See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/321932162

A Review of Wax-Formation/Mitigation Technologies in the Petroleum

Industry

Article  in  SPE production & operations · December 2017

DOI: 10.2118/189447-PA

CITATIONS READS

2 802

3 authors, including:

Tathagata Acharya
California State University, Bakersfield
12 PUBLICATIONS   23 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Flow Assurance and Upstream Petroleum Engineering View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Tathagata Acharya on 01 March 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 PO189447 DOI: 10.2118/189447-PA Date: 15-December-17 Stage: Page: 1 Total Pages: 10

A Review of Wax-Formation/Mitigation
Technologies in the Petroleum Industry
Meagan White, Kelly Pierce, and Tathagata Acharya, California State University, Bakersfield

Summary
Wax or paraffin formation in subsea pipelines is a major problem in the upstream petroleum industry, accounting for tremendous eco-
nomic losses. Researchers have reported that approximately 85% of the world’s oils encounter problems from wax formation (Thota
and Onyeanuna 2016). In this manuscript, the authors briefly discuss the mechanism of wax formation in pipelines. Next, a review of
various wax-mitigation technologies is provided. The review includes citations of various thermal, chemical, mechanical, biological,
and other innovative methods reported by previous researchers and used in the industry.

Introduction
Flow assurance is a relatively newer term used in the oil and gas industry that refers to the flow of hydrocarbons from the reservoir to
the onshore receiving facilities. Flow assurance is especially significant in the subsea oil and gas industry, which involves deepwater
drilling. Hydrocarbons are obtained from subsea wells and are transferred to onshore facilities through a network of flowlines, subsea
manifolds, platforms, and trunkline. Fig. 1 shows a schematic of a subsea network.

Trunkline to onshore

Platform

Sea

Flowline

Subsea manifold

Well 1 Seabed Well 2

Fig. 1—Schematic of a subsea oil and gas network.

At large depths, high pressures and temperatures are encountered and the flow-assurance technologies aim at reducing the pressure
drop between the reservoir and the onshore facilities. The pressure drop across a well transporting the hydrocarbons is a combination of
the following two factors.
The first factor is difference in pressure heads, as shown by
ðh
PReservoir  PWell ¼ g qðyÞdy; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð1Þ
0

where PReservoir is the reservoir pressure, PWell is the well outlet pressure, g is the acceleration caused by gravity, and q is the density of
hydrocarbon as a function of well depth.
The second factor is the frictional pressure drop in the well as shown by
L qV 2
PReservoir  PWell ¼ f ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð2Þ
D 2
where f is the friction factor, L is the measured depth of the well, D is the diameter of the well, q is the density of hydrocarbons, and V
is the flow velocity.
Pressure drops through wells and subsea flowlines are influenced by several factors:
1. Hydrocarbon composition in wells. Hydrocarbons contained within wells are in a multiphase state. Hydrocarbons in liquid form
have larger density than the hydrocarbons in gaseous form. As given by Eqs. 1 and 2, pressure drop across wells is directly pro-
portional to the density of hydrocarbons, and therefore wells with more liquids will give rise to larger pressure drops.
2. Flow velocity in wells. As shown by Eq. 2, pressure drop varies as a square of flow velocity. Therefore, with increasing flow ve-
locity, the pressure drop across a well will increase rapidly.

Copyright V
C 2017 Society of Petroleum Engineers

Original SPE manuscript received for review 7 March 2017. Revised manuscript received for review 20 August 2017. Paper (SPE 189447) peer approved 7 September 2017.

2017 SPE Production & Operations 1

ID: jaganm Time: 18:31 I Path: S:/PO##/Vol00000/170051/Comp/APPFile/SA-PO##170051

 PO189447 DOI: 10.2118/189447-PA Date: 15-December-17 Stage: Page: 2 Total Pages: 10

3. Effect of temperature on hydrocarbons. Hydrocarbon compositions that predominantly contain gases are highly influenced by
temperatures. With increase in temperature, the gas velocities increase, and as shown by Eq. 2, the pressure drop increases across
the well.
4. Measured depth (MD) of wells. As shown by Eq. 2, the pressure drop through a well increases with increasing MD.
5. Friction in wells. Eq. 2 shows that the pressure drop across a well increases with increasing friction factor.
6. Gravity forces. Eq. 1 shows that the pressure drop across a well increases with increasing head, and therefore the gravity forces
are extremely significant.
7. Bathymetry. Pressure drop across flowlines is highly influenced by flowline bathymetry. Pipelines with a greater number of bends
caused by bathymetry experience larger pressure drops.
8. Valves and process modules. Valves and process modules in flowlines give rise to larger pressure drops.
9. Formation of solid deposits in pipelines. Formation of solid deposits in pipelines in the form of hydrates, asphaltene, and wax
chokes the pipelines and creates large pressure drops across them.

