6). After optimum radiation time, it was helpful for the formation of heavier and more complex compounds due to the combination of broken structures and free radicals. This finding is in agreement with the results of other researchers, who showed that the viscosity of light vacuum residue decreased with an increase in ultrasonic time from 10 to 70 min, but beyond which the viscosity increased [60]. Doust et al. [61] also found that a minimum fuel oil viscosity was observed for the ultrasonic irradiation time of 5 min. From the above results, it could be concluded that the oil viscosity decreased then increased with the increase in time. However, Taheri-Shakib et al. [62] found that with an increase in the ultrasonic time, the viscosity of oil also increased. These results can be attributed to the quick collapse of existing components of oil due to the inequalities between the transmitted sonic frequency and the natural frequency of the cavitation process [62]. Thus, the viscosity of oil increased. Quite the reverse, Gao et al. [63] found that viscosity of the oil sample decreases with an increase in ultrasonic irradiation time. In fact, various factors affect the viscosity of the oil sample, such as ultrasonic irradiation time [64], ultrasonic power [65], ultrasonic frequency [65], crude oil composition [65], temperature [66], water cut [66], dilute ration of oil [67], etc. Chen et al. [60] found that the influence of ultrasonic irradiation time on the viscosity of Saudi Arabia light vacuum residue is most significant. Huang et al. [64] found that the reduction rate of residual oil viscosity is significantly influenced by ultrasonic power and exposure time. The study conducted by Shi et al. [65] revealed that the impact of ultrasonic power on viscosity reduction of crude oil is the most significant, followed by reaction time and temperature. Gao et al. [67] reported that the effective parameters of viscosity reduction of heavy oil followed this order: dilute ration of oil > ultrasonic irradiation time > measuring temperature > electric power. Hamidi et al. [68] found that the relationship between ultrasonic frequency and fluid viscosity is characterized by a more intricate nature. Under uncontrolled temperature conditions, increasing the ultrasonic frequency promotes a decrease in fluid viscosity, but under controlled temperature conditions, the opposite is true, possibly due to poor fluid cavitation. Ju et al. [69] indicated that the effect of ultrasonic frequency on viscosity reduction of crude oil processing equipment on offshore platforms is not significant. Huang et al. [64] also found that the higher the viscosity of residual oil, the better the effect of ultrasonic irradiation. This is in disagreement with the results of other researchers, who showed that viscosity reduction resulting from ultrasonic irradiation is more significant for lighter oleic fluids than heavier ones [68]. Viscosity reduction is a critical concern in the development and transportation of heavy oil reservoirs. In field studies, it is necessary to activate the oil by lowering of the viscosity of the oil, making it easier to pump. The increase in oil recovery can be attributed to a decrease in viscosity caused by ultrasound. Abramova et al. [70] reported the successful implementation of an ultrasonic technique for enhanced oil recovery in two separate regions with distinct geological conditions: Western Siberia (WS) and the Samara Region (SR). This highly efficient method achieved success rates of 90%, resulting in significant increases in oil production rates, ranging from 40% to 100% across different wells. The influence of ultrasound on fluid viscosity under reservoir conditions was examined through further field tests in the Tatarstan oil field by Abramov et al. [53]. A 24 h ultrasonic treatment was conducted using an above-ground generator with an output power of 9 kW and a frequency of 19 kHz. The downhole tool, equipped with a temperature sensor, was positioned opposite the perforation zones. It was observed that the temperature remained below 65 °C throughout the treatment, allowing uninterrupted operation of the tool and resulting in an increase in daily oil production by 0.4 tons/day. Following a four-hour treatment period, there was a reduction in oil viscosity from 183 mPa·s to 154 mPa·s, corresponding to a significant decrease of approximately 16%.

