4.6 Article

Upgrading the Properties of the Crude Oil-Water System for EOR with Simultaneous Effects of a Homologous Series of NanoGemini Surface-Active Ionic Liquids, Electrolytes, and pH

期刊

ACS OMEGA
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.2c04741

关键词

-

资金

  1. Bu-Ali Sina University
  2. Iran National Science Foundation (INSF) [99031559]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the effects of electrolytes and pH on imidazolium nano-Gemini surface-active ionic liquids (GSAILs), and finds that the properties and stability of the crude oil-water system can be significantly improved when the concentration of electrolytes is appropriate and the pH is 9.5.
This study investigated the simultaneous effects of electrolytes, NaCl and MgCl2 electrolytes, individually and as a mixture, and pH on a homologous series of imidazolium nano-Gemini surface-active ionic liquids (GSAILs), [C4im-Cm-imC4]-[Br2], where m = 2, 4, and 6. These can improve the properties of the crude oil-water system and consequently enhance the oil recovery. The results precisely revealed that interfacial tension (IFT) and critical micelle concentration were initially decreased with electrolyte concentration up to 55.7 and 58.6%, respectively, in comparison to the salt-free condition, followed by a slight increase. Moreover, adjusting the pH can provide a further improvement so that 79.2% IFT reduction is attained at pH 9.5 compared to that at the natural pH and that GSAILs show high stability in the pH range of 2.5-9.5. Meanwhile, aqueous solutions of crude oil and electrolyte presented 1 day emulsification indices within 43-53%, followed by minor changes after 1 week. Interestingly, the emulsification index of 77.1% was attained at pH 9.5. Surface wettability was also favorably altered from oil-wet to water-wet with the nanoGSAILs. The findings of this study help gain a better understanding of the effects of nanosurface active materials to improve oil extraction under reservoir conditions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据