Wax Formation in Pipelines

Wax formation and deposition in subsea crude-oil pipelines are major flow-assurance problems that cause heavy losses to the industry.
Severe wax deposition in Lasmo Field, UK, resulted in the abandonment of the entire field, and losses in the region of USD 100 million
were incurred (Singh et al. 2000; Nguyen et al. 2001). Waxes are classified as microcrystalline and macrocrystalline waxes (Dorset
2000; Elsharkawy et al. 2000; Kumar et al. 2004). Macrocrystalline or n-paraffin waxes are the principal constituents, which have elon-
gated structures such as rods, plates, and needles (del Carmen Garcia et al. 1998; Kané et al. 2002). These typically consist of 20 or
more carbon atoms, but waxes containing up to 80 carbon atoms have been reported (Woo et al. 1984). Microcrystalline waxes are com-
posed of iso-paraffin or branched-chain paraffins and naphthenes (Misra et al. 1995; Bacon et al. 2010). These have smaller rounded
structures (Bacon et al. 2010). Macrocrystalline waxes constitute approximately 80 to 90% of the total wax content, while the rest are
microcrystalline waxes such as branched chain paraffins and naphthenes (Rehan et al. 2016). The mitigation technologies discussed in
the present manuscript relate predominantly to macrocrystalline waxes forming in subsea pipelines.
Wax or paraffin tends to precipitate when the temperature of the crude oil falls below the wax-appearance temperature (WAT) or
cloud point, which is typically between 95 and 130 F (Coberly 1942). When crude oil flows from the wellbore, the pressure drops cause
solution gases to liberate. Thus, the temperature drops, the viscosity increases, and the hydrocarbon composition changes. As the tem-
perature reduces to WAT, wax molecules form clusters of chains. However, the crystals grow only when the nuclei reach a critical size,
attain stability, and facilitate further attachment.
Wax deposition in pipelines is largely influenced by the composition of oil. Wax or saturate composition in oil can be determined
through saturate/aromatic/resin/asphaltene (SARA) analysis. The analysis involves dividing a sample of crude oil into the four fractions
(saturate, aromatic, resin, and asphaltene) according to their polarizability and polarity. Although the saturate or wax fractions consist
of nonpolar materials including linear, branched, and cyclic saturated hydrocarbons, aromatics contain more polarizable material.
Finally, resins and asphaltenes have polar substituents (Aske et al. 2001; Fan et al. 2002). SARA analysis is performed using three
established methods: gravity-driven chromatography (ASTM), high-pressure liquid chromatographic, and thin-layer chromatography,
the details of which are explained elsewhere (Fan et al. 2002). The ASTM method requires a large oil sample for the analysis, and as-
phaltene is removed from the sample before chromatography is performed. This method is also the slowest and is hard to automate. The
high-pressure liquid-chromatographic method is an improvement over the ASTM method because it is faster and less difficult to auto-
mate. However, like the ASTM method, it also requires removal of asphaltenes before chromatography can be performed. Finally, the
thin-layer chromatography method is the most improved of the three methods, and is the fastest. It also does not require asphaltenes to
be separated before chromatographic analysis (Fan et al. 2002).
SARA analysis is also useful toward understanding the flow behavior of crude oils. A crude oil is regarded as heavy when its  API
value, shown by Eq. 3, is less than 20 (Dusseault 2001):
141:5
API gravity ¼  131:5; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð3Þ
Sg

where Sg is specific gravity.

Heavy oil is highly viscous and cannot flow easily through the wells. SARA analysis reveals that heavy crude oils contain larger
weight percentages of asphaltene and resin compared with conventional oil. Table 1 shows typical composition by weight percentages
of conventional and heavy crude oils (Santos et al. 2014). Several research groups studied flowability of crude oils as a function of
SARA components. Leontaritis and Mansoori (1988) reported that the resins/asphaltenes ratio determined asphaltene stability and flow
behavior of crude oils. A colloidal-instability index has been defined as the ratio of asphaltenes/saturates to asphaltenes/resins, and is
used as a similar correlation (Por 1992; Asomaning and Watkinson 1999). A comparative study conducted using SARA analysis
between a heavy crude oil and a waxy crude oil showed that the waxy crude oil had a larger percentage of asphaltene, whereas the
heavy crude oil had a larger percentage of resin. The study revealed superior stability of waxy emulsions and therefore better flowability
of waxy crude oil, with water cut as high as 70% vs. only 50% in heavy crude oil. Formation of stable waxy emulsions would inhibit
wax deposition in pipelines (Paso et al. 2009).

Composition (wt%)
Asphaltene Resin Oil Fraction
Conventional oil 0.1–12 3–22 67–97
Heavy oil 11–45 14–39 24–64

Table 1—Composition of conventional and heavy oils (Santos et al. 2014).

Wax-deposition mechanisms in pipelines have been studied extensively by researchers. Wax deposition takes place through three
stages: wax separation, wax-crystal growth, and wax deposition (Khanifar et al. 2011). During the initial stages of deposition, the con-
centration of wax crystals in deposits is in the range of 5 to 10 wt%. With the increase in deposition, wax becomes harder, and the yield

2 2017 SPE Production & Operations

ID: jaganm Time: 18:31 I Path: S:/PO##/Vol00000/170051/Comp/APPFile/SA-PO##170051

 PO189447 DOI: 10.2118/189447-PA Date: 15-December-17 Stage: Page: 3 Total Pages: 10

stress increases and therefore it becomes more difficult to mitigate the deposits (Kang et al. 2014). Burger et al. (1981) have shown that
during startup operations, wax deposition is a consequence of three separate mechanisms through which both dissolved and precipitated
wax crystals are transported laterally: molecular diffusion, Brownian motion, and shear dispersion.

Molecular Diffusion. This enables the diffusion of dissolved wax constituents. When the temperature of crude oil flowing through the
pipeline falls below the WAT, tiny wax crystals are precipitated and liquid oil will be in equilibrium with those solid crystals. The quantity
of these crystals that can remain dissolved in liquid oil decreases with decrease in temperature. With crude oil flowing, the temperatures at
the walls of the pipeline are lesser than the temperatures at the center of the pipeline. The temperature profile along the wall will create a
concentration gradient of dissolved wax and will lead to transportation of wax toward the wall through molecular diffusion, as shown by
@G @C
¼ Df  A  ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð4Þ
@t @y
where G is the total solid deposition by molecular diffusion,. Df is the molecular-diffusion coefficient for deposition, A is the surface
area available, C is the concentration of wax in oil, and @C is the concentration gradient. Therefore, Eq. 4 can be rewritten as
@y
. .
Wm ¼ qs  A  Df  @C  dT ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð5Þ
@T dy
.
where Wm is the rate of wax-crystal @C is the solubility coefficient of wax crystals in oil, qs is
. deposition caused by molecular diffusion, @T
the wax-crystal density, and dT is the radial-temperature gradient at the wall, which can be evaluated through a heat-transfer analysis.
dy

Brownian Motion. Brownian motion facilitates lateral transport of already precipitated wax particles. As the thermally excited oil
molecules collide with the already precipitated small solid-wax crystals, Brownian movements of wax crystals are created, and with the
concentration gradient leads to net transport of these particles toward the pipeline walls. Eq. 6 shows Brownian diffusion:
.
DB ¼ ðR  TÞ ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð6Þ
ð6p  l  d  NÞ
where DB is the Brownian-diffusion coefficient, R is the gas constant, T is absolute temperature, l is dynamic viscosity, d is the particle
diameter, and N is Avogadro’s number.

