Composition useful in metal sulfide scale removal

Abstract

The present invention discloses a method and a composition for removing metal sulfide scale present on the surface of a metal, said method comprising: providing a liquid composition comprising: a chelating agent and a counterion component selected from the group consisting of: sodium gluconate; gluconic acid; tetrasodium EDTA; EDTA; propylenediaminetetraacetic acid (PDTA); nitrilotriacetic acid (NTA); N-(2-hydroxyethyl) ethylenediaminetriacetic acid (HEDTA); diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (DTPA); hydroxyethyliminodiacetic acid (HEIDA); cyclohexylenediaminetetraacetic acid (CDTA); diphenylaminesulfonic acid (DPAS); ethylenediaminedi(o-hydroxyphenylacetic) acid (EDDHA); glucoheptonic acid; gluconic acid; oxalic acid; malonic acid; succinic acid; glutaric acid; adipic acid; pimelic acid; suberic acid; azelaic acid; sebacic acid; phthalic acid; terephthalic acid; aconitic acid; carballylic acid; trimesic acid; isocitric acid; citric acid; L-glutamic acid-N,N-diacetic acid (GLDA); salts thereof; and mixtures thereof; and an aldehyde; and water exposing a surface contaminated with said metal sulfide scale to the liquid composition; allowing sufficient time of exposure to remove said metal sulfide scale from the contaminated surface and sequestration of the sulfur ions from solution.

Claims

1. An aqueous composition for use in removing metal sulfide scale from a surface contaminated with the metal sulfide scale, said aqueous composition comprising: a chelating agent selected from the group consisting of sodium gluconate; gluconic acid; tetrasodium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA); EDTA; propylenediaminetetraacetic acid (PDTA); nitrilotriacetic acid (NTA); N-(2-hydroxyethyl)ethylenediaminetriacetic acid (HEDTA); diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (DTPA); hydroxyethyliminodiacetic acid (HEIDA); cyclohexylenediaminetetraacetic acid (CDTA); diphenylaminesulfonic acid (DPAS); ethylenediaminedi(o-hydroxyphenylacetic) acid (EDDHA); glucoheptonic acid; oxalic acid; malonic acid; succinic acid; glutaric acid; adipic acid; pimelic acid; suberic acid; azelaic acid; sebacic acid; phthalic acid; terephthalic acid; aconitic acid; carballylic acid; trimesic acid; isocitric acid; citric acid; L-glutamic acid-N,N-diacetic acid (GLDA); salts thereof; and mixtures thereof; an aldehyde; and water, wherein the aqueous composition has a pH ranging from 8 to 10, and the aldehyde is present in the aqueous composition in an amount ranging from 20 to 70 wt % of the weight of the aqueous composition.

2. The aqueous composition according to claim 1, wherein the chelating agent is present in the composition in an amount ranging from 20 to 70 wt % of the weight of the composition.

3. The aqueous composition according to claim 1, wherein the aldehyde is present in the composition in an amount ranging from 40 to 60 wt % of the weight of the composition.

4. The aqueous composition according to claim 1, wherein the chelating agent is present in the composition in an amount ranging from 40 to 60 wt % of the weight of the composition.

5. The aqueous composition according to claim 1, wherein the chelating agent and the aldehyde are present in the composition in an amount of approximately 50 wt % of the weight of the composition.

6. The aqueous composition according to claim 1, wherein the metal sulfide scale is selected from the group consisting of iron sulfide, zinc sulfide, lead sulfide, and combinations thereof.

7. The aqueous composition according to claim 1, wherein the metal sulfide scale is iron sulfide.

8. The aqueous composition according to claim 1, wherein the aldehyde is selected from the group consisting of aliphatic aldehydes having 1-10 carbon atoms and aromatic aldehydes having 7-20 carbon atoms.

9. The aqueous composition according to claim 1, wherein the aldehyde is an aliphatic aldehyde having 1-6 carbon atoms.

10. The aqueous composition according to claim 1, wherein the aldehyde is selected from the group consisting of glyoxylic acid and glyoxal.