3.3. Crude Oil Demulsification

The oil–water mixture generated during conventional oil recovery typically undergoes gravity settling followed by electric dehydration to separate the oil and water phases. For crude oils with a strong emulsion structure, demulsifiers are added along with various demulsification methods to achieve effective oil–water separation. However, for certain types of crude oils, traditional methods fail to accomplish efficient separation of the oil and water phases. Examples include oil-in-water emulsified crude oils, recovered sewage oils, and aged oils produced from tertiary oil recovery processes. Due to their complex chemical composition and emulsion structure, these types of crude oils pose challenges for demulsification using electrical or chemical methods in an electric dehydrator as it may disrupt the electric field leading to tripping and operational issues. Relying solely on chemical methods proves difficult in effectively breaking down the emulsion while also being costly. Ultrasonic demulsification exploits the displacement effect induced by ultrasonic waves acting on fluid media with different properties. Given that ultrasound exhibits good conductivity in both oil and water phases, this method is suitable for various types of emulsions. Furthermore, combining ultrasonic treatment with chemical demulsifiers enhances their efficiency through diffusion effects. Therefore, employing a combination of ultrasonication and chemical demulsifiers holds promising prospects for dehydrating emulsified crude oils when conventional dehydration techniques prove ineffective. The researches on crude oil demulsification using ultrasound are listed in Table 1.
Table 1. Research experiments on crude oil demulsification using ultrasound. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [71].
Table 1. Research experiments on crude oil demulsification using ultrasound. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [71].
Crude Oil DetailsIrradiation ModeFrequencyAcoustic IntensityOil ViscosityWater ContentEffectReference
Gachsaran crude oilContinuous, single frequency20 kHz0.25 W/cm319.1 mm2/s (25 °C)10–25 vol.%Standing waves[72]
Lu-Ning crude oilPulsed, single frequency10–80 kHz0.86 W/L1440 mPa s (20 °C)65 vol.%Standing waves[73]
Iranian crude oilContinuous, single frequency28 kHz65–43 W/L16.82 mm2/s (20 °C)7 vol.%Standing waves[74]
SAGD heavy oilContinuous, single frequency10–30 kHz0.5 W/cm2-30–90 vol.%Mechanical vibrations[75]
Brazilian heavy crude oilContinuous, single frequency35 kHz19.2 ± 2.0 W/dm3133.4 mm2/s (45 °C)12–50 vol.%Mechanical vibrations[76]
Lu-Ning crude oilContinuous, single frequency10 kHz0.38 W/cm21390 mPa s
(20 °C)		0.29 vol.%Standing wave[77]
Luo et al. [78] conducted a study of the effect of ultrasonic standing waves (USWs) on the separating water-in-oil (W/O). The separation process of W/O emulsions using USWs is represented in Figure 7. They found that ultrasonic treatment was an efficient demulsification method. The oil–water properties also have significant influence on ultrasonic separation. When the oil viscosity and oil–water interfacial tension increase, the demulsification efficiency of W/O emulsions decrease. Check [74] came up with the idea of dehydration and desalting of heavy crude oil using the two periods of ultrasonication. With the ultrasonic irradiation input powers at 75 W for primary irradiation and 50 W for secondary irradiation, dehydration rate of 96% was observed. The results indicated that ultrasonication has an important influence on the dehydration and desalting of crude oil. Micrographs demonstrated a 40% increase in water drop size after each step of the process (Figure 8). Li and Fogler [79,80] proposed a two-stage ultrasound emulsification mechanism (Figure 9). Antes et al. [76] conducted experiments in respect to demulsification of crude oil using low frequency ultrasound without using chemical demulsifiers. A maximum demulsification efficiency of 65% was observed for the emulsion with water content of 50% and droplet size distribution of 10 μm. In addition, the demulsification efficiencies were found to be higher at relatively lower temperatures (45 °C), which is of significant importance considering that industrial demulsification processes typically operate at temperatures exceeding 60 °C, requiring substantial energy input. Although the exact mechanism underlying the demulsification process remains elusive, it is plausible to propose that demulsification is intricately linked to the turbulence induced by cavitation in the medium. Subsequently, ultrasound can enhance the shocks of water drops increasing coalescence. Antes et al. [81] investigated the effect of ultrasound frequency (25, 35, 45, 130, 582, 862, and 1146 kHz) on the demulsification of crude oil emulsions. It could be seen the ultrasound frequency had a considerable impact on the crude oil demulsification at lower frequency (25–45 kHz) but no obvious influence was found with crude oil demulsification at higher frequency (above 45 kHz). A maximum demulsification efficiency of 65% was observed for the ultrasound frequency of 45 kHz and treatment time of 15 min. At frequencies up to 45 kHz, the indirect application of ultrasound results in instability of the W/O emulsion. A decrease in ultrasound frequency is expected to correspond with an increase in mechanical effect of acoustic cavitation in aqueous systems.
So far, many field trials on the application of ultrasound have been reported. Field tests were conducted on the wells of Samotlor oil field, using ultrasound-assisted oil well configuration that enables real-time collection of near-wellbore data. The results showed that after sonochemical treatment of the near-wellbore area, there was an average increase in the daily production rate of oil wells by 5.2 tons per day, an average increase in well productivity index by 107%, and an average decrease in water cut of the well fluid by 28% [82]. Mullakaev et al. [82] conducted a study on the impact of ultrasonication on oil output from 27 producing wells, revealing a significant increase in oil production rate by 70–80%, a rise of 40% in well productivity index, and an 8.2% reduction in water cut, with a success rate ranging between 75–85%. The observed effects lasted for a duration of 5–12 months. Similarly, Abramov et al. [83] reported that ultrasound treatment led to a notable improvement in productivity factor by 39% and reduced water cut by 5%.
Energies 17 03517 g009
Figure 9. Two-stage ultrasound emulsification: droplet formation and break-up. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [84].
Figure 9. Two-stage ultrasound emulsification: droplet formation and break-up. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [84].
Energies 17 03517 g009