Shear Dispersion. With small solid particles suspended in a liquid in laminar flow, the particles tend to move in the direction of the
surrounding liquid. However, mutually induced velocity fields are created that facilitate movements in the transverse directions. In such
flows, the particle speed is equal to the streamline speed at the center, and the particles rotate with angular velocity equivalent to one-
half the shear rate. The rotating particles impart circulatory motion to the layer of liquid adjacent to the particle. The drag force on
neighboring particles by the rotating liquid causes large temporary displacements. This is called shear dispersion, and is shown by
d2  c  C
DS ¼ ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð7Þ
10
where d is the particle diameter, Ds is the shear-dispersion coefficient, c is the oil-shear rate at the wall, and C is the concentration of
wax out of the solution at the wall.
Several researchers have proposed different mathematical models to understand wax deposition. Huang et al. (2011) developed a
model, the Michigan wax predictor, to predict the growth, deposition thickness, and wax fraction during wax formation in pipelines.
This model applies molecular diffusion as the deposition mechanism for wax formation (Huang et al. 2011). Ridzuan et al. (2017)
focused on the development of a mathematical model to predict wax deposition and to determine the relationships between various pro-
cess variables, such as temperature differential between crude oil and pipeline walls, wax composition in crude oil, cooling rate along
the pipelines, and flow rate of hydrocarbons. They also used their experimental apparatus, a rotatable central composite design, to
obtain a minimum yield of wax deposition. They used response-surface methodology to evaluate the optimized conditions for minimal
wax deposition (Ridzuan et al. 2017).

Wax-Formation-Prevention/Removal Techniques
Prevention of wax formation in subsea flowlines is of significant interest to the petroleum industry. There are several established meth-
ods used in the industry, and several significant technologies in decreasing order of their frequency of application in the field are dis-
cussed in the following section.

Method a: Mechanical Removal. Mechanical-removal techniques are the oldest wax-removal techniques applied in the industry. The
following are some established mechanical-removal techniques.
Scrapers and cutters are used in well tubing to remove wax. Using these devices, wax may be removed by scraping from the tubing
wall while the well is still producing. Although such methods are economical, one major disadvantage is plugging of perforations
within wells as a result of circulation of scraped paraffin through the well annulus. Another disadvantage is associated with wireline
scrapers being stuck in wells during post-cleaning operations (Al-Yaari 2011).
The efficiency in gas lift wells may be enhanced by using free pistons to remove paraffin from such wells (Al-Yaari 2011).
Use of pipeline-inspection gauges (PIGs) is a mechanical method that is the oldest and among the most widely used wax-removal
techniques in the field, and has been reported previously (Koshel and Kapoor 1999; Craddock et al. 2007; Shecaira et al. 2011; Goodman
and Joshi 2013; Kang et al. 2014). PIGs have been used in the petroleum industry for more than a century, and there are arguments that
suggest the acronym “PIG” may also have been derived from the squealing noise they make while traveling through a pipeline (The Pig-
ging Products and Services Association 1995). A PIG is launched from a PIG launcher, which is a section of the pipeline with a larger di-
ameter gradually reducing to the normal diameter of the pipeline. As the PIG is launched, the launching station is closed and the

2017 SPE Production & Operations 3

ID: jaganm Time: 18:31 I Path: S:/PO##/Vol00000/170051/Comp/APPFile/SA-PO##170051

 PO189447 DOI: 10.2118/189447-PA Date: 15-December-17 Stage: Page: 4 Total Pages: 10

pressure-driven flow of the hydrocarbon in the pipeline pushes the PIG through to the receiving center. The PIG while traveling can
scrape off the wax deposits from the pipeline walls. Fig. 2 shows how a cleaning PIG can operate within a section of a subsea pipeline.
Some of the advantages of using PIGs include low labor costs, simplicity of operation, and less downtime because cleaning may be
faster compared with some of the other methods. However, retrieving a PIG that is stuck in a pipeline may be very expensive (Fung
et al. 2006).

PIG-launching end A cleaning PIG

PIG-receiving end

Wax deposition along walls

Fig. 2—Use of PIGs.

Method b: Chemicals as Wax Inhibitors. Use of chemical inhibitors for wax mitigation in the field has been reported by several
researchers (Koshel and Kapoor 1999; Craddock et al. 2007; Goodman and Joshi 2013; Kang et al. 2014). Wax inhibitors are added to
oils with high wax content to minimize problems associated with transporting oil. There are three types of wax inhibitors: wax-crystal
modifiers, detergents, and dispersants. The detergents and dispersants are surface-active agents that primarily keep wax crystals dis-
persed as separate particles and reduce their ability to interact and adhere to solid surfaces. These surface agents partly function by mod-
ifying the surface of the pipeline wall. One example is wetting the pipeline surface by water to prevent adhesion of paraffin. Some
surfactants also solubilize the nucleus and prevent paraffin agglomeration (Al-Yaari 2011).
Wax-crystal modifiers have structures similar to precipitating wax crystals. They coprecipitate with wax and compete with wax crys-
tals by occupying their positions on the crystal lattice through hydrocarbon chains. Alternatively, they also create hindrances toward the
growth of wax crystals. Wax-crystal modifiers are also known as pour-point depressants. The pour point is the minimum temperature at
which oil flows freely under its own weight and specified test conditions. The pour-point depressants can alter the growth and surface
characteristics of wax crystals. With pour-point depressants, wax crystals have reduced the tendency of forming 3D structures and stick-
ing to metal surfaces such as pipeline walls. Pedersen and Rønningsen (2003) tested 12 different commercial pour-point depressants
and concluded that viscosity reduction in crude oils with wax was the highest within the temperature range of 10 to 25 C. Wei (2015)
provided a review of several newly developed wax-crystal modifiers such as ethylene-vinyl acetate, polyethylene-poly (ethylene-pro-
pylene), poly (ethylene-butene), and poly (maleic anhydride amide co-a-olefin), and concluded that the performance of wax-crystal
modifiers was a strong function of their ability to cocrystalize with wax. Therefore, in addition to the structure of the wax-crystal modi-
fier, its composition is also significant. The efficiency of wax-crystal modifiers is increased by using them with solvents (Wei 2015).
The disadvantage of using chemical inhibitors is that they must be used before the bulk temperature of crude oil drops below the WAT.

Method c: Hot Oiling/Hot Watering. Several thermal methods of wax mitigation, such as hot oiling/watering and thermal coatings
(explained later in the subsection Surface Coatings and Thermal Management), have been used in the field (Esaklul et al. 2003;
Goodman and Joshi 2013; Kang et al. 2014). Hot oiling or hot watering is the method of injecting hot oil or hot water into wells in an
attempt to dewax wellbores. Hot oil or water at 150 to 300 F (approximately 65 to 150 C) is pumped into the casing or tubing to melt
waxes (Newberry and Barker 1985). It is one of the most-common methods used in the field. The biggest advantage is perhaps associ-
ated with it being a simple method and that it may not require complicated instrumentation. However, the effectiveness of hot oil/water
injection depends on the location of wax in the tubing. Because the heat capacity of the injected liquid is much lower than the heat
capacity of the well, the liquid starts cooling fast and may not be as effective when paraffin is at larger depths (Mansure and Barker
1993). In addition, hot oil injection may cause formation damage over time, which has been discussed in petroleum literature (Reistle
and Blade 1932; Barker 1987; Nanniger and Nanniger 1990; Noll 1992; Newberry and Barker 2000). However, there are various advan-
tages of this method, such as its simplicity of application, low costs, and immediate results (Barker 1987).