11. The aqueous composition according to claim 1, wherein the aldehyde is selected from the group consisting of benzaldehyde and cinnamaldehyde.

12. A one-step metal sulfide scale removal process, comprising subjecting a metal sulfide scale to an aqueous composition having a pH ranging from 8 to 10 and comprising a chelating agent and glyoxal, wherein the chelating agent is selected from the group consisting of sodium gluconate; gluconic acid; tetrasodium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA); EDTA; propylenediaminetetraacetic acid (PDTA); nitrilotriacetic acid (NTA); N-(2-hydroxyethyl)ethylenediaminetriacetic acid (HEDTA); diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (DTPA); hydroxyethyliminodiacetic acid (HEIDA); cyclohexylenediaminetetraacetic acid (CDTA); diphenylaminesulfonic acid (DPAS); ethylenediaminedi(o-hydroxyphenylacetic) acid (EDDHA); glucoheptonic acid; oxalic acid; malonic acid; succinic acid; glutaric acid; adipic acid; pimelic acid; suberic acid; azelaic acid; sebacic acid; phthalic acid; terephthalic acid; aconitic acid; carballylic acid; trimesic acid; isocitric acid; citric acid; L-glutamic acid-N,N-diacetic acid (GLDA); salts thereof; and mixtures thereof; glyoxal is present in the aqueous composition in an amount ranging from 20 to 70 wt % of the weight of the aqueous composition, and sulfide ions generated by the removal process are sequestered by said glyoxal.

13. The process of claim 12, wherein the metal sulfide scale is selected from the group consisting of: iron sulfide, zinc sulfide, lead sulfide, and combinations thereof.

14. The process of claim 12, wherein the metal sulfide scale is iron sulfide.

15. A method of removing metal sulfide scale present on a metal surface, said method comprising: providing an aqueous composition having a pH ranging from 8 to 10 and comprising: a chelating agent selected from the group consisting of sodium gluconate; gluconic acid; tetrasodium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA); EDTA; propylenediaminetetraacetic acid (PDTA); nitrilotriacetic acid (NTA); N-(2-hydroxyethyl)ethylenediaminetriacetic acid (HEDTA); diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (DTPA); hydroxyethyliminodiacetic acid (HEIDA); cyclohexylenediaminetetraacetic acid (CDTA); diphenylaminesulfonic acid (DPAS); ethylenediaminedi(o-hydroxyphenylacetic) acid (EDDHA); glucoheptonic acid; oxalic acid; malonic acid; succinic acid; glutaric acid; adipic acid; pimelic acid; suberic acid; azelaic acid; sebacic acid; phthalic acid; terephthalic acid; aconitic acid; carballylic acid; trimesic acid; isocitric acid; citric acid; L-glutamic acid-N,N-diacetic acid (GLDA); salts thereof; and mixtures thereof; and an aldehyde, wherein the aldehyde is present in the aqueous composition in an amount ranging from 20 to 70 wt % of the weight of the aqueous composition; exposing a surface contaminated with said metal sulfide scale to the aqueous composition; allowing sufficient time of exposure to remove said metal sulfide scale from the contaminated surface and sequester sulfur ions generated by removal of metal ions from the scale.

16. The method according to claim 15, wherein the aldehyde is selected from the group consisting of glyoxal, glyoxylic acid, benzaldehyde, cinnamaldehyde, and combinations thereof.

17. The method according to claim 15, further comprising a step of disposal of the chelating agent and/or of the aldehyde having sequestered the sulfur ions.

18. The aqueous composition according to claim 1, wherein the chelating agent is tetrasodium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid.

19. The process according to claim 12, wherein the chelating agent is tetrasodium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid.

20. The method according to claim 15, wherein the chelating agent is tetrasodium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid.