4. Outlook

The ultrasonic oil production technology in China has achieved significant advancements in equipment development, mechanism research, and industrial application. However, there is still ample room for further development. The future development directions of ultrasonic oil production technique in China are as follows:
(1)
Currently, various optimization studies on the mechanism of ultrasonic oil production have only achieved significant progress in laboratory settings and have yet to be widely applied in actual field production. Due to the inability of laboratory experiments to fully reflect real formation environments, it is imperative that practical applications are strengthened in future research.
(2)
The study of ultrasonic oil production theory has been continuously conducted. However, to date, no definitive conclusions have been reached regarding the mechanism of ultrasonic oil production due to its multidisciplinary nature and the complexity of the oil layer structure.
(3)
At present, ultrasonic oil recovery technology primarily finds application in low-permeability and heavy oil reservoirs. In the future, this technology holds potential for being extended to the exploitation of shale gas and coalbed methane, representing a promising direction for development.

5. Conclusions

In recent years, the petroleum industry has faced significant challenges in terms of low oil recovery efficiency, high energy consumption, and environmental pollution, which have hindered its sustainable development. Power ultrasound, as an emerging green technology, holds immense potential for both upstream and downstream applications in the petroleum industry. This paper reviews the recent development of ultrasonic enhanced oil recovery though plug removal, oil viscosity reduction, and crude oil demulsification. Different ultrasonic powers/frequencies are employed to different oil reservoir. This review paper can serve as a valuable reference for future studies on ultrasound-assisted enhanced oil recovery processes.

Author Contributions

H.Z. (Huan Zhang): data curation, investigation, and writing—original draft; C.G.: validation, conceptualization, and supervision; H.Z. (Hongli Zhang): data curation, investigation, and formal analysis; N.S.: investigation, methodology, and data curation; Q.C.: project administration and funding acquisition. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was carried out with the financial support of the Shaanxi Province City Linkage Key Plan Project (Grant No. 2022GDTSLD69), the Key Research and Development Project of Weinan City (Grant No. 2022ZDYFJH-80), the Shaanxi Province Education Department (Grant No. 23JK0443), and the Talent Project of Weinan Normal University (Grant No. 2022RC14).