Method d: Chemical Solvents. Chemical solvents are used when crude oils are highly sensitive to surfactants, and form emulsions or
produced water with high concentration of dissolved solid particles. They are useful toward dissolving only a specific weight of wax de-
pendent on molecular weight (MW), pressure, and temperature (Newberry and Barker 1985; Bimuratkyzy and Sagindykov 2016).
Some of the commonly used chemical solvents to dissolve wax formations are carbon tetrachloride, carbon disulfide, kerosene, and die-
sel oil (Al-Yaari 2011; Bimuratkyzy and Sagindykov 2016). The advantage of using chemical solvents is that they are inexpensive
and may not require complicated instrumentation. However, this method may be less efficient toward dissolving wax plugs with
larger masses.

Method e: Exothermic or Fused Chemical Reactions. This technique involves exothermic chemical reactions with controlled heat
emission to remove wax deposits in pipelines (Singh and Fogler 1998; Nguyen et al. 2001, 2003, 2004; Nguyen and Fogler 2005).
Fused chemical reactions undergo a delay before significant product formation. Nguyen et al. (2001) performed a fused chemical reac-
tion between sodium nitrite and ammonium chloride catalyzed by citric acid encapsulated in polymer-coated gelatin capsules. They
suggested that because of the characteristic delay, a highly fused exothermic chemical reaction will produce substantial heat to melt
and redissolve wax at the desired location (Nguyen el at. 2001). Using the encapsulation technique, either the catalyst or one of the reac-
tants is encapsulated. Thus, the release of the catalyst into the bulk solution is controlled. Therefore, the exothermic reaction between
sodium nitrite and ammonium chloride was delayed by the controlled release of the encapsulated catalyst, which was citric acid. The

4 2017 SPE Production & Operations

ID: jaganm Time: 18:31 I Path: S:/PO##/Vol00000/170051/Comp/APPFile/SA-PO##170051

 PO189447 DOI: 10.2118/189447-PA Date: 15-December-17 Stage: Page: 5 Total Pages: 10

polymeric coating on the capsule had to dissolve before the catalyst was released into the solution and heat was generated. The thick-
ness of the polymeric coating determined the extent of delay of heat release.
Another significant example of wax removal using exothermic reactions is the nitrogen-generation system. This is a novel technol-
ogy to dissolve wax formed in pipelines, which has been developed, field tested, and commercialized by Petrobras Research Center.
This method involves introduction of two inorganic salts and organic solvents to a line. Their chemical reaction generates nitrogen and
heats the internal sections of a pipeline where wax has formed. The heat is used to dissolve the wax plug. It is then flushed out of the
pipeline (Khalil 1996). The disadvantage of using exothermic chemical reactions as a method to mitigate wax formation is related to
higher costs because of the requirement of expensive chemicals, catalysts, and polymer coatings. The chemicals used may also be toxic
(Sadeghazad and Ghaemi 2003). Finally, exothermic chemical reactions are an indirect method of heat generation compared with direct
methods such as hot oiling/watering.

Method f: Surface Coatings and Thermal Management. Researchers have also studied the effect of plastic coatings on wax deposi-
tion. It was shown that plastic coatings decreased the weights of wax deposits by 30 wt% or more for high-MW wax because of thermal
insulation (Patton and Casad 1970). For their experiments, Patton and Casad (1970) studied three different waxes: Cit-Con 350,
Shellwax 200, and Cit-Con recrystallized heavy-intermediate wax. The recrystallized heavy-intermediate wax has a much-larger MW
than the other two waxes and is representative of the natural paraffin deposits in pipelines (Nathan 1955; Graves and Tuggle 1968).
Recently, coating the internal surfaces of a pipeline with a new polymer, ethylene-tetrafluoroethylene (ETFE), has been reported as
a useful method to inhibit wax formation. A test was conducted with three different pipes: a pipe with ETFE internal-plastic-pipe coat-
ing, a pipe with rigid polyvinyl chloride internal-plastic-pipe coating, and a steel pipe. The ETFE pipe with the least roughness showed
the best results (Bagdat and Masoud 2015). Such surface treatments preclude the need for chemical injectors or storage containers for
hot water/oil during heating operations. However, mitigation of wax by providing surface coatings may be more expensive than most
other methods discussed.

Method g: Wax Mitigation by Microbial Treatment. Using microorganisms for wax mitigation, although not very widely used, has
been successfully used on some fields of the Mehsana Asset of Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited (Biswas et al. 2012). Biosur-
factant-producing bacterial cultures have been reported that aid in wax mitigation in pipelines. Strains such as the Pseudomonas species
and Actinomyces species have been shown to reduce heavy hydrocarbon fractions and increase C15 to C20 fractions when crude oil was
treated with these bacteria. Crude-oil properties were improved by lowering the WAT, thus making pipelines with flowing crude oil
less susceptible to wax formation (Etoumi 2007).
A bacterial strain, Geobacillus TERI NSM, has been identified that can help degrade crude-oil paraffin at high temperatures. Such
bacteria degrade the paraffin under high-temperature, low-oxygen, and low-nutrient conditions while sparing low-carbon-chain paraffin
(Sood and Lal 2008).
Lazar et al. (1999) studied a special bacterial consortium (SBC1) and reported that they were efficient in preventing and controlling
solid- as well as semisolid-paraffin deposition.
Although this is an innovative method, microbial treatment may only be used in wells that produce water and where the bottomhole
temperature is lower than 200 F. This is because the microbes used require water to survive and may not be able to withstand extremely
high temperatures (Towler and Rebbapragada 2004).