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF A PREFERRED EMBODIMENT

(1) According to a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the metal sulfide scale removing composition provides excellent scale dissolution combined with the sequestration of sulfide ions. This, in turn, reduces the down time for producing wells or facilities where the scale is being removed and the associated costs of removal or lost production. It also reduces the cost of such treatment, by limiting the treatment apparatus required, as well as substantially increasing the safety of individuals involved in scale removal operations by considerably reducing the presence of free sulfate ions and consequently limiting the risk of the formation of hydrogen sulfide gas during the scale removal operations.

(2) According to a preferred embodiment of the present invention, a composition for removing iron sulfide scale permits the removal thereof with a high dissolution capacity. This, in turn, allows reducing the volume of scale remover necessary. This also decreases transport costs and many other related items resulting from the usage of lower volumes of scale remover.

EXAMPLE 1

Process to Prepare a Composition According to a Preferred Embodiment of the Invention

(3) To prepare a 40 wt % Na.sub.4EDTA solution formulation, one must first weigh 400 g of Na.sub.4EDTA, the one dilutes up to 1000 mL with distilled water. To prepare a metal sulfide dissolver solution formulation, one pours 40 mL of 40 wt % Na.sub.4EDTA solution into a graduated cylinder, then one adds 40 mL of 40 wt % glyoxal in water solution. Then, the resulting mixture is diluted up to 100 mL with water. Table 1 provides the physical properties of the composition of Example 1.

(4) TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Physical properties of a composition of Example 1 according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention Metal sulfide dissolver solution of Example 1 Appearance clear, amber Specific Gravity 1.183 pH @ ° C. 8.71 @ 21.0° C. Refractive Index  1.3849 Freezing point −12° C.

EXAMPLE 2

(5) Another composition according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention was prepared. This one contained 40 mL of 40 wt % Na.sub.4EDTA solution into a graduated cylinder, then one adds 25 mL of 40 wt % Glyoxal in water solution. 0.75% of a corrosion inhibitor was incorporated in the composition. The corrosion inhibitor was Basocorr PP® commercially available. Table 2 provides the physical properties of the composition of Example 2.

(6) TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Physical properties of a composition of Example 2 according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention Metal sulfide dissolver solution of Example 2 Appearance clear, amber Specific Gravity 1.156 pH @ ° C. 9.27 @ 22.6° C. Refractive Index  1.3777

(7) Alcohols and derivatives thereof, such as alkyne alcohols and derivatives and preferably propargyl alcohol and derivatives thereof can also be used as corrosion inhibitor as alternative to Basocorr PP®. Propargyl alcohol itself is traditionally used as a corrosion inhibitor which works extremely well at low concentrations. It is a toxic/flammable chemical to handle as a concentrate, so care must be taken during handling the concentrate. In the composition according to the present invention, the toxic effect does not negatively impact the safety of the composition.

(8) Corrosion Testing

(9) The composition of Example 1 was placed in contact with various metal coupons in order to assess its corrosiveness to metals. The coupons were exposed at a temperature of 55° C. for a duration of 168 hours. The results of this corrosion testing are set out in Table 4 below. The duration of the experiment is done to reflect the chelation reaction which occurs when such a metal scale dissolver is used as it is a slow reaction which does not occur substantially faster at elevated temperatures.

(10) TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 4 Corrosion testing on composition of Example 1 various coupons at 55° C., for an exposure of 168 hours and 0 psi pressure Temp Corrosion (° C.) Coupon Hours (lb/ft.sup.2) Pits 55 316SS 168 0.000 No 55 A7075-T6 168 0.004 No
Solubilizing Iron Sulfide

(11) The inventors have previously noted that chelating agents such as EDTA (Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid) or DTPA (diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid) have the ability to dissolve deposited metal sulfides such as iron sulfide. To be effective EDTA and the like must be put in solution at around pH 9. According to a preferred embodiment, the pH is around 8.7.