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Li, Q.C.; Liu, J.; Wang, S.M.; Guo, Y.; Han, X.Y.; Li, Q.; Cheng, Y.F.; Dong, Z.; Li, X.Z.; Zhang, X.D. Numerical insights into factors affecting collapse behavior of horizontal wellbore in clayey silt hydrate-bearing sediments and the accompanying control strategy. Ocean. Eng. 2024, 297, 117029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Höök, M.; Kurland, S.D.; Johansson, S.; Tang, X. Decline and depletion rates of oil production: A comprehensive investigation. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 2014, 372, 20120448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Kjärstad, J.; Johnsson, F. Resources and future supply of oil. Energ. Policy 2009, 37, 441–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Ayirala, S.; Yousef, A. A state-of-the-art review to develop injection-water-chemistry requirement guidelines for ior/eor projects. SPE Prod. Oper. 2015, 30, 26–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Pangu, G.D.; Feke, D.L. Kinetics of ultrasonically induced coalescence within oil/water emulsions: Modeling and experimental studies. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2009, 64, 1445–1454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Godec, M.; Kuuskraa, V.; Van Leeuwen, T.; Melzer, L.S.; Wildgust, N. CO2 storage in depleted oil fields: The worldwide potential for carbon dioxide enhanced oil recovery. Energy Procedia 2011, 4, 2162–2169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Lim, J.S.; Wong, S.F.; Law, M.C.; Samyudia, Y.; Dol, S.S. A review on the effects of emulsions on flow behaviours and common factors affecting the stability of emulsions. J. Appl. Sci. 2015, 15, 167–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Mullakaev, M.S.; Abramov, V.O.; Abramova, A.V. Development of ultrasonic equipment and technology for well stimulation and enhanced oil recovery. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 2015, 125, 201–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Gbadamosi, A.O.; Junin, R.; Manan, M.A.; Agi, A.; Oseh, J.O.; Usman, J. Synergistic application of aluminium oxide nanoparticles and oilfield polyacrylamide for enhanced oil recovery. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 2019, 182, 106345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Augustine, A.; Radzuan, J.; Afeez, G. Mechanism governing nanoparticle flow behaviour in porous media: Insight for enhanced oil recovery applications. Int. Nano Lett. 2018, 8, 49–77. [Google Scholar]
  11. Gbadamosi, A.O.; Junin, R.; Manan, M.A.; Agi, A.; Yusuff, A.S. An overview of chemical enhanced oil recovery: Recent advances and prospects. Int. Nano Lett. 2019, 9, 171–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Gbadamosi, A.O.; Junin, R.; Manan, M.A.; Agi, A.; Oseh, J.O.; Usman, J. Effect of aluminium oxide nanoparticles on oilfield polyacrylamide: Rheology, interfacial tension, wettability and oil displacement studies. J. Mol. Liq. 2019, 296, 111863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Li, Q.; Wang, Y.L.; Wang, F.L.; Wu, J.P.; Tahir, M.U.; Li, Q.C.; Yuan, L.; Liu, Z.H. Effect of thickener and reservoir parameters on the filtration property of CO2 fracturing fluid. Energ. Source Part A 2020, 42, 1705–1715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Wang, Z.; Xu, Y.; Suman, B. Research status and development trend of ultrasonic oil production technique in china. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2015, 26, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Adeyemi, I.; Meribout, M.; Khezzar, L. Recent developments, challenges, and prospects of ultrasound-assisted oil technologies. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2022, 82, 105902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Arabzadeh, H.; Amani, M. Application of a novel ultrasonic technology to improve oil recovery with an environmental viewpoint. J. Pet. Environ. Biotechnol. 2017, 8, 1000323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Rozina, E.Y. A Cavitational regime of a sonocapillary effect. Int. J. Fluid Mech. Res. 2006, 33, 473–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Baimukhametov, G.F.; Kayumov, A.A.; Dengaev, A.V.; Maksimenko, A.F.; Marakov, D.A.; Shishulin, V.A.; Drozdov, I.M.; Samuylova, L.V.; Getalov, A.A.; Aliev, F.A.; et al. Unveiling the potential of cavitation erosion-induced heavy crude oil upgrading. Fluids 2023, 8, 274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Abdurahman, M.H.; Abdullah, A.Z. Mechanism and reaction kinetic of hybrid ozonation-ultrasonication treatment for intensified degradation of emerging organic contaminants in water: A critical review. Chem. Eng. Process. Process Intensif. 2020, 154, 108047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Agi, A.; Junin, R.; Syamsul, M.F.; Chong, A.S.; Gbadamosi, A. Intermittent and short duration ultrasound in a simulated porous medium. Petroleum 2019, 5, 42–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Kim, B.; Won, J.; Duran, J.A.; Park, L.C.; Park, S.S. Investigation of sonochemical treatment of heavy hydrocarbon by ultrasound-assisted cavitation. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2020, 68, 105216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Cui, J.; Zhang, Z.; Liu, X.; Liu, L.; Peng, J. Studies on viscosity reduction and structural change of crude oil treated with acoustic cavitation. Fuel 2020, 263, 116638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Agi, A.; Junin, R.; Abdullah, M.O.; Jaafar, M.Z.; Arsad, A.; Sulaiman, W.R.W.; Norddin, M.N.A.M.; Abdurrahman, M.; Abbas, A.; Gbadamosi, A.; et al. Application of polymeric nanofluid in enhancing oil recovery at reservoir condition. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 2020, 194, 107476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Kok, J.B.W. Collision dynamics of bubble pairs moving through a perfect liquid. Appl. Sci. Res. 1993, 50, 169–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Postema, M.; Marmottant, P.; Lancée, C.T.; Hilgenfeldt, S.; de Jong, N. Ultrasound-induced microbubble coalescence. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 2004, 30, 1337–1344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Agi, A.; Junin, R.; Jaafar, M.Z.; Sidek, M.A.; Yakasai, F.; Gbadamosi, A.; Oseh, J. Laboratory evaluation to field application of ultrasound: A state-of-the-art review on the effect of ultrasonication on enhanced oil recovery mechanisms. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 2022, 110, 100–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Naderi, K.; Babadagli, T. Influence of intensity and frequency of ultrasonic waves on capillary interaction and oil recovery from different rock types. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2010, 17, 500–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Lauterborn, W.; Bolle, H. Experimental investigations of cavitation-bubble collapse in the neighbourhood of a solid boundary. J. Fluid Mech. 1975, 72, 391–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Tamaddoni, H.A.; Roberts, W.W.; Hall, T.L. Enhanced shockwave lithotripsy with active cavitation mitigation. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2019, 146, 3275–3282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Zhang, Y.; Li, S. The secondary bjerknes force between two gas bubbles under dual-frequency acoustic excitation. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2016, 29, 129–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Yoshida, K.; Fujikawa, T.; Watanabe, Y. Experimental investigation on reversal of secondary bjerknes force between two bubbles in ultrasonic standing wave. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2011, 130, 135–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Mei, H.Y.; Zhang, M.L.; Sun, L.T.; Sun, L.; Guo, P. Effect of pressure on the oil and gas system of paraffine position temperature. J. Southwest Pet. Inst. 2001, 23, 9–11. [Google Scholar]
  33. Yang, F.; Li, Z. Effect of wax deposition on the porosity and permeability of reservoir. Nat. Gas Geosci. 2006, 17, 848–850. [Google Scholar]
  34. Xu, H.; Pu, C.; Zhao, S.; Li, Y.; Shen, H. Experimental study and application of high power ultrasonic treatment for removal of near wellbore paraffin precipitation damage. J. Southwest Pet. Univ. 2011, 33, 146–151. [Google Scholar]
  35. Zhou, L.; Wang, Z. A comparison study on the removal of paraffin wax deposition plug by ultrasound treatment, chemical demulsifier and combination of ultrasound and chemical demulsifier. Petrol. Sci. Technol. 2020, 38, 690–697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Roberts, P.M.; Adinathan, V.; Sharma, M.M. Ultrasonic removal of organic deposits and polymer-induced formation damage. SPE Drill. Completion 2000, 15, 19–24. [Google Scholar]
  37. Xu, H.; Pu, C.; Li, Y. Experimental study on high power ultrasonic treatment for removal of near wellbore polymer plugging. Pet. Geol. Recovery Effic. 2011, 18, 93–96. [Google Scholar]
  38. Shi, X.; Xu, H.; Yang, L. Removal of formation damage induced by drilling and completion fluids with combination of ultrasonic and chemical technology. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2017, 37, 471–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Xu, X.; Bao, T. Research on the removal of near-well blockage caused by asphaltene deposition using sonochemical method. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2020, 64, 104918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Dehshibi, R.R.; Mohebbi, A.; Riazi, M.; Niakousari, M. Experimental investigation on the effect of ultrasonic waves on reducing asphaltene deposition and improving oil recovery under temperature control. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2018, 45, 204–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Salehzadeh, M.; Akherati, A.; Ameli, F.; Dabir, B. Experimental study of ultrasonic radiation on growth kinetic of asphaltene aggregation and deposition. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 2016, 94, 2202–2209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Uetani, T.; Matsuoka, T.; Honda, H. Removal of Plugged Asphaltene in a Reservoir by Earthquakes. In SPE International Symposium and Exhibition on Formation Damage Control; SPE: Singapore, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  43. Champion, B.; Bas, F.; Nitters, G. The application of high-power sound waves for Wellbore cleaning. SPE Prod. Facil. 2004, 19, 113–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Taheri-Shakib, J.; Naderi, H.; Salimidelshad, Y.; Kazemzadeh, E.; Shekarifard, A. Application of ultrasonic as a novel technology for removal of inorganic scales (kcl) in hydrocarbon reservoirs: An experimental approach. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2018, 40, 249–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Taheri-Shakib, J.; Naderi, H.; Salimidelshad, Y.; Teymouri, A.; Shekarifard, A. Using ultrasonic as a new approach for elimination of inorganic scales (nacl): An experimental study. J. Pet. Explor. Prod. Technol. 2018, 8, 553–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Zhang, X.; Zang, C.; Ma, H.; Wang, Z. Study on removing calcium carbonate plug from near wellbore by high-power ultrasonic treatment. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2020, 62, 104515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Ghanavati, M.; Shojaei, M.J.; Ahmad, R.S.A. Effects of asphaltene content and temperature on viscosity of iranian heavy crude oil: Experimental and modeling study. Energ. Fuel. 2013, 27, 7217–7232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Greaves, M.; Xia, T. Downhole upgrading of wolf lake oil using thai/capri processes-tracer tests. Prepr. Pap. Am. Chem. Soc. Div. Fuel Chem. 2004, 49, 69–72. [Google Scholar]
  49. Hart, A.; Shah, A.; Leeke, G.; Greaves, M.; Wood, J. Optimization of the capri process for heavy oil upgrading: Effect of hydrogen and guard bed. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2013, 52, 15394–15406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Langevin, D.; Poteau, S.; Hénaut, I.; Argillier, J.F. Crude oil emulsion properties and their application to heavy oil transportation. Oil Gas Sci. Technol. 2004, 59, 511–521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Al-Roomi, Y.; George, R.; Elgibaly, A.; Elkamel, A. Use of a novel surfactant for improving the transportability/transportation of heavy/viscous crude oils. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 2004, 42, 235–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Sokolov, A.V.; Simkin, E.M. Study of Influence of Acoustic Treatment on Theological Properties of Some Oils; All-Union Research Institute of Nuclear Geophysics and Geochemistry: Moscow, Russia, 1981. [Google Scholar]
  53. Abramov, V.O.; Abramova, A.V.; Bayazitov, V.M.; Mullakaev, M.S.; Marnosov, A.V.; Ildiyakov, A.V. Acoustic and sonochemical methods for altering the viscosity of oil during recovery and pipeline transportation. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2017, 35, 389–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Bjorndalen, N.; Islam, M.R. The effect of microwave and ultrasonic irradiation on crude oil during production with a horizontal well. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 2004, 43, 139–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Chakma, A.; Islam, M.R.; Berruti, F. Asphaltene-Viscosity relationship of processed and unprocessed bitumen. In Asphaltene Particles in Fossil Fuel Exploration, Recovery, Refining, and Production Processes; Plenum: New York, NY, USA, 1994; pp. 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  56. Gao, J.; Li, C.; Xu, D.; Wu, P.; Lin, W.; Wang, X. The mechanism of ultrasonic irradiation effect on viscosity variations of heavy crude oil. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2021, 81, 105842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Gunal, O.G.; Islam, M.R. Alteration of asphaltic crude oil rheology with electromagnetic and ultrasonic irradiation. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 2000, 26, 263–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Shedid, S.A. An ultrasonic irradiation technique for treatment of asphaltene deposition. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 2004, 42, 57–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Mousavi, S.M.; Ramazani, A.; Najafi, I.; Davachi, S.M. Effect of ultrasonic irradiation on rheological properties of asphaltenic crude oils. Petrol. Sci. 2012, 9, 82–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Chen, J.; Sun, Y.; Zhang, Q.; Zhao, L.; Zhou, Q. Impact of ultrasonic treatment on variations of vacuum residual viscosity. Pet. Refin. Eng. 2015, 2, 28–31. [Google Scholar]