Method h: Cold Flow. Cold flow is the method of generating a slurry of solid deposits in a controlled way such that they do not adhere
to the pipeline walls (Merino-Garcia and Correra 2008). One of the earliest known cold-flow technologies was patented by Coberly
(1942). Wax crystals typically form on the walls of a pipeline when the temperature of the wall falls below the WAT or the crystalliza-
tion temperature of wax. Coberly (1942) suggested that wax deposition may be retarded by reducing the temperature of the oil that con-
tains wax to well below the crystallization temperature. It was also mentioned that by adding fine particles of resin with a melting point
greater than the crystallization temperature of wax, the resin particles acted as nucleation sites for wax and would prevent deposition of
wax crystals along the pipeline walls (Coberly 1942). Merino-Garcia and Correra (2008) mentioned that the feasibility of cold flow
could be validated by eliminating the temperature gradient and cold wall. Fig. 3 shows the cold-flow scheme redrawn by the authors
using the work by Merino-Garcia and Correra (2008).

Dissolved wax

Precipitated wax

T (bulk)>WAT, only T (bulk) = Twater, only

dissolved waxes dissolved waxes

Fig. 3—Cold-flow scheme (Merino-Garcia and Correra 2008).

Argo et al. (2007) invented a similar cold-flow technology where hydrocarbons containing wax and other solid deposits such as
asphaltenes, or any other precipitating solids, could be transported through pipelines (Argo et al. 2007). This technology involves intro-
ducing hydrocarbons into a reactor, where they are mixed with a flow of cold fluid with a temperature lower than the crystallization

2017 SPE Production & Operations 5

ID: jaganm Time: 18:31 I Path: S:/PO##/Vol00000/170051/Comp/APPFile/SA-PO##170051

 PO189447 DOI: 10.2118/189447-PA Date: 15-December-17 Stage: Page: 6 Total Pages: 10

temperature. Fig. 4 shows a simple schematic of this technology, which is explained here. Warm oil containing dissolved wax enters
the reactor. At the same time, cold oil/condensates containing small crystals enter the reactor as shown in Fig. 4. The small crystals in
the cold oil may be carbonates, salts, wax, asphaltenes, or any other crystals that can act as nucleation sites. When warm oil is mixed
with cold oil, the precipitators precipitate as small crystals on the nucleating sites and are carried by the flowing hydrocarbons without
causing deposits or blockages. The extent of subcooling may be maintained either by enough cold liquid or by sufficient heating inside
the reactor (Argo et al. 2007).

Warm oil containing

precipitators
enter the reactor Reactor where
mixing takes
place Pipeline carrying
hydrocarbons
to a downstream
location

Cold oil containing

nucleation sites is
introduced into
the reactor

Fig. 4—Cold-flow method for transporting hydrocarbons containing wax (Argo et al. 2007).

However, the cold-flow technology has not been implemented by the industry for field use. It has been a research and development
project that has progressed to the stages of laboratory prototypes and pilot testing.

Method i: Cold-Oil Recirculation. C-FER Technologies in Edmonton, Canada, have proposed the recirculation of cold oil to reduce
the temperature of crude oil and thus inhibit wax formation on pipeline walls (Al-Yaari 2011). Fig. 5 shows the apparatus from
Al-Yaari (2011) redrawn by the authors. Nenniger and Nenniger (2005) reported a method of using cold, unheated oil for recirculation
and for stimulating heavy-oil production. However, this method may not be suitable when wax has already solidified on the walls
of pipelines.

Dissolved wax
Chilled oil

Precipitated wax

Fig. 5—Cold-oil recirculation (Al-Yaari 2011).

Method j: Choke Cooling. Knowles (1987) developed a technology where a stream of gas and waxy oil was suddenly cooled by let-
ting it pass through a choke to form wax/oil slurry. The slurry could be transported through pipelines without wax deposition along the
pipeline walls. Fig. 6 shows a conceptual representation of the apparatus redrawn by the authors using the work by Knowles (1987).
However, creating the choke geometry may be expensive, and the method may not be effective when wax plugs already exist in a pipe-
line. A breakaway wax plug traveling with a high velocity may damage the choke region of the pipeline.

Flow direction Dissolved wax

Gas

Precipitated wax

Fig. 6—Choke cooling (Merino-Garcia and Correra 2008).

Method k: The Wax Eater. Using this technology by Kellogg, Brown, and Root and Halliburton, hot oil enters a flow loop when the
ambient temperature is much lower and is maintained at lower than WAT. This encourages the formation of wax in oil but also reduces
the oil temperature to approximately the seabed temperature (Benson 2000; Kalpakci et al. 2000; Fung et al. 2003). Thus, the wax dis-
persed in oil does not move toward the walls to accumulate there. The amount of recirculating fluid must be greater than the amount of
oil that enters the flow loop (Merino-Garcia and Correra 2008). Fig. 7 shows the wax eater reproduced by the authors using the pub-
lished work by previous researchers (Merino-Garcia and Correra 2008; Al-Yaari 2011). Like cold-flow technologies, the wax eater has
not been used in the field yet.

Method l: Magnetic-Fluid Conditioning. This is a novel technology in which a fluid exposed to a magnetic field causes changes in
solids that are being carried or precipitated from that fluid. When the fluids in pipelines are directed across powerful magnetic fields,

6 2017 SPE Production & Operations

ID: jaganm Time: 18:31 I Path: S:/PO##/Vol00000/170051/Comp/APPFile/SA-PO##170051

 PO189447 DOI: 10.2118/189447-PA Date: 15-December-17 Stage: Page: 7 Total Pages: 10

the growth of wax crystals is altered and therefore the formation of solids is inhibited. Magnetic conditioning is useful toward prevent-
ing clogging caused by wax and other solid deposits in wells and pipelines carrying oil. There are several patents that have been derived
from this technology (Harms et al. 1991; Jones 1992; Corney 1993; Stanley 1998). However, this method will be more expensive than
the conventional methods used because of its requirement of complicated instrumentation to maintain the magnetic field.

Cold slurry Hot oil

Low ambient temperature = 3–4°C

Fig. 7—The wax eater (Merino-Garcia and Correra 2008).

Conclusion
Wax begins depositing on the pipeline walls using a combination of various mechanisms such as molecular diffusion, Brownian motion,
and shear dispersion (Burger et al. 1981). The authors have attempted to provide the petroleum-engineering and flow-assurance commu-
nity with an overview of different wax-deposition-prevention/inhibition technologies and believe this article may be used by early ca-
reer engineers and researchers in the industry. Various wax-deposition-mitigation techniques are reviewed such as mechanical methods
(scraping and using PIGs and free pistons), thermal methods (hot oiling/watering, cold-flow techniques, thermal coating), using chemi-
cals (pour-point depressants, fused-chemical reactions, and chemical solvents), using microorganisms, magnetic-fluid conditioning, and
the wax eater. Although many of these technologies have been used in the field, the authors have not found such applications of meth-
ods such as cold flow, choke cooling, the wax eater, and magnetic-fluid conditioning. For each wax-mitigation method discussed, using
their understanding, the authors have created Table 2 to show an apparent technology-readiness level (TRL) derived from the US
Department of Energy’s classification (Sanchez 2011).