(12) The incumbent chemical treatment to remove iron sulfide scale typically utilizes acid to dissolve the scale. As the scale removal process is typically carried out at a low pH, (due to the acid present to remove the scale), the sulfide ions which are released from the scale go back into solution, subsequently forming hydrogen sulfide gas. The generation of hydrogen sulfide (H.sub.2S) is an unwanted and serious problem for operators as it is a fatal toxic gas and highly corrosive thus causing further damage to facilities or wellbore tubulars. The value of the present invention lies in allowing the removal of metal sulfide scale (such as iron sulfide) yielding far safer conditions than the conventional process and thus minimizing the treatment costs.

(13) Moreover, the compositions according to the present invention, provide an advantageous environmental safety profile compared to the other chemical methods used to dissolve metal sulfide scale. This represents a major advantage over those previous methods mentioned. Another advantage to the compositions, according to preferred embodiments of the present invention, include the handling of the composition as well as the disposal of the solution effluent post-scale removal.

(14) In terms of metal sulfide scale, one notes there are several scales which can cause problems, leading to potential operational and/or production deficiencies. These include: zinc sulfide, lead sulfide, iron sulfide, and calcium sulfide. The most common form of metal sulfide scale that would be encountered on oilfield equipment or processing facilities is iron sulfide. However, zinc sulfide scale may be present in smaller amounts and is quite difficult to remove. Alternatively lead sulfide scale can be removed somewhat more easily than zinc sulfide but presents different challenges. There are at least 7 known isotopes which are radioactive, three of them have half-lives between 22.3 and 17.3 million years. .sup.202Pb and .sup.205Pb are gamma emitter and .sup.210Pb is a beta emitter. All those isotopes can be a source of natural occurring radioactive material (NORM) and it is advantageous to remove such safely from contaminated surfaces or tools. Having the present invention safely and efficiently remove lead sulfide scale by chelating the lead atoms and sequestrating the sulfur atoms is desirable.

(15) Dissolution Testing

(16) To assess the effectiveness of the compositions according to preferred embodiments of the present invention, metal scale dissolution testing was carried out. Table 5 compiles the results of the tests of the dissolving power of various compositions according to preferred embodiments of the present invention when performed at 60° C. (140° F.).

(17) TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 5 Results of the dissolution of FeS by various compositions at 60° C. (140° F.) carried out in a solution of 100 mL 40 wt % 40 wt % 40 wt % Wt of Final wt Na.sub.4EDTA Sodium Glyoxal Iron(II) Wt of of sample Wt Total soln (v %) Gluconate (v %) Sulfide filter and filter loss solubility (mL) (v %) (mL) (g) (g) (g) (g) (kg/m3) 20 20 4.9991 0.2773 3.7532 1.5232 15.232 20 40 5.0024 0.2920 3.6348 1.6596 16.596 30 30 5.0006 0.2827 3.0019 2.2814 22.814 30 70 3.9918 0.2867 3.3242 0.9543 9.543 40 20 5.0039 0.2867 2.8746 2.4160 24.160 40 40 5.0020 0.2959 2.1636 3.1343 31.343 40 40 3.9987 0.2679 1.1792 3.0874 30.874 40 60 4.0016 0.2808 1.0096 3.2728 32.728 50 50 5.0009 0.2801 1.3556 3.9254 39.254 60 40 4.0002 0.2616 0.8768 3.3850 33.850 70 30 4.0096 0.2792 3.0643 1.2245 12.245 60 40 5.0027 0.2821 4.0723 1.2125 12.125 50 50 5.0020 0.2651 4.1699 1.0972 10.972 40 60 5.0001 0.2783 4.3061 0.9723 9.723

(18) Visual observation of the reactions revealed that no hydrogen sulfide gas was generated during the experiments. This is an indication that the composition used to dissolve the iron sulfide was not an acidic composition and the dissolution (removal) of the metal sulfide scale did not generate hydrogen sulfide gas as conventional acid based treatments do. The results indicate that preferred compositions according to the present invention provide a volume % of chelating and aldehyde in roughly the same amounts. The testing also illustrates that excellent total solubility was obtained for most all of the compositions tested, all the while generating no hydrogen sulfide gas.

