↓ Skip to main content

Control of Microbial Sulfide Production with Biocides and Nitrate in Oil Reservoir Simulating Bioreactors

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Control of Microbial Sulfide Production with Biocides and Nitrate in Oil Reservoir Simulating Bioreactors
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, December 2015
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2015.01387
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yuan Xue, Gerrit Voordouw

Abstract

Oil reservoir souring by the microbial reduction of sulfate to sulfide is unwanted, because it enhances corrosion of metal infrastructure used for oil production and processing. Reservoir souring can be prevented or remediated by the injection of nitrate or biocides, although injection of biocides into reservoirs is not commonly done. Whether combined application of these agents may give synergistic reservoir souring control is unknown. In order to address this we have used up-flow sand-packed bioreactors injected with 2 mM sulfate and volatile fatty acids (VFA, 3 mM each of acetate, propionate and butyrate) at a flow rate of 3 or 6 pore volumes (PV) per day. Pulsed injection of the biocides glutaraldehyde (Glut), benzalkonium chloride (BAC) and cocodiamine was used to control souring. Souring control was determined as the recovery time (RT) needed to re-establish an aqueous sulfide concentration of 0.8-1 mM (of the 1.7-2 mM before the pulse). Pulses were either for a long time (120 h) at low concentration (long-low) or for a short time (1 h) at high concentration (short-high). The short-high strategy gave better souring control with Glut, whereas the long-low strategy was better with cocodiamine. Continuous injection of 2 mM nitrate alone was not effective, because 3 mM VFA can fully reduce both 2 mM nitrate to nitrite and N2 and, subsequently, 2 mM sulfate to sulfide. No synergy was observed for short-high pulsed biocides and continuously injected nitrate. However, use of continuous nitrate and long-low pulsed biocide gave synergistic souring control with BAC and Glut, as indicated by increased RTs in the presence, as compared to the absence of nitrate. Increased production of nitrite, which increases the effectiveness of souring control by biocides, is the most likely cause for this synergy.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 66 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 21%
Researcher 9 13%
Student > Master 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 15 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 12%
Environmental Science 7 10%
Engineering 6 9%
Unspecified 3 4%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 21 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 March 2019.
All research outputs
#7,224,641
of 22,834,308 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#7,670
of 24,813 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,377
of 388,741 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#143
of 400 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,834,308 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,813 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 388,741 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 400 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.