Subsection Wax-Mitigation Method TRL

a Mechanical removal TRL 9
b Chemical inhibitors TRL 9
c Hot oiling TRL 9
d Chemical solvents TRL 9
e Exothermic chemical reactions TRL 8/9
f Surface coatings and thermal management TRL 9
g Microbial treatment TRL 9
h Cold flow TRL 6/7
i Cold-oil recirculation TRL 6
j Choke cooling TRL 6
k Wax eater TRL 6/7
l Magnetic-fluid conditioning TRL 6

Table 2—TRL for each wax-mitigation method.

Because the mechanical methods of wax removal are most popular, the authors believe one area of future research may be focused
toward developing expendable and inexpensive mechanical-removal tools or PIGs that may be flushed away along with wax plugs.
Thermal treatment is another area that requires more research into developing inexpensive passive heating mechanisms. Finally, micro-
bial treatments may be more useful if technologies are developed for their usage at much-higher temperatures and in wells with
no water.

Nomenclature
A ¼ area available for deposition
C ¼ concentration of wax in oil
d ¼ particle diameter
D ¼ well diameter
DB ¼ Brownian-diffusion coefficient
Df ¼ diffusion coefficient

2017 SPE Production & Operations 7

ID: jaganm Time: 18:31 I Path: S:/PO##/Vol00000/170051/Comp/APPFile/SA-PO##170051

 Ds ¼ shear-dispersion coefficient
f ¼ friction factor
G ¼ solid deposition
L ¼ measured depth of the well
N ¼ Avogadro’s number
PReservoir ¼ reservoir pressure
PWell ¼ well pressure
R ¼ gas constant
T ¼ temperature
V ¼ flow velocity
c ¼ oil-shear rate at the wall
l ¼ dynamic viscosity
qðyÞ ¼ hydrocarbon density as a function of vertical depth
qs ¼ wax-crystal density

References
Al-Yaari, M. 2011. Paraffin Wax Deposition: Mitigation & Removal Techniques. Presented at the SPE Saudi Arabia Section Young Professionals Tech-
nical Symposium, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, 14–16 March. SPE-155412-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/155412-MS.
Argo, C. B., Bollavaram, P., Hjarbo, K. W. et al. 2007. Method and System for Transporting Flows of Fluid Hydrocarbons Containing Wax, Asphaltenes,
and/or Other Precipitating Solids. US Patent No. 7,261,810.
Aske, N., Kallevik, H., and Sjoblom, J. 2001. Determination of Saturate, Aromatic, Resin, and Asphaltenic (SARA) Components in Crude Oils by Means
of Infrared and Near-Infrared Spectroscopy. Energy Fuels 15 (5): 1304–1312. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef010088h.
Asomaning, S. and Watkinson, A. P. 1999. Deposit Formation by Asphaltene-Rich Heavy Oil Mixtures on Heat Transfer Surfaces. Proc., International
Conference on Understanding Heat Exchanger Fouling and Its Mitigation, Castelvecchio Pascoli, Italy, May, 283–290. New York City: Bugell
House.
Bacon, M. M., Romero-Zerón, L. B., and Chong, K. K. 2010. Determining Wax Type: Paraffin or Naphthene? SPE J. 15 (4): 963–968. SPE-124799-PA.
https://doi.org/10.2118/124799-PA.
Bagdat, M. and Masoud, R. 2015. Control of Paraffin Deposition in Production Operation by Using Ethylene-TetraFluoroEthylene (ETFE). Proc., Inter-
national Conference on Integrated Petroleum Engineering and Geosciences, Kuala Lumpur, 13–21. Singapore: Springer.
Barker, K. M. 1987. Formation Damage Related to Hot Oiling. Presented at the SPE Production Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma,
8–10 March. SPE-16230-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/16230-MS.
Benson, R. A. 2000. Method for Making Slurry. US Patent No. 6,070,417.
Bimuratkyzy, K. and Sagindykov, B. 2016. The Review of Flow Assurance Solutions with Respect to Wax and Asphaltene. Brazil. J. Petrol. Gas 10 (2):
119–134. https://doi.org/10.5419/bjpg2016-0010.
Biswas, S. K., Bateja, S., Sarbhai, M. P. et al. 2012. Application of Microbial Treatment for Mitigating the Paraffin Deposition in Down Hole Tubulars
and Surface Flow Lines of Wells–A Success Story. Presented at the SPE Oil and Gas India Conference and Exhibition, Mumbai, 28–30 March. SPE-
154662-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/154662-MS.
Burger, E. D., Perkins, T. K., and Striegler, J. H. 1981. Studies of Wax Deposition in the Trans Alaska Pipeline. J Pet Technol 33 (6): 1075–1086. SPE-
8788-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/8788-PA.
Coberly, A. 1942. Method of Preventing Wax Deposits in Tubing. US No. Patent 2,303,823.
Corney, J. D. 1993. Magnetic, Fluid-Conditioning Tools. US Patent No. 5,178,757.
Craddock, H. A., Mutch, K., Sowerby, K. et al. 2007. A Case Study in the Removal of Deposited Wax from a Major Subsea Flowline System in the Gan-
net Field. Presented at the International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, Houston, 28 February–2 March. SPE-105048-MS. https://doi.org/
10.2118/105048-MS.
del Carmen Garcia, M., Carbognani, L., Urbina, A. et al. 1998. Paraffin Deposition in Oil Production. Oil Composition and Paraffin Inhibitors Activity.
Petrol. Sci. Technol. 16 (9–10): 1001–1021. https://doi.org/10.1080/10916469808949822.
Dorset, D. L. 2000. Crystallography of Real Waxes: Branched Chain Packing in Microcrystalline Petroleum Wax Studied by Electron Diffraction.
Energy Fuels 14 (3): 685–691. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef9902350.
Dusseault, M. B. 2001. Comparing Venezuelan and Canadian Heavy Oil and Tar Sands. Presented at the Canadian International Petroleum Conference,
Calgary, 12–14 June. PETSOC-2001-061. https://doi.org/10.2118/2001-061.
Elsharkawy, A. M., Al-Sahhaf, T. A., and Fahim, M. A. 2000. Wax Deposition from Middle East Crudes. Fuel 79 (9): 1047–1055. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S0016-2361(99)00235-5.
Esaklul, K A., Fung, G., Harrison, G. et al. 2003. Active Heating for Flow Assurance Control in Deepwater Flowlines. Presented at the Offshore Tech-
nology Conference, Houston, 5–8 May. OTC-15188-MS. https://doi.org/10.4043/15188-MS.
Etoumi, A. 2007. Microbial Treatment of Waxy Crude Oils for Mitigation of Wax Precipitation. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 55 (1–2): 111–121. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.petrol.2006.04.015.
Fan, T., Wang, J., and Buckley, J. S. 2002. Evaluating Crude Oils by SARA Analysis. Presented at the SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium,
Tulsa, 13–17 April. SPE-75228-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/75228-MS.
Fung, G., Backhaus, W. P., McDaniel, S. et al. 2006. To Pig or Not to Pig: The Marlin Experience With Stuck Pig. Presented at the Offshore Technology
Conference, Houston, 1–4 May. OTC-18387-MS. https://doi.org/10.4043/18387-MS.
Fung, G. S., Amin, R. M., Kalpakci, B. et al. 2003. Method for Reducing Solids Build-Up in Hydrocarbon Streams Produced from Wells. US Patent No.
6,656,366.
Goodman, N. T. and Joshi, N. 2013. A Tale of Two Flowlines-Paraffin Plugging and Remediation. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, New Orleans, 30 September–2 October. SPE-166196-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/166196-MS.
Graves, R. H. and Tuggle, R. 1968. Composition of Paraffin Deposits in Oil Field Tubing and Lines. Presented at the American Chemical Society Meet-
ing, Atlantic City, New Jersey, USA, 8–13 September.
Harms, H. L., Moeckly, C. R., Reed, D. et al. 1991. Oil Tool and Method for Controlling Paraffin Deposits in Oil Flow Lines and Downhole Strings. US
Patent No. 5,052,491.
Huang, Z., Lee, H. S., Senra, M. et al. 2011. A Fundamental Model of Wax Deposition in Subsea Oil Pipelines. AIChE J. 57 (11): 2955–2964. https://
doi.org/10.1002/aic.12517.