(19) Moreover, pH of the resulting solution was measured in order to assess the resulting mixture. The measured pH was in the range of pH 3.5 to 4.5.

(20) To assess the effectiveness of a composition according to preferred embodiments of the present invention on the dissolution of various metal sulfide scale testing was carried out on various metals and with various components missing from said composition. Table 6 compiles the results of the tests.

(21) TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 6 Results of the dissolution of various sulfide scales with various compositions at 60° C. (140° F.) carried out in a solution of 100 mL 40 wt % Final wt Na.sub.4EDTA 40 wt % Wt of Wt of of sample Total soln (v %) Glyoxal (v %) Iron(II) filter and filter Wt loss solubility Sample (mL) (mL) Sulfide (g) (g) (g) (g) (kg/m3) ZnS 40 40 3.9989 28.4005 32.0780 0.3214 3.214 PbS 40 40 6.9981 28.4394 29.9678 5.4697 54.697 FeS 40 4.0017 28.4135 31.8816 0.5336 5.336 FeS 40 3.9989 28.4244 32.4432 −0.0199 −0.199 FeS 40 40 5.0020 0.2959 2.1636 3.1343 31.343 FeS 40 40 3.9987 0.2679 1.1792 3.0874 30.874

(22) The above results are indicative that the selected composition according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention can be used to dissolve a wide variety of metal sulfide scales. As well, it seems that the absence of either the aldehyde component or the chelating agent component causes the compositions to lose a substantial amount of their effectiveness in removing sulfide metals.

(23) Further to the above testing and to assess the effectiveness of a composition according to preferred embodiments of the present invention on the dissolution of various metal sulfide scale under various operating conditions, testing was carried out on various metals and under various real-world scenarios. Some of these scenarios include the present of oil on the scale present on mid-stream and downstream equipment, which typically causes a substantial decrease in the effectiveness of a metal sulfide scale dissolver, Table 7 compiles the results of this series of tests.

(24) TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 7 Results of the dissolution of various sulfide scales with various compositions at 60° C. (140° F.) carried out in a solution of 100 mL 40% Na.sub.4EDTA Glyoxal Total sample soln (v %) (v %) solubility Sample (mL) (mL) (kg/m.sup.3) FeS with 10 wt % Oil 50 50 37.797 FeS with 10 wt % Oil 40 40 35.632 FeS with 10 wt % Oil 40 40 32.392 1# Separator Khurmala FeS* 60 40 15.140 1# Separator Khurmala FeS 40 40 13.142 2# HE KAR FeS** 40 40 141.730 FeS 40 40 32.243 FeS 40 40 26.870 FeS 40 40 30.839 FeS 40 40 29.482 FeS 40 30 30.350 FeS 50 30 32.637 FeS 40 10 9.958 FeS 60 20 14.315 FeS 80 10 9.864 FeS 40 10 12.801 FeS 40 25 28.166 PbS 40 25 39.945 ZnS 40 25 1.455 Note: CI-1A is 10 wt % potassium iodide in water. CI-4a is a commercially available corrosion inhibitor component, Basocorr PP ®. *refers to a refinery sample of metal sulfide scale contaminated with oil where the sample is a viscous paste **refers to a refinery sample of metal sulfide scale contaminated with oil where the sample is flowable

(25) The data collected indicates that a preferred embodiment of the scale dissolving composition according to the present invention can be applied in a variety of conditions and achieve desirable outcomes. This confirms that such compositions have substantial value in the oil and gas industry to overcome substantial problems heretofore not adequately addressed.

(26) It has also been established that such compositions would have value when used in geothermal applications where fluids are circulated deep into the earth and back up to the surface and may encounter similar scaling issues where metal sulfide scale may form on the walls of the tubing of these systems.