  61. Doust, A.M.; Rahimi, M.; Feyzi, M. Effects of solvent addition and ultrasound waves on viscosity reduction of residue fuel oil. Chem. Eng. Process. Process Intensif. 2015, 95, 353–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Taheri-Shakib, J.; Shekarifard, A.; Naderi, H. Analysis of the asphaltene properties of heavy crude oil under ultrasonic and microwave irradiation. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrol. 2018, 129, 171–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Gao, J.; Shen, X.; Mo, X.; Wu, P.; Li, C.; Lin, W.; Wang, X. Study on the real-time variation laws and mechanism of oil sample viscosity during ultrasonic irradiation. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2023, 98, 106460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Huang, X.; Zhou, C.; Suo, Q.; Zhang, L.; Wang, S. Experimental study on viscosity reduction for residual oil by ultrasonic. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2018, 41, 661–669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Shi, C.; Yang, W.; Chen, J.; Sun, X.; Chen, W.; An, H.; Duo, Y.; Pei, M. Application and mechanism of ultrasonic static mixer in heavy oil viscosity reduction. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2017, 37, 648–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Qiang, H. Experimental studies on viscosity reduction of heavy crude oil by ultrasonic irradiation. Acoust. Phys. 2020, 66, 495–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Gao, J.; Xu, D.; Wang, X.; Zhu, C. Orthogonal experiments of the heavy oil viscosity reduction by using ultrasonic wave. Petrochem. Technol. 2021, 50, 313–318. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  68. Hamidi, H.; Mohammadian, E.; Junin, R.; Rafati, R.; Azdarpour, A.; Junid, M.; Savory, R.M. The effect of ultrasonic waves on oil viscosity. Petrol. Sci. Technol. 2014, 32, 2387–2395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Ju, P.; Liu, B.; Yang, S. Research on ultrasonic viscosity reduction characteristics of crude oil processing equipment on offshore platforms. Energy Chem. Ind. 2023, 44, 43–46. [Google Scholar]
  70. Pashin, D.; Bayazitov, V.; Abramov, V.; Gerasin, A.; Abramova, A. Ultrasonic technology for enhanced oil recovery. Engineering 2014, 6, 177–184. [Google Scholar]
  71. Luo, X.M.; Gong, H.Y.; He, Z.L.; Zhang, P.; He, L.M. Recent advances in applications of power ultrasound for petroleum industry. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2021, 70, 105337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Ali, K.; Ali, S.; Payam, P.; Mohammad, R.R.; Mohammad, M.N. Experimental and theoretical study of crude oil pretreatment using low-frequency ultrasonic waves. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2018, 48, 383–395. [Google Scholar]
  73. Xie, W.; Li, R.; Lu, X. Pulsed ultrasound assisted dehydration of waste oil. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2015, 26, 136–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Check, G.R. Two-stage ultrasonic irradiation for dehydration and desalting of crude oil: A novel method. Chem. Eng. Process. Process Intensif. 2014, 81, 72–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Wang, Z.; Gu, S.; Zhou, L. Research on the static experiment of super heavy crude oil demulsification and dehydration using ultrasonic wave and audible sound wave at high temperatures. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2018, 40, 1014–1020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Antes, F.G.; Diehl, L.O.; Pereira, J.S.F.; Guimar Es, R.C.L.; Guarnieri, R.A.; Ferreira, B.M.S.; Dressler, V.L.; Flores, E.M.M. Feasibility of low frequency ultrasound for water removal from crude oil emulsions. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2015, 25, 70–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Ye, G.; Lu, X.; Han, P.; Peng, F.; Wang, Y.; Shen, X. Application of ultrasound on crude oil pretreatment. Chem. Eng. Process. Process Intensif. 2008, 47, 2346–2350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Luo, X.; Gong, H.; Cao, J.; Yin, H.; Yan, Y.; He, L. Enhanced separation of water-in-oil emulsions using ultrasonic standing waves. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2019, 203, 285–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Li, M.K.; Fogler, H.S. Acoustic emulsification. Part 1. The instability of the oil-water interface to form the initial droplets. J. Fluid Mech. 1978, 88, 499–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Li, M.K.; Fogler, H.S. Acoustic emulsification. Part 2. Breakup of the large primary oil droplets in a water medium. J. Fluid Mech. 1978, 88, 513–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Antes, F.G.; Diehl, L.O.; Pereira, J.S.F.; Guimarães, R.C.L.; Flores, E.M.M. Effect of ultrasonic frequency on separation of water from heavy crude oil emulsion using ultrasonic baths. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2017, 35, 541–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Mullakaev, M.S.; Abramov, V.O.; Abramova, A.V. Ultrasonic automated oil well complex and technology for enhancing marginal well productivity and heavy oil recovery. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 2017, 159, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Abramov, V.O.; Abramova, A.V.; Bayazitov, V.M.; Altunina, L.K.; Gerasin, A.S.; Pashin, D.M.; Mason, T.J. Sonochemical approaches to enhanced oil recovery. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2015, 25, 76–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Sivakumar, M.; Tang, S.Y.; Tan, K.W. Cavitation technology-a greener processing technique for the generation of pharmaceutical nanoemulsions. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2014, 21, 2069–2083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Energies 17 03517 g001