8 2017 SPE Production & Operations

Jones, C. 1992. Magnetic Conditioner for Fluid Flow Line. US Patent No. 5,122,277.
Kalpakci, B., Amin, R., Win, T. et al. 2000. A Novel Approach for Treatment and Transport of Waxy Crude Oils in Single, Bare Subsea Flowlines. Pre-
sented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, 1–4 October. SPE-62947-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/62947-MS.
Kané, M., Djabourov, M., Volle, J.-L. et al. 2002. Morphology of Paraffin Crystals in Waxy Crude Oils Cooled in Quiescent Conditions and Under
Flow. Fuel 82 (2): 127–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-2361(02)00222-3.
Kang, P.-S., Lee, D.-G., and Lim, J.-S. 2014. Status of Wax Mitigation Technologies in Offshore Oil Production. Presented at the Twenty-Fourth Interna-
tional Ocean and Polar Engineering Conference, Busan, Korea, 15–20 June. ISOPE-I-14-285.
Khalil, C. N. 1996. In Situ Nitrogen Generation Removes Wax from Flowlines. World Oil 217 (7): 44–45.
Khanifar, A., Sheykh Alian, S., Demiral, B. et al. 2011. Study of Asphaltene Precipitation and Deposition Phenomenon during WAG Application. Pre-
sented at the SPE Enhanced Oil Recovery Conference, Kuala Lumpur, 19–21 July. SPE-143488-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/143488-MS.
Knowles, W. T. Jr. 1987. Choke Cooling Waxy Oil. US Patent No. 4,697,426.
Koshel, K. C. and Kapoor, S. 1999. Effect of Flow Improver on Indian western Offshore Crude-Carrying Pipeline: A Case Study. Presented at the SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, 3–6 October. SPE-56570-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/56570-MS.
Kumar, S., Agrawal, K. M., Khan, H. U. et al. 2004. Study of Phase Transition in Hard Microcrystalline Waxes and Wax Blends by Differential Scanning
Calorimetry. Petrol. Sci. Technol. 22 (3–4): 337–345. https://doi.org/10.1081/LFT-120024390.
Lazar, I., Voicu, A., Nicolescu, C. et al. 1999. The Use of Naturally Occurring Selectively Isolated Bacteria for Inhibiting Paraffin Deposition. J. Pet.
Sci. Eng. 22 (1–3): 161–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0920-4105(98)00065-5.
Leontaritis, K. J. and Mansoori, G. A. 1988. Asphaltene Deposition: A Survey of Field Experiences and Research Approaches. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 1 (3):
229–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/0920-4105(88)90013-7.
Mansure, A. and Barker, K. M. 1993. Insights Into Good Hot Oiling Practices. Presented at the SPE Production Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City,
Oklahoma, 21–23 March. SPE-25484-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/25484-MS.
Merino-Garcia, D. and Correra, S. 2008. Cold Flow: A Review of a Technology to Avoid Wax Deposition. Petrol. Sci. Technol. 26 (4): 446–459. https://
doi.org/10.1080/10916460600809741.
Misra, S., Baruah, S., and Singh, K. 1995. Paraffin Problems in Crude Oil Production and Transportation: A Review. SPE Prod & Fac 10 (1): 50–54.
SPE-28181-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/28181-PA.
Nanniger, J. and Nanniger, G. 1990. Optimizing Hot Oiling/Watering Jobs to Minimize Formation Damage. Presented at the Annual Technical Meeting,
Calgary, 10–13 June. PETSOC-90-57. https://doi.org/10.2118/90-57.
Nathan, C. C. 1955. Solubility Studies on High Molecular Weight Paraffin Hydrocarbons Obtained from Petroleum Rod Waxes. SPE-485-G.
Nenniger, J. and Nenniger, E. 2005. Method and Apparatus for Stimulating Heavy Oil Production. US Patent No. 6,883,607.
Newberry, M. E. and Barker, K. M. 1985. Formation Damage Prevention Through the Control of Paraffin and Asphaltene Deposition. Presented at the
SPE Production Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 10–12 March. SPE-13796-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/13796-MS.
Newberry, M. E. and Barker, K. M. 2000. Organic Formation Damage Control and Remediation. Presented at the SPE International Symposium on For-
mation Damage Control, Lafayette, Louisiana, 23–24 February. SPE-58723-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/58723-MS.
Nguyen, D. A. and Fogler, H. S. 2005. Facilitated Diffusion in the Dissolution of Carboxylic Polymers. AlChE J. 51 (2): 415–425. https://doi.org/
10.1002/aic.10329.
Nguyen, D. A., Fogler, H. S., and Chavadej, S. 2001. Fused Chemical Reactions. 2. Encapsulation: Application to Remediation of Paraffin Plugged Pipe-
lines. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 40 (23): 5058–5065. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie0009886.
Nguyen, D. A., Fogler, H. S., and Sumaeth, C. 2004. Fused Chemical Reactions. 3. Controlled Release of a Catalyst To Control the Temperature Profile
in Tubular Reactors. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 43 (18): 5862–5873. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie049933k.
Nguyen, D. A., Iwaniw, M. A., and Fogler, H. S. 2003. Kinetics and Mechanism of the Reaction Between Ammonium and Nitrite Ions: Experimental
and Theoretical Studies. Chem. Eng. Sci. 58 (19): 4351–4362. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0009-2509(03)00317-8.
Noll, L. 1992. Treating Paraffin Deposits in Producing Oil Wells. Report NIPER-551, IIT Research Institute, National Institute for Petroleum and Energy
Research, Bartlesville, Oklahoma, for US Department of Energy, January 1992.
Paso, K., Silset, A., Sørland, G. et al. 2009. Characterization of the Formation, Flowability, and Resolution of Brazilian Crude Oil Emulsions. Energy
Fuels 23 (1): 471–480. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef800585s.
Patton, C. C. and Casad, B. M. 1970. Paraffin Deposition from Refined Wax-Solvent Systems. SPE J. 10 (1): 17–24. SPE-2503-PA. https://doi.org/
10.2118/2503-PA.
Pedersen, K. S. and Rønningsen, H. P. 2003. Influence of Wax Inhibitors on Wax Appearance Temperature, Pour Point, and Viscosity of Waxy Crude
Oils. Energy Fuels 17 (2): 321–328. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef020142+.
Por, N. 1992. Stability Properties of Petroleum Products. Tel Aviv, Israel: Israel Institute of Petroleum and Energy.
Rehan, M., Nizami, A-S., Taylan, O. et al. 2016. Determination of Wax Content in Crude Oil. Petrol. Sci. Technol. 34 (9): 799–804. https://doi.org/
10.1080/10916466.2016.1169287.
Reistle, C. E. and Blade, O. C. 1932. A Laboratory Study of Rod Waxes. In Paraffin and Congealing-Oil Problems, 125–158. Washington, DC: US Gov-
ernment Printing Office.
Ridzuan, N., Yacoob, Z., and Adam, F. 2017. Response Surface Methodology on Wax Deposit Optimization. Paper. Malaysian J. Anal. Sci. 21 (2):
452–459.
Sadeghazad, A. and Ghaemi, N. 2003. Microbial Prevention of Wax Precipitation in Crude Oil by Biodegradation Mechanism. Presented at the SPE
Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Jakarta, 9–11 September. SPE-80529-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/80529-MS.
Sanchez, R. 2011. Technology Readiness Assessment Guide. DOE-G-413.3-4, US Department of Energy, Office of Management (15 September 2011).
Santos, R. G., Loh, W., Bannwart, A. C. et al. 2014. An Overview of Heavy Oil Properties and Its Recovery and Transportation Methods. Brazilian J.
Chem. Eng. 31 (3): 571–590. https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-6632.20140313s00001853.
Shecaira, F. S., Barros, D., Ramachandran, K. et al. 2011. The Cottonwood Field Case History: The Pig/Paraffin Obstruction of a Long Subsea, Deep-
water Tie-back and Its Successful Remediation. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, 30 October–2 Novem-
ber. SPE-146156-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/146156-MS.
Singh, P. and Fogler, H. S. 1998. Fused Chemical Reactions: The Use of Dispersion to Delay Reaction Time in Tubular Reactors. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.
37 (6): 2203-2207. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie9706020.
Singh, P., Venkatesan, R., and Fogler, H. S. 2000. Formation and Aging of Incipient Thin Wax-Oil Gels. AlChE J. 46 (5): 1059–1074. https://doi.org/
10.1002/aic.690460517.
Sood, N. and Lal, B. 2008. Isolation and Characterization of a Potential Paraffin-Wax Degrading Thermophilic Bacterial Strain Geobacillus kaustophilus
TERI NSM for Application in Oil Wells with Paraffin Deposition Problems. Chemosphere 70 (8): 1445–1451. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.chemosphere.2007.08.071.

2017 SPE Production & Operations 9

Stanley, D. 1998. Magnetic Fluid Conditioner. US Patent No. 5,783,074.
The Pigging Products & Services Association. 1995. An Introduction to Pipeline Pigging. Houston: Gulf Professional Publishing.
Thota, S. T. and Onyeanuna, C. C. 2016. Mitigation of Wax in Oil Pipelines. Int. J. Eng. Res. Rev. 4 (4): 39–47.
Towler, B. F. and Rebbapragada, S. 2004. Mitigation of Paraffin Wax Deposition in Cretaceous Crude Oils of Wyoming. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 45 (1–2):
11–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2004.05.006.
Wei, B. 2015. Recent Advances on Mitigating Wax Problem Using Polymeric Wax Crystal Modifier. J. Petrol. Explor. Prod. Technol. 5 (4): 391–401.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13202-014-0146-6.
Woo, G. T., Garbis, S. J., and Gray, T. C. 1984. Long-Term Control of Paraffin Deposition. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhi-
bition, Houston, 16–19 September. SPE-13126-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/13126-MS.

Meagan White is a bachelor’s degree student in her senior year of studying engineering science at California State University,
Bakersfield. Her current research interests are in the fields of flow assurance, thermodynamics, and multiphase flows.
Kelly Pierce is a bachelor’s degree student in her junior year of studying engineering at California State University, Bakersfield.
Her current research interests are in the fields of thermodynamics, subsea-fluid dynamics, and flow assurance.
Tathagata Acharya is a lecturer of engineering at California State University, Bakersfield. He has spent more than 2 years in the
upstream oil and gas industry working as a research engineer. Acharya’s current research interests are in the fields of flow assur-
ance, thermodynamics, computational fluid dynamics, and multiphase flows. He holds master’s and PhD degrees in mechani-
cal engineering from Louisiana State University, with a specialization in thermal and fluid sciences.

10 2017 SPE Production & Operations

View publication stats