(27) As understood by the person skilled in the art, the corrosion inhibitor used in geothermal systems may vary from those used in oil and gas activities as to be adapted to the different conditions encountered in such systems.

(28) Corrosion Testing

(29) The following corrosion testing outlined in the tables below for different compositions (including or excluding corrosion inhibition packages) according to the present invention at temperatures reaching 60° C. This would be representative of the conditions surface fluids (pipelines and refinery, or other surface equipment) would be subjected to. Various temperatures and various periods of exposure times were tested. A desirable result was one where the lb/ft.sup.2 corrosion number is at or below 0.05. More preferably, that number is at or below 0.02. The acidic compositions also referred to as fluid or fluid systems, were also tested at various dilution ratios where 100% represents the undiluted fluid. All dilutions are done with tap water unless indicated otherwise. The results of the corrosion testing are reported in Table 8 below. Additional corrosion testing was carried out on another series of steels and the corrosion testing results are reported in Table 9.

(30) TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 8 Corrosion testing of the Composition of Example #2 on various steels at various temperatures and times of exposure Surface Temp. Time Area Density Coupon (° C.) (Hrs) CI Package (cm.sup.2) (g/cm.sup.3) mils/year mm/year lb/ft.sup.2 1018CS 55 168 N/A 34.710 7.86 439.012 11.151 0.343 316 55 168 N/A 20.968 7.92 −0.025 −0.001 0.000 A7075 55 168 N/A 32.064 2.81 15.880 0.403 0.004 1018CS 60 24 N/A 34.710 7.86 1454.347 36.940 0.162 1018CS 60 24 Spent 34.710 7.86 1711.390 43.469 0.191 1018CS 60 48 N/A 34.710 7.86 1376.629 34.966 0.307 1018CS 60 48 Spent 34.710 7.86 1022.220 25.964 0.228 1018CS 60 24 0.75% CI-4A, 34.710 7.86 657.303 16.696 0.073 0.45% CI-1A 1018CS 60 24 0.75% CI-4A 34.710 7.86 674.580 17.134 0.075 1018CS 60 16 0.75% CI-4A 34.710 7.86 478.558 12.155 0.036 1018CS 40 24 0.75% CI-4A 34.710 7.86 58.625 1.489 0.007 J55 60 16 0.75% CI-4A 30.129 7.86 472.400 11.999 0.035 P110 60 16 0.75% CI-4A 34.839 7.86 262.756 6.674 0.020 QT-900 60 16 0.75% CI-4A 34.774 7.86 350.544 8.904 0.026 J55 40 24 0.75% CI-4A 30.129 7.86 63.472 1.612 0.007 P110 40 24 0.75% CI-4A 34.839 7.86 48.437 1.230 0.005 QT-900 40 24 0.75% CI-4A 34.774 7.86 69.084 1.755 0.008 1018CS 60 16 0.75% CI-4A, SPENT 34.710 7.86 285.934 7.263 0.021 1018CS 40 24 0.75% CI-4A, SPENT 34.710 7.86 222.016 5.639 0.025 1018CS 60 24 0.75% CI-4A, SPENT 34.710 7.86 183.301 4.656 0.020 API 60 16 0.75% CI-4A 33.097 7.86 415.043 10.542 0.031 API 40 24 0.75% CI-4A 33.097 7.86 135.227 3.435 0.015 API 60 16 SPENT 0.75% CI-4A 33.097 7.86 384.634 9.770 0.029 API 40 24 SPENT 0.75% CI-4A 33.097 7.86 209.634 5.325 0.023 Note: CI-1A is 10 wt % potassium iodide in water.

(31) TABLE-US-00008 TABLE 9 Corrosion testing of the Composition of Example #2 on various steels at various temperatures and times of exposure at atmospheric pressure Coupon CI Temperature Duration Corrosion Rate Pitting Type Package (° C.) (° F.) (hrs) mm/year lb/ft.sup.2 Index Nitronic 50 CI-4A 55 131 168 0.004 0.000 0 Brass C26000 CI-4A 55 131 168 0.009 0.000 0 Copper CI-4A 55 131 168 0.000 0.000 0 SD 2507 CI-4A 55 131 168 0.015 0.000 0 Chrome barrel CI-4A 55 131 168 8.121* 0.0229* 0 1018CS CI-4 60 140 24 5.314 0.023 3 J55 CI-4 60 140 24 10.472 0.046 3 P110 CI-4 60 140 24 12.130 0.053 3 Note: CI-4a is a commercially available corrosion inhibitor component, Basocorr PP ®. CI-4 is a commercially available corrosion inhibitor component, Basocorr PA ®. *The Chrome portion of the chrome coupon didn't show significant corrosion however the corrosion was evident on the back of the coupon.
Elastomer Compatibility

(32) When common sealing elements used in the oil and gas industry come in contact with acid compositions they tend to degrade or at least show sign of damage. A number of sealing elements common to activities in this industry were exposed to a composition according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention to evaluate the impact of the latter on their integrity. More specifically, the hardening and drying and the loss of mechanical integrity of sealing elements can have substantial consequences on the efficiency of certain processes as breakdowns require the replacement of defective sealing elements. Testing was carried out to assess the impact of the exposure of composition of Example 2 to various elastomers. Long term (72 hour exposure) elastomer testing on the concentrated product of Example 2 at 70° C. showed little to no degradation of various elastomers, including Nitrile® 70, Viton® 75, EPDM E70® style sealing elements, the results are reported in Tables 10, 11 and 12. The results indicates that the composition of Example 2 is compatible with various elastomers typically found in the oil and gas industry.

(33) TABLE-US-00009 TABLE 10 Elastomer compatibility data of the exposure of various elastomers to the composition of Example #2 for a duration of 3 days (72 hours) at 70° C. Weight Weight Weight Weight Thickness Thickness Thickness Thickness Elastomer before/g after/g Change/g Change/% before/mm after/mm Change/mm Change/% Viton V75 240 0.2688 0.2716 −0.0028 −1.04 3.55 3.58 −0.03 −0.85 Nitrile N70 240 0.1909 0.1939 −0.0030 −1.57 3.53 3.54 −0.01 −0.28 EPDM E70 126 0.0989 0.1004 −0.0015 −1.52 2.59 2.59 0.00 0.00

(34) TABLE-US-00010 TABLE 11 Elastomer compatibility data of the exposure of various elastomers to the composition of Example #2 for a duration of 28 days at 20° C. Weight Weight Weight Weight Thickness Thickness Thickness Thickness Elastomer before/g after/g Change/g Change/% before/mm after/mm Change/mm Change/% Viton V75 240 0.2482 0.2485 −0.0003 −0.12 3.58 3.56 0.02 0.56 Nitrile N70 240 0.1875 0.1883 −0.0008 −0.43 3.52 3.49 0.03 0.85 EPDM E70 126 0.0998 0.1002 −0.0004 −0.40 2.61 2.60 0.01 0.38

(35) TABLE-US-00011 TABLE 12 Elastomer compatibility data of the exposure of various elastomers to the composition of Example #2 for a duration of 3 days at 20° C. Weight Weight Weight Weight Thickness Thickness Thickness Thickness Elastomer before/g after/g Change/g Change/% before/mm after/mm Change/mm Change/% Viton V75 240 0.2839 0.2845 −0.0006 −0.21 3.56 3.57 −0.01 −0.28 Nitrile N70 240 0.1789 0.1798 −0.0009 −0.50 3.5 3.5 0.00 0.00 EPDM E70 126 0.0877 0.0880 −0.0003 −0.34 2.6 2.61 −0.01 −0.38

(36) While the foregoing invention has been described in some detail for purposes of clarity and understanding, it will be appreciated by those skilled in the relevant arts, once they have been made familiar with this disclosure that various changes in form and detail can be made without departing from the true scope of the invention in the appended claims.