Figure 1. Diagram of ultrasonic oil recovery. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [15].
Figure 1. Diagram of ultrasonic oil recovery. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [15].
Energies 17 03517 g001
Energies 17 03517 g002
Figure 2. (a) Cavitation bubble formation and (b) subsequent asymmetric bubble collapse. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [19].
Figure 2. (a) Cavitation bubble formation and (b) subsequent asymmetric bubble collapse. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [19].
Energies 17 03517 g002
Energies 17 03517 g003
Figure 3. Schematic illustration of the stages in coalescence mechanism. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [25].
Figure 3. Schematic illustration of the stages in coalescence mechanism. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [25].
Energies 17 03517 g003
Energies 17 03517 g004
Figure 4. Effect of water injection and ultrasonic wave radiation on KCl deposition. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [44].
Figure 4. Effect of water injection and ultrasonic wave radiation on KCl deposition. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [44].
Energies 17 03517 g004
Energies 17 03517 g005
Figure 5. FTIR spectra of different heavy oil samples; (a) each sample (the red, green, blue curve represent heavy oil, heavy oil with ultrasonic irradiation for 6 mins and 12 mins, respectively); (b) compares the data across the three groups. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [56].
Figure 5. FTIR spectra of different heavy oil samples; (a) each sample (the red, green, blue curve represent heavy oil, heavy oil with ultrasonic irradiation for 6 mins and 12 mins, respectively); (b) compares the data across the three groups. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [56].
Energies 17 03517 g005
Energies 17 03517 g006
Figure 6. Different exposure times of ultrasonic radiation under power of 40 W and frequency of 20 kHz: ultrasonic for (a) 0 s; (b) 150 s; (c) 300 s; (d) 450 s; (e) 600 s. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [41].
Figure 6. Different exposure times of ultrasonic radiation under power of 40 W and frequency of 20 kHz: ultrasonic for (a) 0 s; (b) 150 s; (c) 300 s; (d) 450 s; (e) 600 s. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [41].
Energies 17 03517 g006
Energies 17 03517 g007
Figure 7. Schematic of the separation process of W/O emulsions using USWs. (a) Applied vertical irradiation; (b) applied horizontal irradiation. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [78].
Figure 7. Schematic of the separation process of W/O emulsions using USWs. (a) Applied vertical irradiation; (b) applied horizontal irradiation. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [78].
Energies 17 03517 g007
Energies 17 03517 g008
Figure 8. Size and distribution of water drops in crude oil emulsion; (a) before using optimized methodology; (b) after irradiation under condition of input power of 75 W and time of 45 s; (c) after first settling time of 5 min; (d) after second irradiation under condition of input power of 50 W and time of 45 s; (e) after second settling time of 5 min. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [74].
Figure 8. Size and distribution of water drops in crude oil emulsion; (a) before using optimized methodology; (b) after irradiation under condition of input power of 75 W and time of 45 s; (c) after first settling time of 5 min; (d) after second irradiation under condition of input power of 50 W and time of 45 s; (e) after second settling time of 5 min. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [74].
Energies 17 03517 g008
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhang, H.; Gao, C.; Zhang, H.; Song, N.; Cao, Q. Revisiting the Application of Ultrasonic Technology for Enhanced Oil Recovery: Mechanisms and Recent Advancements. Energies 2024, 17, 3517. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17143517

AMA Style

Zhang H, Gao C, Zhang H, Song N, Cao Q. Revisiting the Application of Ultrasonic Technology for Enhanced Oil Recovery: Mechanisms and Recent Advancements. Energies. 2024; 17(14):3517. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17143517

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhang, Huan, Chunyang Gao, Hongli Zhang, Naijian Song, and Qiang Cao. 2024. "Revisiting the Application of Ultrasonic Technology for Enhanced Oil Recovery: Mechanisms and Recent Advancements" Energies 17, no. 14: 3517. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17143517

APA Style

Zhang, H., Gao, C., Zhang, H., Song, N., & Cao, Q. (2024). Revisiting the Application of Ultrasonic Technology for Enhanced Oil Recovery: Mechanisms and Recent Advancements. Energies, 17(14), 3517. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17143517

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop