United States                      EPA/600/R-01/066
            Environmental Protection
            Agency                        September 2001
vvEPA     Research and
            Development
            MERCURY IN PETROLEUM AND
            NATURAL GAS: ESTIMATION OF
            EMISSIONS FROM PRODUCTION,
            PROCESSING, AND COMBUSTION
            Prepared for

            Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
            Prepared by
            National Risk Management
            Research Laboratory
            Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

-------
                                 Foreword
      The U.S. Environmental  Protection  Agency is  charged by  Congress  with
protecting the Nation's land, air,  and water resources. Under a mandate of national
environmental laws, the Agency strives to formulate and  implement actions leading to
a compatible balance  between human activities and the ability of natural systems to
support and nurture life. To meet this mandate, EPA's research program is providing
data and technical support for solving environmental problems today and building a
science knowledge base  necessary to manage  our ecological resources wisely,
understand how pollutants affect our health, and prevent or reduce environmental risks
in the future.

      The National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL) is the Agency's
center for investigation of technological and management approaches for preventing
and reducing risks from pollution that threaten human health and the environment.  The
focus of the Laboratory's research program is on methods and their cost-effectiveness
for prevention and control  of pollution to air, land,  water, and subsurface resources,
protection of water quality in public water systems; remediation of contaminated sites,
sediments and  ground  water; prevention and control  of  indoor air  pollution;  and
restoration of ecosystems.  NRMRL collaborates with both public and private sector
partners to foster technologies that reduce the cost of compliance and to anticipate
emerging problems. NRMRL's research provides solutions to environmental problems
by: developing and promoting technologies that protect and  improve the environment;
advancing scientific and engineering  information  to support regulatory and policy
decisions; and  providing the technical support  and information transfer to ensure
implementation  of environmental  regulations and strategies  at the national, state, and
community levels.

      This publication has  been  produced as part of the Laboratory's  strategic
long-term  research plan.  It  is published and made available  by  EPA's Office of
Research and Development to assist the user community and to link researchers with
their clients.
                                 E. Timothy Oppelt, Director
                                 National Risk Management Research Laboratory

                           EPA REVIEW NOTICE

     This report has been peer and administratively reviewed by the U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency, and approved for  publication.  Mention of trade names or
     commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.

     This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information
     Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.

-------
                                           EPA-600/R-01-066

                                           September 2001
  Mercury in Petroleum and Natural Gas:
        Estimation  of Emissions from
Production, Processing, and Combustion
                           by
                       S. Mark Wilhelm
                   Mercury Technology Services
                   23014 Lutheran Church Rd.
                      Tomball, TX 77375
                EPA Purchase Order No. 1C-R013-NASA
                      EPA Project Officer
                     David A. Kirchgessner
              National Risk Management Research Laboratory
                 Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
                       Prepared for:
                U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                 Office of Research and Development
                    Washington, DC 20460

-------
                                       Abstract
    Mercury is a trace component of all fossil fuels including natural gas, gas condensates, crude
oil, coal, tar sands and other bitumens. The use of fossil hydrocarbons as fuels  provides the main
opportunity for emissions of the mercury they contain to the atmospheric  environment but other
avenues also exist in production, transportation and in processing systems. These other avenues
may provide  mercury directly to air, water or solid waste streams. This document examines
mercury in liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons that are produced  and/or  processed in the United
States for the purpose  of estimating, to  the extent possible, emissions of mercury to the U.S.
environment from petroleum and natural gas.

    Although the masses of petroleum and natural gas processed and consumed  in the U.S. are
very large, only  limited  amounts of information are available concerning mercury in gas  and oil
processed  domestically. This report compiles  existing information  and  data  on  mercury in
petroleum and natural gas and examines the current state of knowledge of the amounts of mercury
in  petroleum and  gas  produced  and imported  to  the U.S. In  addition, the  distribution  and
transformation of mercury in production, transportation and processing are considered relative to
the determination  of  mercury  in  air emissions,  wastewater, and products  from oil  and  gas
processing facilities. Finally, the  fates of  mercury in combusted gas and liquid fuel products are
examined.

    The mercury associated with petroleum and natural gas production and processing enters the
environment primarily via solid waste streams  (drilling and refinery waste) and  via combustion of
fuels. In total the amount may exceed 10,000 kg yearly but the present estimates are uncertain due
to lack of statistical data. The amounts in solid wastes and atmospheric emissions from combustion
are estimated to be roughly equal.  Solid  waste streams likely contain a much higher fraction of
mercuric sulfides  or  other  insoluble  compounds  than water  soluble species  and  thus the
bioavailability of mercury from this  category is much more limited than that which derives from
combustion.

    This report is  intended to assist in the identification  of those areas that  require additional
research,  especially  the needs  associated with  measuring  the  concentrations of the various
chemical species of mercury in the various  feedstocks and waste streams associated with the oil
and gas industry. Acquisition of additional  information will be necessary if accurate estimates of the
magnitudes  of  mercury emissions  associated with U.S. petroleum and natural gas  are to  be
accomplished.

-------
                                     Contents


Abstract 	   ii

Tables 	   v

Figures  	   vi

Abbreviations 	   vii

Acknowledgements 	   viii

    Chapter 1  Introduction	   1
       References 	   2

    Chapter 2  Background	   3
       References 	   4

    Chapter 3  Oil and Gas Processed in The United States  	   6
       Chemistry of Oil and Natural Gas 	   6
       World Oil Production  	   8
       U.S. Oil and Gas Production and Imports  	   9
       Geologic Origin of Mercury in Oil and Natural Gas 	   14
       References 	   14

    Chapter 4  Petroleum and  Natural Gas Processing 	   16
       Petroleum Refining  	   16
       Gas Processing 	   22
       References 	   23

    Chapter 5  Mercury in Petroleum  and Natural Gas	   24
       Properties of Mercury and Mercury Compounds 	   24
       Mercury in Hydrocarbons 	   25
       Analytical Methods 	   31
              Gas  	   31
              Liquids  	   32
       References 	   33

    Chapter 6  Mercury in Refining and Gas Processing	   35
       Extraction  	   35
       Transportation  	   37
       Refining	   37
       Gas Processing 	   40
       Mercury Removal Systems  	   40
       References 	   41

-------
Chapter 7  Mercury Emissions from Oil and Natural Gas Production and Processing 43
    Mercury Emissions to Water 	  43
           Produced Water  	  43
           Refinery Wastewater 	  44
    Mercury Emissions to Air	   47
    Mercury Emissions Via Solid Waste Streams	  49
    Mercury in Crude Oil  	  50
    Mercury in Refined Products  	  58
    Estimate of Mercury Emissions from Refineries	   59
    Mercury in Combusted Gas and Estimated Emissions	   61
    U.S. EPA Estimates	  62
    References  	   64

Chapter 8  Data Requirements to Estimate Mercury Emissions	   67
    References  	   69
                                       IV

-------
                                        Tables

Table 2-1       Estimate of Mercury Cycling in the Biosphere  	     4
Table 2-2       Estimate of Point Source Mercury Discharge 	    5

Table 3-1       Typical Characteristics of Crude Oil 	     7
Table 3-2       World  Production of Crude Oil, NGL and Other Liquids 	     8
Table 3-3       World  Natural Gas Production 	     8
Table 3-4       U.S. Production and Reserves of Crude Oil, NGL and Natural Gas	    9
Table 3-5       U.S. Crude Oil Reserves and Production  	   10
Table 3-6       Top Thirty U.S. Oil Fields 	   11
Table 3-7       Top Thirty U.S. Natural Gas Fields  	   12
Table 3-8       Oil Imports to U.S. Refineries  	    13
Table 3-9       Nomenclature and Age of Geological Strata 	   15

Table 4.1       Distillation Processes	   17
Table 4-2       Decomposition  Processes  	    18
Table 4-3       Unification  and  Rearrangement Processes  	   18
Table 4-4       Treatment Processes  	   19
Table 4-5       Refined Products  	    19

Table 5-1       Physical Properties of Elemental Mercury 	    24
Table 5-2       Solubilities and Volatilities of Mercury Compounds 	    25
Table 5-3       Natural Abundance of Mercury Compounds in Hydrocarbons 	    28
Table 5-4       Solubility of Mercury Compounds in Liquids 	    29
Table 5-5       Mercury Compounds in Natural Gas Condensates	    29
Table 5-6       Operational Hg Speciation  in Petroleum Samples	   29

Table 6-1       Oil-Water Distribution Coefficients  	   36
Table 6-2       Total Mercury in Desalter Sludge	   38
Table 6-3       Mercury Removal Systems for Hydrocarbons  	  42

Table 7-1       Mercury in  Produced Waters 	   45
Table 7-2       Mercury Concentrations in  Produced Water 	   46
Table 7-3       Pollutant Concentrations for a Typical Refinery Wastewater  	  46
Table 7-4       Mercury Emission  Factors for Refinery Processes 	   49
Table 7-5       Total Mercury Concentrations in Crude Oil by NAA (1970)  	   52
Table 7-6       Total Mercury Concentrations in  Crude Oil by NAA  (1975)  	   52
Table 7-7       Total Mercury Concentrations in  Alberta Crude Oils	    53
Table 7-8       Total Mercury Concentrations in Libyan Crude Oils	    53
Table 7-9       Mercury Concentrations in  U.S. West Coast Crude Oils	    54
Table 7-10     Total Mercury Concentrations in Crude Oils (Bloom 2000)	   54
Table 7-11      Mercury Concentrations in  Crude Oils Processed in NJ Refineries	    55
Table 7-12     Total Mercury Concentrations in Crude Oils (EC 2000) 	   56
Table 7-13     Mercury Content of Crude Oils Processed in Canada	    57
Table 7-14     Summary of THg in Crude  Oils and Gas Condensates	    57
Table 7-15     Summary of THg in Refined Products	    58
Table 7-16     Summary of Mercury Concentrations in Fuel Oils 	    58
Table 7-17     Estimates of Mercury in Crude Oil and Refined Products  	    60
Table 7-18     Fuels from Crude Oil Used by Refineries	    61
Table 7-19     Mercury in  Major Crude Oil Imports	    61

-------
Table 7-20     Total Hg Concentration in U.S. Pipeline Gas	   62
Table 7-21     U.S. EPA Estimates of Mercury in Fuel Oil	   64
Table 7-22     Mercury Concentration in Oils Used as Fuels 	   64

Table 8-1       Summary of Estimates for Mercury Emissions 	   69
                                        Figures
Figure 4-1
Figure 4-2
Figure 4-3
Figure 4-4
Figure 4-5

Figure 5-1
Figure 5-2

Figure 6-1
Figure 6-2
Figure 6-3
Figure 6-4
Typical Refining Process	
Primary Distillation 	
Vacuum DistiNation  	
Segregated Water Treatment System for a Typical Refinery
Gas Process Schematic 	
20
21
21
22
23
Solubility of Elemental Mercury in Normal Alkanes 	   30
Distribution of Mercury Compounds in Liquids 	   30

Primary Separation  	   37
Crude Oil Desalting  	   38
Mercury (Total) in Distilled Products  	   39
Distribution of THg Concentrations in Petroleum Coke  	   39
                                            VI

-------
                                 Abbreviations
API
BP
bpd
bpy
CVAA
CVAF
DFO
DOE
EOR
EPA
GF
HPLC
ICP
LNG
Mg
MS
NAA
NGL
NPDES
OAR
OPEC
ORD
OSWER
OW
PBT
RFO
SCF
IDS
TEG
TMDL
TRI
USGS
UV
VP
American Petroleum Institute
Boiling Point
barrels per day
barrels per year
Cold Vapor Atomic Absorbance
Cold Vapor Atomic Fluorescence
Distillate Fuel Oil
(U.S.) Department of Energy
Enhanced Oil Recovery
(U.S.) Environmental Protection Agency
Gulf (of Mexico)
High Performance Liquid Chromatography
Inductively Coupled Plasma
Liquefied Natural Gas
Megagram (106 grams)
Mass Spectroscopy
Neutron  Activation Analysis
Natural Gas Liquids
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Office of Air and Radiation (U.S. EPA)
Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries
Office of Research and Development (U.S. EPA)
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (U.S. EPA)
Office of Water (U.S. EPA)
Persistent, Bioaccumulative, Toxic
Residual Fuel Oil
Standard Cubic Foot
Total Dissolved Solids
Triethyleneglycol
Total Maximum Daily Load
Toxic Release Inventory
United States Geological Survey
Ultraviolet
Vapor Pressure
                                         VII

-------
                           Acknowledgements
1.   Michael Aucott (New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection) and the New Jersey
    Mercury Study Committee for data on mercury in crude oils processed by New Jersey
    refineries.
2.   David Kirchgessner (U.S. EPA/ORD/NRMRL-RTP) for information on methane emissions
    in natural gas processing.
3.   Wenli Duo for the report and data: "Mercury Emissions From The Petroleum Refining
    Sector In Canada," for Environment Canada, Trans-boundary Air Issues Branch,
    Hazardous Air Pollutants Program.
4.   Nicolas Bloom (Frontier Geosciences) for numerous helpful suggestions and discussions.
5.   Robert Kelly (Analytical Chemistry Division, Chemical Science and Technology Laboratory,
    National Institute of Standards and Technology) for helpful discussions.
6.   Bob Morris (Coastal Corporation)  for a copy of his paper "New TRI Reporting Rules on
    Mercury," presented at the  National Petroleum Refiners Association Meeting, San Antonio,
    Texas (September, 2000).
7.   George N. Breit (U.S. Geological Survey, Denver Federal Center) for data and discussions
    concerning mercury in produced water.
8.   David E. Panzer (Minerals  Management Service, Camarillo, CA) for data on mercury in
    produced water.
9.   Bob Finkelman (U.S. Geological Survey) for information on mercury in coal and information
    on geologic origins of mercury in fossil fuels.
10.  Herb Tiedemann (National  Petroleum Technology Office, Tulsa, OK) for data on mercury in
    the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
11.  Karin Ritter (American Petroleum  Institute) for providing several API reports.
                                       VIM

-------
                                             Chapter 1
                                            Introduction
Discharges  of  mercury  to  the  environment  from
industrial  sources   are   recognized   as  significant
contributors to the accumulations of mercury in aquatic
ecosystems. The reasons are many but they mainly
stem  from the  current understanding  of the  global
mercury   cycle  and   the  chemical  and   biological
mechanisms  that  account for  the transformation  of
atmospheric   mercury  and  mercury   in   industrial
wastewaters  to  the  methylmercury  in  fish   (U.S.
EPA/ATSDR    1996).   Further,   the   toxicity    of
methylmercury  to humans and  piscivorous mammals
and the effects of inorganic mercury species on aquatic
organisms are now firmly established (NRC 2000, U.S.
EPA  1996).   The  comprehensive  reviews   of  the
geochemical aspects of mercury (EPA 1997a,  Porcella
1994, Morel et al. 1998) strongly suggest  that mercury
originating from human activities  is a major contributor
to the  global  cycle  and  hence  to  the   resultant
methylmercury  in the  aquatic food chain.  A general
overview  of the geochemical mercury cycle and  its
anthropogenic contributions are provided in Chapter 2.

Mercury and  its common chemical forms are officially
designated   by  the   U.S.   EPA   as   persistent,
bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) pollutants, which are
defined  as  those  substances  that are  persistent
(months to years) in the environment, accumulate and
concentrate in  biota and that are  toxic to  organisms
(EPA 1997b,  EPA  1999). Mercury  and  its compounds
are thus  the  subjects of numerous regulations that
originate  from  both   federal and  regional   agency
jurisdictions.  The   statutes   that  regulate   mercury
discharges to the environment include provisions based
on both human and aquatic life concerns.

Under the general  program to develop action  plans for
PBT  pollutants, the U.S.   EPA  has constructed  an
action plan  for mercury that focuses on  regulatory
actions, enforcement and research  to characterize and
reduce the risks associated with mercury. As part of the
mercury action  plan, U.S. EPA Office of Research and
Development   (EPA/ORD)  has developed a  mercury
research  and  monitoring   strategy    to   facilitate
coordination and direction  of  research efforts  involving
mercury. Some of the research topics currently under
investigation   include  source  evaluation,  emission
characterization,  atmospheric  transport  and  fate,
deposition,   fate  in  terrestrial  and  aquatic  media,
bioaccumulation,  ecological  toxicity,  health  effects,
exposure, monitoring, risk management,  control  and
remediation.

The EPA/ORD research plan includes the development
and evaluation of emission control technology for coal-
fired utilities and  other mercury emitters in support of
the Office of Air and  Radiation (OAR) and the Office of
Solid  Waste  and Emergency  Response (OSWER)
programs. This effort includes attention to speciation
issues,  control option costs and  the disposal of the
mercury-containing wastes  resulting  from  the  control
options. Also included are research efforts directed to
the development  of fate,  transport and transformation
data  in support of  the  Office  of  Water  (OW)
determinations of total maximum  daily  loads (TMDLs)
for mercury.

While the issues involving mercury emissions from coal
and waste  combustion are  currently under intensive
investigation,  U.S.  EPA  acknowledges that  little is
known about  mercury  emissions  from  the petroleum
and  natural gas  industries  (EPA  1997b).  Given the
magnitude of petroleum and natural gas consumption
in  the U.S., it would seem  prudent to have accurate
data on the ranges  and mean amounts of mercury in
petroleum and gas produced in, and imported to, the
U.S. In  addition, the  distribution and  transformation of
mercury  in  production, transportation and processing
are likewise important to the determination of mercury
in air  emissions, wastewater, and products  from oil and
gas processing facilities. Finally, the fate of mercury in
combusted fuel products needs definition.

EPA/ORD has initiated a  program to better define the
issues related to mercury in the  natural gas  and oil
industries. This document  was commissioned by U.S.
EPA/ORD   to  document  the   current   level  of
understanding of  the factors that influence the role of
petroleum and  natural gas as contributing sources of

-------
mercury. Several major questions are addressed in the
discussion to follow:

    •   What are the  estimated  ranges  and  mean
       amounts of mercury  (total)  in oil and  natural
       gas?

    •   What are the major  sources  of  mercury in
       hydrocarbons  as  categorized  by  geology,
       location of origin and hydrocarbon type?

    •   What chemical species of mercury are present
       in  petroleum and natural gas and how do they
       distribute in production, processing and refining
       systems?

    •   What is the current knowledge  concerning the
       amounts of  mercury  that  exist in  the  major
       egression pathways from petroleum processing
       including  wastewater,  air   emissions,   solid
       waste and fuel products?

    •   What are the estimated  magnitudes of water
       and  atmospheric  mercury  emissions   from
       petroleum processing?

    •   What are the major deficiencies in  the current
       knowledge  and  what data  are  required to
       improve understanding?

Strategies to reduce anthropogenic mercury emissions
should be based on the known amounts of mercury in
industrial emissions. The compilation of information that
follows is intended to assist government and industry to
define  the research  and data gathering that may be
necessary to improve the current level of understanding
concerning mercury in fossil fuels.

In the discussion  to  follow, an  effort  has  been
made, when  referring  to   the  concentration of
mercury  in  liquids and  solids,  to apply the  units
"ppb" meaning parts per  billion  by weight  with
correction for density of liquids and solids. Such
concentrations are referred to as THg meaning total
mercury   per   unit  weight  of  the  matrix.  This
designation derives from  the  fact  that  mercury
analysis   methods  typically  do   not  distinguish
forms  and all  forms of mercury in  a sample are
summed   in the  procedures employed.  Thus  the
term  THg  (ppb)  means  the  summed  (by  the
analytical method)  concentration of  mercury in a
sample of measured or calculated weight.

For gases, the units are typically jig/m3 meaning \ig
per  standard  cubic  meter of   the  gas.   It  is
acknowledged   that   many  gas  concentrations
reported   in  the literature  are  not  corrected to
standard   conditions   (which   have   different
interpretations  for chemists and  engineers).  No
attempt   has  been   made  to  attempt   such
corrections, which are  negligible in comparison to
the analytical uncertainties  for such values. The
term THg for gases is not  applied  as gas analysis
methods (as historically practiced) are incapable to
distinguish volatile forms. Gas concentrations infer
total amounts in that particulate mercury is seldom
encountered  in  analysis  of natural  gas streams.
Exceptions do exist  and are acknowledged but are
not typically identified in the text.

References

Morel,  F., Kraepiel, A., and  M. Amyot,  1998, The
  Chemical Cycle  and  Bioaccumulation  of  Mercury,
  Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst., 29:543.

National Research Council, 2000, Toxicological Effects
  of  Methylmercury,    National   Academy   Press,
  Washington, DC.

Porcella,   D.,   1994,   Mercury in  the  Environment,
  Biogeochemistry in Mercury Pollution,  Integration  and
  Synthesis, Watras, C. and J. Huckabee, eds., Lewis
  Publishers, Boca Raton, FL.

U.S. EPA, 1996, 1995 Updates: Water quality criteria
  documents for the protection of aquatic life in ambient
  water,   EPA/820/B-96/001   (NTIS    PB98-153067),
  Office of Water, Washington, DC.

U.S. EPA, 1997a,  Mercury  Study Report to Congress,
  EPA/452/R-97/003 (NTIS PB98-124738), Office of Air
  Quality  Planning  and Standards, Research  Triangle
  Park, NC and Office of Research and Development,
  Washington, DC.

U.S. EPA, 1997b, EPA Strategic Plan, EPA/190/R-
  97/002   (NTIS PB98-130487), Office  of the Chief
  Financial Officer, Washington, DC.

U.S. EPA, 1999, PBT  Final Rule Effective for Reporting
  Year 2000,  64  FR  58666,  October  29,  1999,
  Washington, DC.

U.S. EPA  and Agency for  Toxic  Substances  and
  Disease Registry (ATSDR),  1996, National Alert on
  Metallic Mercury Exposure, Washington, DC.

-------
                                              Chapter 2
                                            Background
The geochemical mechanisms by which mercury cycles
in the environment are generally known in concept but
some aspects of the cycle are incompletely understood
in  detail.  The level of understanding, however,  has
improved markedly over the last 10 years and many of
the aspects of the  cycle can be described with a  fair
degree of confidence. The term cycle  is used because
of the movement  of  mercury  between  major pools
(major pools are air and water; geologic mercury is not
considered a  pool  but contributes to the  cycle)  at
significant rates of flux (see Table 2-1). The movement
is coincident with chemical transformations of mercury
that  are  produced by physical, chemical  and  biologic
forces. While the  total amount of mercury in the world
as a whole is constant, the amount in  the biosphere is
not.  The amount of mercury mobilized  and  released
into the biosphere has increased markedly over time,
especially from human activities since  the beginning of
the industrial age.

Contributions of  mercury to the biosphere  originate
from  both  natural  and  anthropogenic sources.  The
natural sources are  volcanic  activity; erosion of terrain;
dissolution  of mercury minerals  in oceans, lakes  and
rivers;  and a variety  of other  avenues  that are not
related to  human  activities. Mercury  also enters the
biosphere from industrial activities through its  use as a
raw  material  and from combustion of fossil fuels and
waste. The  use  of   mercury  as  an   ingredient  in
manufactured products  has been reduced  in  recent
years and  likely will be completely discontinued within
the next decade or two.

The  atmosphere is  considered important  because it is
the  mobilizing  pathway  for  mercury deposition  to
remote regions  not  contiguous with industrial  activities
and  thus  provides  the  avenue for  introduction  of
mercury  to  otherwise  pristine  environments.  The
estimate  of  the  total  annual  global  input  to  the
atmospheric pool from  all sources including  natural,
anthropogenic, and  oceanic emissions  is approximately
5,000 Mg (see Table 2.1,  evasion 2,000 Mg,  terestrial
3,000 Mg).
Most  of the mercury  in  the atmosphere exists  as
elemental mercury vapor, which  can circulate  in the
atmosphere  for  more than  a year and  thus  can be
transported to regions far from the source of emission.
Mercury in rainfall is the primary avenue of egress from
the atmosphere to the surface.  Mercury  in  surface
waters can be re-emitted back to  the atmosphere  as a
vapor  (evasion).  From land, mercury  re-enters  the
atmosphere  from  the  transpiration  of  plants  or  as
mercury  adsorbed  to mobilized particles. As it  cycles
between the atmosphere,  land,  and water,  mercury
undergoes    numerous   chemical   and   physical
transformations,  some  of which  are not  completely
understood in a quantitative fashion.

While  most of  the  mercury in  the atmosphere  is
elemental,   most  of  the   mercury   in  water,  soil,
sediments,  or plants  and animals  is in the form  of
inorganic mercury  salts and organometallics  (mostly
methylmercury). Bacteria in sediments produce  most of
the  methylated form  of  mercury  but  the  exact
mechanisms  have  yet  to   be   completely  defined.
Although its  concentration is  a very small percentage of
the amount in water, methylmercury concentrates in the
aquatic food chain.  Predatory organisms at the top of
the aquatic food  web  acquire  and  accumulate the
methylmercury  in  their diets and  present elevated
concentrations.  While  the  concentration  at the  bottom
of the  aquatic food chain may be at  the low parts per
trillion level,  at the top,  fish tissue  can present mercury
concentrations in excess of 1 ppm.   Bioconcentration
factors are thus on the order of 104 to  105.

Inorganic mercury (oxidized and elemental)  is  less
efficiently absorbed and more readily eliminated from
the body than  methylmercury and, therefore, does not
tend to  bioaccumulate  in fish  or other organisms.
Inorganic mercury (mercuric  ion, mercury complexed to
inorganic ligands) is toxic to organisms, however, and is
the  dominant  toxic   species   in   water.  Although
environmentally  important,   the  toxicity  of inorganic
mercury is secondary in consideration to  its role as the

-------
species that  is  acted  on  by  bacteria  to  produce
methylmercury that concentrates  in the  aquatic food
chain.  It is the rising amount of methylmercury  in fish
and the known effects of inorganic mercury on aquatic
organisms that are the  principal reasons to reduce the
human contribution to the mercury cycle. Since natural
emissions are largely  outside the domain of human
influence,  attention is  focused  on man's  contribution
and on ways to minimize it.

The vast majority of the mercury that enters the  global
mercury  cycle  from  human  activities comes  from
combustion of waste and fuels. According to  the U.S.
EPA  (1997)  estimates  (see   Table   2-2),  of  the
approximately  140 Mg of  mercury  emitted  to  the
environment in the U.S. from point sources in  the year
analyzed  (1994-95), fully  125  Mg  originated  from
combustion. According  to   the  EPA  estimates,  the
breakdown for combustion is roughly 50/40/10 percent
for  coal  burning,  waste  incineration  and  fuel  oil
combustion (U.S. EPA 1997).

The U.S. total  mercury  emissions from point sources of
125  Mg/y  compares  to  approximately  2,000  Mg/y
globally.  The  U.S.  percentage  of  the  world  mercury
emission total  is less than  the  U.S. percentage of its
energy usage. The discrepancy  derives from  the fact
that  waste disposal and  coal  combustion are  more
prevalent in countries outside the U.S.
                Major R&D efforts are now being directed to developing
                systems and  process modifications to  reduce  mercury
                emissions from U.S. combustion  sources.  For waste
                incinerators and coal-fired  boilers, some  of the new
                technology is now being  applied. The  use of  mercury
                removal equipment for coal-fired boilers was  recently
                mandated and  full implementation  should occur  by
                2005. Extension  of  regulations to oil-fired boilers  is
                currently under review.

                U.S. EPA (1997)  acknowledges that the estimates  for
                mercury in petroleum (fuel oil) are highly suspect due to
                the fact that data  are lacking both  for mercury  in crude
                oil and in many of the fuel products  derived from  it.
                Given that the amount of oil consumed in the U.S.  is
                roughly  the same as the amount of coal burned, it
                would seem prudent to obtain a more precise  estimate
                of mercury in crude oil so as to  be able to  estimate
                atmospheric  mercury emissions  that  originate  from
                refineries and liquid fuels.

                References

                U.S. EPA,  1997,  Mercury Study  Report to Congress,
                  EPA/452/R-97/003 (NTIS PB98-124738), Office of Air
                  Quality Planning and Standards, Research  Triangle
                  Park, NC and Office of Research and Development,
                  Washington, DC.
                         Table 2-1 - Estimate of Mercury Cycling in the Biosphere
                                             (U.S. EPA 1997)

                                               Rates, Amounts, Concentrations
                       Pools
                Ocean
                Air
                    Flux (yearly)
                Ocean to Air
                Air to Ocean
                Air to Ground
                Ground to Air
                Human Production
                    Sink (yearly)
                Marine precipitation
11x10  kg (0.5 - 3 ppt ocean; 1-10 ppt fresh water)
5 x 106 kg (1 -10 ng/m3; mean lifetime > 1 year)

2 x 106 kg/y (evasion)
2 x 106 kg/y (marine deposition)
3 x 106 kg/y (terrestrial deposition)
3 x 106 kg/y (natural 1 + man 2)
4x 106 kg/y (local 2 + air 2)
0.2x 10bkg/y

-------
             Table 2-2 - Estimate of Point Source Mercury Discharge
                                (U.S. EPA 1997)

U.S. year 1994-95                                     Mg/y       % of Total (1)
Point Sources
Combustion sources
Utility boilers
Coal
Oil
Natural gas
Municipal waste incinerators
Commercial/industrial boilers
Coal
Oil
Medical waste incinerator
Hazardous waste incinerator
Residential boilers
Oil
Coal
Sewage Sludge Incinerators
Wood-fired boilers
Crematories
Manufacturing Sources
Miscellaneous Sources
141.0
125.3
47.2
(47.0)
(0.2)
(<0.1)
26.9
25.8
(18.8)
(7.0)
14.6
6.4
3.3
(2.9)
(0.4)
0.9
0.2
<0.1
14.4
1.3
96.9
86.9
32.8
(32.6)
(0.1)
(0.0)
18.7
17.9
(13.1)
(4.9)
10.1
4.4
2.3
(2.0)
(0.3)
0.6
0.1
0.0
10.0
0.9
   (1) Total for percentage amounts includes non-point sources

-------
                                              Chapters
                       Oil And Gas Processed in  the United States
Fossil fuels include coal, petroleum, natural gas, shale
oil and several other forms of bituminous fuel materials
that were produced by the decay of plant remains over
geological time  (Speight  1999). Most of the world's
energy  is derived from  the  fossil  fuels  with  smaller
amounts of energy coming  from nuclear, wind, solar
and hydroelectric sources. Fossil fuels are projected to
be the major sources of energy for  the next 50 to  100
years.

Mercury  is  a   trace  component  of  all  geologic
hydrocarbons. Its origin  relative to the origin of the oil
and gas in which  it is found, and the geological  reasons
for its occurrence in the  various types of fossil fuels are
largely unexplored topics. In  the  effort to account for
mercury in petroleum and natural  gas,  it is  useful to
examine mercury in the  context of petroleum chemistry
in  general  and  in the  context of  the extraction  and
product manufacturing  processes  for  petroleum  and
natural  gas  (Chapter 4).  Although  of interest from  a
geological standpoint, the quantities of fuels produced
from shale oil, tar sands, and other forms of bitumen are
small  relative to  coal, crude  oil  and natural gas. The
occurrence of mercury  in shale oil and  tar  sands  is
largely undocumented and will not be discussed.

Chemistry of Oil and Natural  Gas

The  distinction  between  petroleum (taken to  mean
liquid  hydrocarbons when extracted from the earth)  and
natural gas (taken to mean material in a purely gaseous
state  when  extracted)   is  somewhat  arbitrary   and
inconvenient. The  industrial  processes  that  convert
liquids  to  products  are different  from  those  that
separate  gases,  however,  and   the  distinction  is
preserved for discussion  of  processing.  It should be
stated that liquids and gas are co-produced from almost
all gas and  petroleum  reservoirs  and the distinction
between a gas field and  an oil field rests on the relative
proportions  of  produced  phases  and the  molecular
weight distribution of the compounds produced.
Crude  oils  are complex mixtures  containing  many
different   hydrocarbon   compounds.   The   chemical
composition and physical properties  of crude  oil vary
dramatically from one field to another. Crude oils range
in  consistency  from water-like  liquids to  semi-solids,
and in  color from clear to black. An  average crude  oil
contains  about  84% carbon,  14%  hydrogen,  1-3%
sulfur,  and  less than 1% each of  nitrogen,  oxygen,
metals,  and  salts.  The  types  of organic  molecules
contained  in crude oils  are  numerous  (more  than
10,000 have been  detected)  but  the major types are
saturated and  unsaturated straight  chain  and  cyclic
hydrocarbons with  lesser amounts  of substituted (for
carbon or hydrogen) molecules. Substitutional moieties
include (in order of occurrence) sulfur, oxygen,  nitrogen
and metals.

Crude  oils  are  generally  classified  as  paraffinic,
naphthenic,  or   aromatic  based  on  the  proportional
dominance   of  hydrocarbon   molecules   in   these
categories. Crude oil assays are used to classify crude
oils and are based on either the distillation  profile or  on
specific gravity and  boiling points.  More comprehensive
crude assays determine  the value of the crude (i.e.,  its
yield and quality of useful products)  and  processing
parameters. Crude  oils are usually grouped according
to the products they yield. Table 3-1  provides examples
of   typical   characteristics of  common   crude oils
according to the compositional categories.

Paraffinic hydrocarbon compounds found  in crude  oil
are saturated (maximum hydrogen bonding) and can  be
either  straight  chains (normal) or  branched  chains
(isomers) of carbon  atoms. The lighter, straight-chain
paraffin molecules  (alkanes)  are  found in  gases and
paraffin waxes.  Isomer  paraffins are  usually found  in
heavier fractions of crude oil.

Aromatics are unsaturated compounds having at least
one benzene ring as part of their molecular structure.
Naphthalenes   are  fused    double-ring   aromatic
compounds.  Complex aromatics  containing three  or
more fused aromatic  rings are  found in heavier crude

-------
are found  in  all  fractions  of  crude oil  and  include
monocycloparaffins     (mostly     C4-C6)      and
dicycloparaffins (mostly C6-C10)

Crude  oils  are  also defined  in  terms of American
Petroleum Institute (API) gravity, which is a measure of
density. Crude oils with  lower  percentages of carbon
(lighter density,  less viscous, higher API gravity) are
richer  in  paraffins and  yield  greater  proportions  of
gasoline  and light petroleum products. Crude  oils with
higher  percentages of carbon (heavier, more  viscous,
lower API  gravity) usually  have  greater amounts  of
aromatics. Crude oils that contain hydrogen sulfide  or
other  reactive sulfur compounds  are referred  to  as
"sour." Those  with  less  reactive  sulfur  are  called
"sweet."

Sulfur  in  crude  oil  can take  the form of hydrogen
sulfide,   as   mercaptans,   sulfides,   disulfides   and
thiophenes or as elemental sulfur. All crude oils contain
sulfur but in  differing  amounts and types. Heavier crude
oil fractions  typically  contain more total  sulfur. Oxygen
compounds  such as  phenols, ketones, and carboxylic
acids  also occur in crude oils in varying amounts but
usually   in  much   lesser   proportions  than  sulfur
compounds. Nitrogen is found  in  lighter fractions  of
crude  oil as  basic  compounds,  and more  often  in
heavier fractions of crude oil as non-basic compounds.
Several  trace  metals  (in addition  to  mercury)  are
sometimes present  in  crude  oil  and  these  include
nickel, iron, arsenic and  vanadium. Crude oils often
contain   inorganic  salts  such  as  sodium  chloride,
magnesium  chloride,   and   calcium   chloride   in
suspension  or  dissolved  in  entrained  water  (brine).
Crude oils  when extracted  from  the  earth  contain
suspended inorganic material including silicates (sand)
and carbonates. The distribution of particle sizes varies
considerably  from  colloids  to fine  sand. The more
viscous the oil the more suspended material it typically
holds.

Natural   gas  generally  is  predominantly  methane
(usually >  90%) with lesser amounts of propane  and
butanes (C1 -  C5,  1-5 carbon atoms per molecule).
Liquids co-produced from  natural gas are mostly C5 to
C10  and  have little aromatic character. Carbon dioxide
and  hydrogen  sulfide  are  common  components of
natural gas. Mercury (elemental) is  a  unique metallic
component of natural gas because of its volatility.

Natural gas is geologically different from most oil in the
sense that it is a less mature material. Less  mature
means that gas  hydrocarbon reservoirs  have been
subjected to  subterranean temperature  and  pressure
over shorter periods of geologic time.  As a result the
liquids co-produced with natural gas are less diverse as
compared to  light crude oils  and contain much higher
percentages of paraffinic compounds.
                              Table 3-1 - Typical Characteristics of Crude Oil
                                              (Speight 1999)
Crude source
USA -Mid-continent
North Sea -Brent
Nigeria -Light
Saudi Arabia -Light
USA -W. Texas Sour
Venezuela -Light
Saudi Arabia -Heavy
Venezuela -Heavy
Paraffins
(% vol)
-
50
37
63
46
52
60
35
Aromatics
(% vol)
-
16
9
19
22
14
15
12
Naphthenes
(% vol)
-
34
54
18
32
34
25
53
Sulfur
(% wt)
0.4
0.4
0.2
2.0
1.9
1.5
2.1
2.3
API
gravity
40
37
36
34
32
30
28
24

-------
World Oil Production

Tables 3-2  and  3-3 compile the world  production of
petroleum liquids (crude oil and natural gas liquids, NGL)
and  natural gas  for 1998  (U.S. DOE  2000). Within
regions  of the world, oil and gas vary considerably in
composition reflecting  the geological  characteristics of
the strata of origin. The world produces about 27 billion
barrels (1 barrel = 159 liters) of oil and about 80 trillion
standard cubic feet (SCF  =  0.0283 standard m3) of gas
yearly. Major exporting countries  (producing and selling
more oil and gas than they  consume) are those in the
Middle East, Venezuela and in Africa. Major importing
countries are Japan, China, India and the United States.
Gas  is imported primarily in liquid  form  (LNG,  liquefied
natural gas) and  mainly  by  Japan and Singapore  as
feeds to petrochemical manufacture.

While global reserves of both oil  and gas continue to
increase, the  recent rate of natural gas discovery and
production  has  increased  more  rapidly  due  to  its
preference  as  a  clean  fuel  and  the  improving
infrastructure  for its transportation to markets  (USGS
2000).  In the U.S. this is especially true with gas fields
accounting  for  the  majority  of new  hydrocarbon
reserves.
                 Table 3-2 -World Production of Crude Oil, NGL and Other Liquids (1998)
                                            (U.S. DOE 2000)
                                 Region/Country
         Rate (1000 b/d)
                       North America
                               Canada
                               Mexico
                               United States
                       Central & South America
                       Western Europe
                       Eastern Europe & Former U.S.S.R.
                       Middle East
                       Africa
                       Far East & Oceania
                                   World Total
                     15,495
                      2,694
                      3,523
                      9,278
                      6,974
                      6,999
                      7,454
                     22,454
                      7,851
                      7,926
             75,152
                          Table 3-3 -World Natural Gas (dry) Production (1998)
                                            (U.S. DOE 2000)
                                 Region/Country
                                                                      ,12
         Rate(10'^SCF/y)
                       North America
                              Canada
                              Mexico
                              United States
                       Central & South America
                       Western Europe
                       Eastern Europe & Former U.S.S.R.
                       Middle East
                       Africa
                       Far East & Oceania
                                  World Total
                      26.17
                       6.04
                       1.27
                      18.86
                       3.09
                       9.66
                      25.16
                       6.61
                       3.70
                       8.58
              82.97

-------
United States Oil and Gas Production and
Imports

The United States currently produces about 40 percent
of the  liquids processed by  U.S. refineries (U.S. DOE
2000).  About 60 percent of crude oil processed by U.S.
refineries is imported. A smaller amount of natural gas
is imported  as  a percentage of gas processed. Total
amounts of oil and gas produced in U.S. are  compiled
in Table 3-4 and by State in Table 3-5. The top 30 U.S.
oil and gas fields  by production in 1998  are listed in
Tables 3-6 and 3-7.

About  30  major fields  account for about  half of U.S.
crude  oil  production (see Table 3-6). Most  of these
fields were discovered prior to 1990.  Newer production
is found mostly offshore  in either  State  or Federal
waters, mostly  in  the  deeper waters  of the Gulf of
Mexico. The range of geology of  U.S. production spans
numerous formation types. Field size is characterized
by recoverable  reserves defined as the amount of oil
calculated to be obtainable  by conventional extraction
techniques. The largest producing oil fields in the U.S.
at present are located on the North Slope of Alaska.

Large  gas  reserves are found in New Mexico,  Texas
and offshore Gulf of Mexico, with the newer production
originating  offshore.  The  relationship  between  gas
production  rates and gas  reservoir size (field size) is
more uniform than  that  for oil because of the variability
of oil  viscosity  and weight  as  opposed  to gas. Gas
production  from the  top  30  gas  fields  (Table  3-7)
accounts for about one third of total U.S. production
(1998).

The trend toward increasing U.S. imports of oil is due to
the fact that the terrestrial regions of the continental
U.S. have been thoroughly explored and the majority of
major fields have  been discovered. Those that  may
remain are  more likely to be  found in deep offshore
waters and in arctic regions. The cost of U.S. frontier oil
exploration  and  production translates  to  a price  per
barrel that  is higher  than the price of oil  that can be
presently purchased  in world markets. Since refineries
naturally  purchase  oil having the lowest cost, the trend
to imports is likely to continue as long as the supply and
quality of oil in the global market is high and as long as
imported   oil is  lower  in  cost  than  new domestic
supplies.

Imported  crude oils  are  compiled in Table 3-8.  The
major sources of crude oil imported to the United States
are those that originate in the Middle East, Venezuela,
the west  coast of Africa, Canada and Mexico. Imported
crude oil accounts for about 60  percent  of crude oil
processed  by U.S. refineries  and  is roughly  equally
divided between OPEC (oil producing and exporting
countries) and non-OPEC sources.
                          Table 3-4 - U.S. Production and Reserves of Crude Oil,
                                       NGL and Natural Gas (1998)
                                             (U.S. DOE 2000)
                                                              Production
                       Reserves
Oil (million barrels)
Natural Gas (billion SCF)
Gas Liquids (million barrels)
Imported (OPEC "') Oil (million barrels)
Imported (Non- OPEC) Oil (million barrels)
1,991
18,720
833
1,500
1,600
21,034
164,041
7,524


                      (1) OPEC - Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries

-------
Table 3-5 - U.S. Crude Oil Reserves and Production
               (1998, 106 Barrels)
                (U.S. DOE 2000)
State or Region
Alaska
Lower 48 States
Alabama
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Florida
Illinois
Indiana
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Michigan
Mississippi
Montana
Nebraska
New Mexico
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania
Texas
Utah
West Virginia
Wyoming
Federal Offshore
Pacific (California)
Gulf of Mexico (Louisiana)
Gulf of Mexico (Texas)
Miscellaneous
U.S. Total (1998)
Reserves
12/31/97
5,161
17,385
47
45
3,750
198
91
92
10
238
20
714
68
183
159
21
735
279
43
605
17
5,687
234
26
627
3,477
528
2,587
362
19
22,546
Production
1998
437
1,554
7
7
270
20
6
10
1b
34
2
83
8
19
14
3
59
33
6
62
1
417
14
1
58
417
45
336
36
2
1,991
                      10

-------
                          Table 3-6 - Top Thirty U.S. Oil Fields
                                    (U.S. DOE 2000)
Rank by
Reserves
1
3
2
15
6
4
9
40
10
18
13
5
8
23
50
44
61
21
14
60
54
7
11
12
28
24
35
25
58
14

Field Name
Prudhoe Bay
Kuparuk River
Midway-Sunset
Point Mclntyre
Kern River
Belridge South
Mississippi Canyon Block 807
Garden Banks Block 426
Milne Point
Green Canyon Block 244
Spraberry Trend Area
Yates
Elk Hills
Wilmington
Viosca Knoll Block 990
Niakuk
Ewing Bank Block 873
Cymric
Endicott
Giddings
Viosca Knoll Block 956
Wasson
Slaughter
Hondo
East Texas
Lost Hills
Seminole
Pescado
Eugene Island SA Block 330
Levelland
Total Production of Top 30
Location
AK
AK
CA
AK
CA
CA
GF(1)
GF
AK
GF
TX
TX
CA
CA
GF
AK
GF
CA
AK
TX
GF
TX
TX
CA
TX
CA
TX
CA
GF
TX

Discovery
Year
1967
1969
1901
1988
1899
1911
1989
1987
1982
1994
1950
1926
1919
1932
1981
1984
1991
1916
1978
1960
1985
1937
1937
1969
1930
1910
1936
1970
1971
1945

1998 Production
(106 barrels)
222.0
91.8
49.6
47.6
46.8
44.9
43.2
26.5
20.4
20.2
20.1
19.3
19.3
19.0
18.6
18.5
18.1
17.7
17.0
16.7
16.5
16.3
14.9
13.9
13.8
11.5
11.5
11.1
10.2
10.0
927
(1)GF = Gulf of Mexico
                                          11

-------
Table 3-7 - Top Thirty U.S. Natural Gas Fields
             (U.S. DOE 2000)
Rank by
Reserves
1
2
3
4
15
6
7
11
12
10
79
21
46
19
52
51
25
37
45
53
43
36
27
22
23
29
17
41
26
66

(1)
Field Name
Blanco / Ignacio-Blanco
Basin
Hugoton Gas Area
Prudhoe Bay
Giddings
Carthage
Mobile Bay
Antrim
Panhandle West
Watte n burg
Matagorda Island Block 623
Elk Hills
Garden Banks Block 426
Panoma Gas Area
McAllen Ranch
Anschutz Ranch East
Whitney Canyon
Viosca Knoll Block 956
Bob West
Indian Basin
McArthur River
Vaquillas Ranch
Strong City District
Spraberry Trend Area
Oak Hill
Mocane-Laverne Gas Area
Red-Oak Morris
Watonga-Chickasha Trend
Gomez
Waltman
Total of Top 30
GF = Gulf of Mexico
Location
NM&CO
NM
KS & OK & TX
AK
TX
TX
AL
Ml
TX
CO
GF(1)
CA
GF
KS
TX
UT&WY
WY
GF
TX
NM
AK
TX
OK
TX
TX
OK & KS & TX
OK
OK
TX
WY


Discovery
Year
1927
1947
1922
1967
1960
1936
1979
1965
1918
1970
1980
1919
1987
1956
1960
1980
1978
1985
1990
1963
1968
1978
1972
1953
1967
1947
1910
1948
1963
1959


1998 Production
(109SCF)
718.1
662.6
468.6
252.7
225.6
222.7
149.4
136.0
123.2
100.9
100.3
98.0
92.8
92.7
84.7
80.1
76.2
74.6
74.3
73.4
72.5
71.6
70.5
69.2
66.5
66.3
64.6
64.6
63.5
56.6
4573

                    12

-------
Table 3-8 - Oil Imports to U.S. Refineries
           (U.S. DOE 2000)

Arab OPEC
Algeria
Iraq
Kuwait
Qatar
Saudi Arabia
United Arab Emirates
Other OPEC
Indonesia
Nigeria
Venezuela
Non OPEC
Angola
Argentina
Australia
Brunei
Cameroon
Canada
China, PRC
China, Taiwan
Colombia
Congo
Ecuador
Egypt
Gabon
Guatemala
Japan
Korea
Malaysia
Mexico
Norway
Peru
Russia
Trinidad and Tobago
Turkey
United Kingdom
Yemen
Other
TOTAL
Crude Oil
1000 b/d
2,053
10
336
300
1
1,404
3
2,116
50
609
1,377
4,427
465
80
31
23
1
1,209
25
-7
349
70
98
11
207
23
-5
-24
26
1,321
221
41
9
53
0
161
4
34
8,596
(3.1 x109b/v)
LPG
1000 b/d
53
50



3

11


11
87





108


-1

-1






-23
6




6

-8
151
(0.06x109b/v
                  13

-------
Geologic Origin of Mercury in Oil and
Natural Gas

It would be useful to understand the geologic origin of
mercury  in  hydrocarbons  so  as  to  obtain  some
predictive capability  for estimation  of the amounts in
regional  sources. At   present  this  task  is  difficult
because  of the  lack  of  data on  total  mercury  and
species concentrations in many of the major oil and gas
fields in the world. In  addition, much of the data  that
does exist are  uncertain  in  accuracy  (discussed  in
Chapter 5) and  insufficiently documented  as  to exact
geologic origin.

Petroleum  and natural  gas occur throughout the upper
portion of  earth's crust. Most oil  and  gas has  been
discovered at depths that do not exceed 10,000 meters.
The  earth's   crust  is  divided  into  strata that   are
categorized in order of age (Table 3-9). These divisions
are distinguished by compositions that are specific to
the conditions of formation and include  the  nature and
type of organic  debris, fossils,  minerals,  and  other
characteristics they contain. Carbonaceous materials,
including oil  and natural  gas, occur in all geological
strata from the Precambrian onward (Tiratsoo 1984).

Crude  oil  and natural  gas originate  from geological
formations  associated with ancient basins (locations of
accumulation  of  ancient organic  material).  The basin
geology is  referred to  as  the  source rock.  Basins  are
characterized  as marine (salt water), lacustrine (fresh
water)  or terrestrial.  It is generally believed  that  the
accumulation  of  petroleum  in reservoirs occurred by
transformation  (maturation)  of the  source  organic
material to molecular  hydrocarbons with the process
being assisted by heat and  pressure from burial of the
original  deposits.   Subsequent   hydrocarbon   fluid
migration to locations of accumulation (traps) accounts
for the discovery of petroleum  in porous reservoirs. The
chemical and geologic factors  that account  for  the
origin of petroleum and its location of discovery are the
focus of a wide  body of science and  technology, so
large in fact  that  a  concise summary  is not  possible
here.

There are few if any attempts in published literature to
account for the origin of mercury in petroleum. Mercury
in  coal is associated with pyrites that are both syngenic
and epigenic with coal (Toole-O'Neil et  al.  1999). One
possible  syngenic  origin  of mercury in  petroleum and
coal is atmospheric deposition to the region of organic
genesis.   Rates  of  ancient  atmospheric   mercury
deposition are unknown,  however. Present day rates of
atmospheric mercury deposition are on the order of 10
ug/m2-year,  but ancient rates are likely lower.  Volcanic
activity is a  possible source of atmospheric deposition
also.

As will be discussed in later sections, the range of total
mercury  concentrations in oil is  thought to  be wider
than  that for coal and  this  variation  suggests that
atmospheric  deposition  to  genetic  organic  material,
being globally uniform, cannot account for the mercury
in   petroleum.  The  more  likely  hypothesis   is that
mercury  in oil and gas originated from  mercury in the
earth's crust that  was liberated  by geological  forces
(heat and pressure) and  migrated as a vapor to the
traps in which oil and gas accumulated.

Although of  mostly academic interest,  the geological
mechanisms that account for mercury in oil and natural
gas await definition. At present, there is insufficient data
on mercury  at specific locations and geologies to draw
any definite  conclusions.
References

Speight, J. G., 1999, The Chemistry and Technology of
    Petroleum, Marcel Dekker, New York, NY.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2000, USGS World Petroleum
    Assessment 2000, Description and Results, U.S.
    Dept. of Interior Digital Data Series, U.S. DOI,
    Washington, DC.

U.S. DOE 2000, Energy Statistics for 1998, Energy
    Information Administration, National Energy
    Information Center, Washington, DC.

Tiratsoo, E. N., 1984, Oilfields of the World,  Scientific
    Press Ltd. Beaconsfield, UK.

Toole-O'Neil, B., Tewalt, S., Finkleman, R., and  D.
    Akers, 1999, Mercury concentration in coal -
    unraveling the puzzle, Fuel, 78: 47.
                                                    14

-------
      Table 3-9 - Nomenclature and Age of Geological Strata
                         (Speight 1999)
    Era
      Period
Epoch
    Age
(years X 10s)
 Cenozoic   Quaternary
                   Recent
                   Pleistocene
                 0.01
                   3
 Cenozoic   Tertiary
                   Pliocene
                   Miocene
                   Oligocene
                   Eocene
                   Paleocene
                  12
                  25
                  38
                  55
                  65
             Cretaceous
  Mesozoic   Jurassic
             Triassic
                                          135
                                          180
                                          225
 Paleozoic
Permian
Carboniferous
 Pennsylvanian
 Mississippian
Devonian
Silurian
Ordovician
Cambrian
                 275

                 350

                 413
                 430
                 500
                 600
Precambrian
                                         800
                               15

-------
                                              Chapter 4
                          Petroleum and Natural Gas Processing
In the effort to  construct the routes of  mercury in
geologic  hydrocarbons to  the biosphere,  it  is useful to
examine  oil  and gas processing steps and to  account
for  the possible  pathways of mercury in the various
process streams. A tremendous variety of processing
schemes exists for refining crude oil and for natural gas
separation but  the majority of gas and oil processing
facilities  are   similar  in   their  basic  designs   and
configurations.

Produced fluids  from  both oil  and  gas wells  enter
separators where the primary phase separations occur.
In almost all cases, primary phase  separations produce
a water stream that is disposed of (most  commonly by
re-injection to the reservoir), a gas stream and a  liquid
hydrocarbon stream that are processed separately. Oil
is transported  to  refineries in pipelines, tankers  (or
barges) and sometimes by truck.  Raw natural gas is
usually treated close to the wellhead to partially remove
water and  4S before transport by pipeline to a  gas
treatment/processing facility. The initial treatments are
necessary to prevent corrosion of the pipeline.

The feed to  a  refinery is a blend of oil from numerous
fields  and   usually from  several  overseas  sources.
Refineries are  usually  configured to process either sour
or sweet crude but usually not both, so the feeds to a
refinery  are   selected   to   match   the   process
configuration.   A   significant   aspect  of   refinery
configuration is the process needed to separate  large
quantities of sulfur contained  in sour crude. The same
is true  for  gas  in  that  sour  gas  requires special
treatment steps and  a  contiguous facility  to  process
separated h^S into sulfur for sale.

In general, the processing  of oil is directed to maximize
gasoline  manufacture  while gas processing is directed
to  separate  methane (sales  gas)  from  other   gas
components. The major differences in processing steps
that are utilized depend on the composition of produced
hydrocarbon and  the  local market. Gas  plants  that
process  both  gas and condensate usually  separate
liquids (C5+)   that  are  used  either as  feeds to
petrochemical  plants or sent to a  refinery where they
are processed  along  with  crude  oil.  The gas  that is
generated in a  crude  oil refinery is most often used to
fuel the refinery and less  often processed to separate
methane for sale.

Petroleum Refining

Petroleum   refining   involves  the   distillation,   or
fractionation,  of crude oils into separate  hydrocarbon
groups or cuts. Chemical  modification and blending of
cuts results in  products that  are  sold. The types of
products and the  relative amounts  of products that are
obtained in refining are directly related to the chemical
characteristics  of the crude  processed  and  to  the
processing  steps  employed  to  modify   chemical
structure (Speight 1999).  A  schematic of the  typical
integrated refining processes is shown  in Figure 4-1.

The  principal  steps  in oil refining  are the  primary
(Figure 4-2) and  vacuum  (Figure  4-3) distillations that
produce  the major  streams  that are  subsequently
treated and modified. Table 4.1 provides an overview of
the feeds and separated fractions.

Intermediates   from   distillations   are  subjected  to
numerous treatment and separation processes such as
extraction,  hydretreating,  and sweetening  to remove
undesirable  constituents and improve  product quality.
Integrated refineries incorporate distillation, conversion,
treatment,  and blending  operations  (see  Figure 1).
Distillation  cuts  are  converted  into   products  by
changing the structure of the hydrocarbon  molecules
through  cracking, reforming, and other  conversion
processes and by blending streams to optimize desired
characteristics.
Conversion processes (Tables 4-2  and 4-3) change the
size   and  structure  of  hydrocarbon  molecules  to
optimize  the  amount  and  quality  of  products.  These
processes include molecular decomposition by thermal
and   catalytic   cracking,  molecular   combination  by
alkylation    and    polymerization    and   molecular
rearrangement by isomerization and catalytic reforming.
                                                    16

-------
Many variations on  these basic unit processes have
been developed and many are proprietary to individual
companies.   For  the  catalytic  processes,  refinery
efficiency   is   achieved   by   optimizing   catalyst
performance relative to feed characteristics.

Treatment processes (Table 4-4) are applied to process
intermediates and  to products and are used to remove
impurities and  contaminants  (sulfur,  metals)  and  to
separate  undesirable constituents  (wax,  aromatics,
naphthenes). Treatments involve  both chemical  and
physical  separation  and  include   desalting,  drying,
hydrodesulfurizing,    solvent   refining,   sweetening,
solvent extraction, and dewaxing.

Formulating   and    blending   combine   hydrocarbon
fractions, additives, and  other components to produce
finished products with specific  properties. Other refinery
unit operations include  light-ends  recovery  (still  gas);
sour-water   stripping;  sludge  treatment;   wastewater
treatment;  acid and  tail-gas  treatment;  and  sulfur
recovery.

Major product  types  and yearly amounts of products
from  U.S.   refineries  are   shown  in  Table   4-5.
Transportation fuels (combusted in engines as opposed
to furnaces) include  gasoline, jet fuel  and  diesel.
Naphthas are primarily used as feeds to petrochemical
processes.   Fuel  oil  is primarily used  for  residential
heating  and to fire  industrial  boilers. Asphalts  and
                                heavy oils  are used  for a  variety of non-combusted
                                products   (construction  materials,   road   materials,
                                lubricants) and combusted products (wax).

                                A  typical  refinery  generates  approximately  10-15
                                gallons of process wastewater for every  barrel of oil
                                processed (API 1977). Water contacts  oil  in  washing
                                operations such as desalting, in steam stripping and in
                                aqueous  treatments (alkylation). A  typical refinery uses
                                a segregated  water  treatment system as described
                                schematically  in  Figure 4-4.  The   water treatment
                                system  consists  of  initial   oil  and solids  removal
                                (clarifiers, separators), additional oil and  solids removal
                                (air  flotation,  filters),  and  waste  removal (activated
                                sludge,  aerated  lagoons,  oxidation  ponds,  trickling
                                filters). Following biological treatment, granular filtration
                                and  polishing  are  employed to  eliminate dissolved
                                solids (Sittig, 1978).  The main function  of wastewater
                                treatment systems is  to remove hydrocarbons so that
                                water can be discharged to meet regulatory criteria.

                                A wide variety of solid waste streams are generated in
                                conjunction  with  crude  oil   refining. These  streams
                                include tank bottoms, slop  oil,  spent catalysts, filter
                                cake from water treatments and numerous  others. The
                                nature and type of refinery  residuals is documented in
                                periodic  compilations  (API   1998)  and   regulatory
                                reviews (U.S. EPA 1996).
                                     Table 4.1 - Distillation Processes
                                               (OSHA 2000)
        Process
  Action
Method
  Purpose
 Feedstocks
  Products
      Atmospheric
       distillation
        Vacuum
       distillation
Separation



Separation
Thermal
Thermal
  Separate
  fractions
Separate w/o
  cracking
Desalted crude
      oil
 Atmospheric
tower residual
 Gas, gas oil,
   distillate,
   residual

 Gas oil, lube
stock, residual
                                                    17

-------
Table 4-2 - Decomposition Processes
          (OSHA 2000)
Process name
Catalytic
cracking
Coking
Hydrocracking
Hydrogen
steam
reforming
Steam cracking
Visbreaking

Process
Alkylation
Grease
compounding
Polymerizing
Catalytic
reforming
Isomerization
Action
Alteration
Polymerize
Hydrogenate
Decompose
Decompose
Decompose
Table 4-3 -
Action
Combining
Combining
Polymerize
Alteration/
dehydration
Rearrange
Method
Catalytic
Thermal
Catalytic
Thermal/
catalytic
Thermal
Thermal
Unification and
(OSHA
Method
Catalytic
Thermal
Catalytic
Catalytic
Catalytic
Purpose
Upgrade
gasoline
Convert
vacuum
residuals
Convert to
lighter HC's
Produce
hydrogen
Crack large
molecules
Reduce
viscosity
Rearrangement
2000)
Purpose
Unite olefins &
isoparaffins
Combine
soaps & oils
Unite two or
more olefins
Upgrade low-
octane naphtha
Convert
straight chain
to branch
Feedstocks
Gas oil, coke
distillate
Gas oil, coke
distillate
Gas oil,
cracked oil,
residual
Desulfurized
gas, O2, steam
Atm. tower hvy
fuel/ distillate
Atmospheric
tower
residual
Processes
Feedstock
Tower
isobutane/
cracker olefin
Lube oil, fatty
acid, alky metal
Cracker olefins
Coker/ hydro-
cracker
naphtha
Butane,
pentane,
hexane
Products
Gasoline,
petrochemical
feedstock
Gasoline,
petrochemical
feedstock
Lighter, higher-
quality
products
Hydrogen, CO,
C02
Cracked
naphtha, coke,
residual
Distillate, tar

Products
Iso-octane
(alkylate)
Lubricating
grease
High-octane
naphtha,
petrochemical
stocks
High-octane
Reformate/
aromatic
Isobutane/
pentane/
hexane
               18

-------
                   Table 4-4 - Treatment Processes
                            (OSHA  2000)
Process
Amine treating
Desalting
Drying &
sweetening
Furfural extraction
Hydrodesulfurization

Hyd retreating

Phenol extraction

Solvent
deasphalting


Solvent dewaxing

Solvent extraction

Sweetening

Action
Treatment
Dehydration
Treatment
Solvent
extraction
Treatment

Hydrogenation

Solvent
extraction

Treatment


Treatment

Solvent
extraction

Treatment

Method
Extraction
Extraction
Adsorption
Thermal
Absorption
Catalytic

Catalytic

Adsorption
Thermal

Absorption


Cool/ filter

Absorption
precipitation

Catalytic

Purpose
acidic
contaminants
Remove
contaminants
Remove H2O
& sulfur
compounds
Upgrade mid
distillate &
lubes
sulfur,
contaminants
Remove
impurities,
saturate
HC's
Improve
viscosity &
color
Remove
asphalt

Rpmnvp WPY
IxCI 1 i\J V C VVCIA
from lube
stocks
Separate
unsat. oils

H2S, convert
mercaptan
Feedstocks
Sour gas, HCs
w/C02 & H2S
Crude oil
Liquids, LPG,
alkylation
feedstock
Cycle oils & lube
feedstocks
High-sulfur
residual/gas oil

Residuals,
cracked HCs

Lube oil base
stocks

Vacuum tower
residual,
propane

Vacuum tower
lube oils

Gas oil,
reformate,
j; j.; 1 1 j.
distillate
Untreated
distillate/gasoline

Products
Acid free gases
& liquid HCs
Desalted crude
oil
Sweet & dry
hydrocarbons
High quality
diesel & lube oil
Desulfurized
olefins, HCs

Cracker feed,
distillate, lube

High quality lube
oils

Heavy lube oil,
asphalt


Dewaxed lube
basestock

High-octane
gasoline

High-quality
distillate/gasoline

Specific Gravity
     g/mL
                     Table 4-5 - Refined Products
                          (U.S. DOE 2000)
Refined Products
Barrel/y
 (109)
kg/y
do11)
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.85
1.10
0.90
0.55

Transportation fuels (60%)
Naphthas (5%)
Residual fuel oil (5%)
Distilled fuel oil (21%)
Petroleum coke (3%)
Asphalt, Heavy oils (3%)
Still Gas (3%)
TOTAL
3.7
0.3
0.3
1.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
6.2
4.4
0.4
0.4
1.8
0.3
0.3
0.2
7.8
                                 19

-------
                                                                                         Still Gas
                                                                                         Gasoline
                                                                                        Kerosene
                                                                                         Naphtha
                                                                                          Diesel

                                                                                        Kerosene

                                                                                        Heating Oil
                                                                                          Diesel
                                                                                         Fuel Oil
                                                                                         Naphtha
                                                                                         Gasoline
                                                                                        Kerosene
                                                                                          Coke
                                                                                         Asphalt
                                                                                       Aromatic Oil
                                                                                          Wax
                                                                                         Lube Oil
Figure 4-1 - Typical Refining Process
                                                        20

-------
                                                           CONBENSER
                                          DISIILLATON
                                                                LffitT NAPHTHA


                                                                    IMC
                                                               HEAVY NAPHTHA


                                                                   160 C
                                                                 KEROSENE
                                                                   SMC
                                                                  "GAS 6k
                                                                  RESOJUM
Figure 4-2 - Primary Distillation
                                               VACUUM
                                             DB1ILLATION
                                                TOWER
                                                               To VACUUM
                                         FUMACE
Figure 4-3 - Vacuum Distillation
VACUUM GAS
    OIL
                                                                    LUBRICATIHG OILS
                                                                       VACUUM
                                                                       RESIOUJM
                                                       21

-------
                                              Poml
                              Process
 Water
Treatment
Ballast


Storage I
Tanlf
                                                                 /  Holding
                                                               "*•    Pond
                                                              Discharge 1
Figure 4-4 - Segregated Water Treatment System for a Typical Refinery
Gas Processing

Figure  4-5 shows a typical gas  processing plant that
provides   pipeline    sales   gas    (methane)   and
petrochemical feedstocks.  Several other types of gas
processing are  common including plants that optimize
liquefied petroleum gas (LPG, C3 and C4) separation,
liquefied  natural gas  (LNG, C1), natural  gas liquids
(NGL,  C3+). Certain  aspects of gas treatment  are
common to all gas processing schemes.

Unlike  refining,  gas processing attempts no  molecular
transformations   to  produce  salable  products.  Gas
processing is more accurately termed  a treatment and
separation process. The treatments are designed to
remove unwanted  constituents (CO2,  H2S, H2O)  and
trace  contaminants  (metals). The  separations  are
typically cryogenic utilizing selective  condensation of
fractions (C2, C3, C4) by removal  of heat.

Water  removal  (dehydration) treatments are applied to
all natural gas  and several processes  are  common.
Glycol  dehydration contacts  gas  with  triethyleneglycol
(TEG) that absorbs water. The TEG  is regenerated in  a
continuous process that boils off the water.  Molecular
sieve (mol-siv)  water  adsorbents are  also  employed.
Mol-siv water sorbents are regenerated with hot gas in  a
  dual contactor arrangement (lag-lead regeneration). Acid
  gas removal  (AGR) involves contacting gas with amine
  solutions that selectively adsorb H2S  and some CO2.
  CO2  is  removed  by  contacting  gas  with  carbonate
  solutions.

  The  gas  separation  process  involves  cooling  gas
  (Joule-Thompson)  to  liquefy  C2 - C5. The cryogenic
  heat  exchanger is referred to  as a cold box  and is
  typically   manufactured   from  aluminum.   Mercury
  removal units containing sorbents  specific to mercury
  are  applied  upstream  of the cold  box to  prevent
  condensation of mercury and subsequent  damage to
  the aluminum welds (Wilhelm  1994).

  Mercury removal (see Figure 4-5)  may or may  not be
  employed  at gas  processing plants.  The decision is
  based on  the  amount  of  mercury in  feeds, whether
  aluminum heat exchangers are utilized and on whether
  downstream   customers   of  gas   products   have
  specifications for mercury. Mercury removal units  are
  required for  virtually  all LNG plants  because  of  the
  sensitivity  of cryogenic  heat exchanges to mercury
  deposition  (Wilhelm  1994)  and  because  the   low
  temperatures required to liquefy gas  usually condense
  mercury as well.
                                                   22

-------
The  individual  products  (propane, butane, C5+)  are
separated  in   towers  by  warming   and  pressure
reductions.  The   resulting  liquid  product  streams
(butane,  propane) are typically feeds to  petrochemical
manufacture with methane sold as a pipelined product
(sales  gas). Ethane  is typically the feed  to ethylene
manufacture;  propane to propylene; butane to MTBE
(methyl-tertbutylether,  a gasoline  additive). The  C5+
product may be sold to a refinery or to other types of
petrochemical manufacture (aromatics, olefins).

References

American Petroleum Institute, 1977, Water Reuse
    Studies, API Publication No. 949. Washington, DC.

American Petroleum Institute, 1998, Management Of
    Residual Materials: 1997, Petroleum Refining
    Performance, API Publication No. 352,
    Washington, DC.
Sittig, M., 1978, Petroleum Refining Industry - Energy
    Saving and Environmental Control, Noyes Data,
    Park Ridge, NJ.
Speight, J. G., 1999, The Chemistry and Technology of
    Petroleum, Marcel Dekker, New York, NY.

U.S. EPA, 1996, Waste Minimization for Selected
    Residuals in the Petroleum Refining Industry, Office
    of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
    EPA/530/R-96/009 (NTIS PB97-121180),
    Washington, DC.

U.S. DOE, 2000, Energy Statistics for 1998, Energy
    Information Administration, National Energy
    Information Center, Washington, D.C.

U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration,
    2000, OSHA Technical Manual, Section 4:
    Petroleum Refining, U.S. Dept. of Labor,
    Washington, DC.

Wilhelm,  S., 1994,  Methods to Combat  Liquid Metal
    Embrittlement  in   Cryogenic   Aluminum   Heat
    Exchangers,  Proceedings 73rd  GPA  Convention,
    New Orleans, LA.
                                                FEED GAS      MEROIIW
                                                 OBVEtt       REMOVAL
                                                                                           C6*
                                                              OtPOPflHKtfl
                                  Figure 4-5 - Gas Process Schematic
                                                   23

-------
                                            Chapters
                          Mercury in Petroleum and Natural Gas
Properties   of   Mercury   and    Mercury
Compounds

The common physical properties of elemental mercury
are listed in Table 5.1. Elemental mercury is a liquid at
ambient conditions. Its melting point is -38.87 C and it
has a boiling point of 357 C. Elemental mercury is quite
dense (13.5 times more than liquid water under ambient
conditions). The high density, the low saturation vapor
pressure and high surface tension control the behavior of
elemental mercury in solid, liquid and gaseous matrices.

Mercury occurs in  nature in the zero (elemental),  +1
(mercury[l]  or  mercurous),  or the +2 (mercury[ll]  or
mercuric)  valence  states.  Mercurous   compounds
       usually   involve   Hg-Hg  bonds
       unstable and rare in nature.
and  are  generally
       Mercury occurs most prevalently in the elemental form
       or in the  inorganic mercuric form. Common mercuric
       compounds  include mercuric oxide, mercuric chloride,
       mercuric  sulfide   and  mercuric  hydroxide. Organic
       mercury  forms also exist  and consist  of two main
       groups: R-Hg-X compounds and R-Hg-R compounds,
       where R = organic species, of which methyl (-CH3) is
       prominent, and X  = inorganic anions, such as chloride,
       nitrate  or hydroxide.  The  R-Hg-X  group  includes
       monomethylmercury compounds. The most prominent
       R-Hg-R compound is dimethylmercury.
                          Table 5-1 - Physical Properties of Elemental Mercury
         Atomic number
         Atomic weight
         Boiling point
         Boiling point/rise in pressure
         Density
         Diffusivity (in air)
         Heat capacity
         Henry's law constant
         Interfacial tension (Hg/H2O)
         Melting point
         Saturation vapor pressure
         Surface tension (in air)
         Vaporization  rate (still air)
80
200.59 atomic mass units
357 C (675 F)
0.0746 °C/torr
13.546 g/cm3 at 20 C (0.489 Ib/in3 at 68 F)
0.112  cm2/sec
0.0332 cal/g at 20 C (0.060 Btu/lb at 68 F)
0.0114 atm m2/mol
375 dyne/cm at 20 C (68 F)
-38.87 C (-37.97 F)
0.16 N/m3 (pascal) at 20 C (68 F)
436 dyne/cm at 20 C (68 F)
0.007  mg/cm2hr for 10.5 cm2 droplet at 20 C
                                                  24

-------
Mercury is difficult to oxidize in the natural environment
and  spilled  mercury (in  soil for  instance) retains the
elemental  form  indefinitely  absent  moisture  and
bacteria until evaporation. Mercury can  be oxidized by
the  stronger  oxidants  including halogens,  hydrogen
peroxide,  nitric  acid  and  concentrated sulfuric acid.
Mercury  is oxidized and  methylated  in sediments by
sulfate-reducing bacteria.

Selected  solubility  and  volatility  data for  elemental
mercury  and some mercury compounds  in water are
compiled in Table 5-2. It is important to note that sulfides
                                          of mercury are largely insoluble in water (and oil) and, as
                                          pollutants are less available to receptors.

                                          Under ambient conditions, silver, gold, copper, zinc, and
                                          aluminum   readily  form  amalgams  with   elemental
                                          mercury. The solubility of these metals  in  elemental
                                          mercury is relatively low. The solubility of zinc in mercury
                                          is approximately 2 g Zn/100 g Hg, while gold solubility in
                                          mercury is only 0.13 g Au/100 g Hg. Silver, copper, and
                                          aluminum  have even  lower  solubilities than gold.  The
                                          affinity  of mercury  for  gold is important in  analytical
                                          procedures that  trap vapor  phase  mercury  on  gold
                                          collectors.
 Formula
State
Table 5-2 - Solubilities and Volatilities of Mercury Compounds


                 Volatility
Hg Solubility in
   H20; 25 C
Name
Hg° Liquid
HgCI2 Solid
HgSO4 Solid
HgO Solid
HgS Solid
HgSe Solid
(CH3)2Hg Liquid
(C2H5)2Hg Liquid
Boiling Point 357 C
Vapor Pressure 25 mg/m
Boiling Point 302 C
decomposes 300 C
decomposes 500 C
Sublimes under vacuum;
Sublimes under vacuum,
Boiling Point 96 C
Boiling Point 170 C
3 (25 C)



decomposes 560 C
decomposes 800 C


50 ppb
70g/L
0.03 g/L
0.05 g/L
- log Ksp(1) = 52
- log Ksp ~ 1 00
< 1 ppm
< 1 ppm
Elemental
Mercuric chloride
Mercuric sulfate
Mercuric oxide
Mercuric sulfide
Mercuric selenide
Dimethylmercury
Diethylmercury
(1) Ksp = solubility product
 Mercury In Hydrocarbons

Elemental  mercury  and  mercury  compounds occur
naturally  in  geologic  hydrocarbons  including  coal,
natural gas, gas condensates and crude oil. Table 5-3
provides a listing of the mercury species that have been
detected and their relative abundance  in hydrocarbon
matrices (Wilhelm and  Bloom 2000).  Since  analytical
speciation techniques do not exist for all of the matrices
(especially coal), considerable uncertainty exists for the
relative abundance of some species.

In natural gas,  mercury exists almost exclusively in its
elemental  form  and  at  concentrations  far  below
saturation suggesting that  no  liquid  mercury phase
exists in most reservoirs.  One gas reservoir is known
(Texas) that produces gas at saturation (with respect to
elemental mercury)   and  produces condensed  liquid
elemental mercury as well suggesting that, in this single
example, the gas is in equilibrium with  a liquid mercury
phase in the reservoir.
                                          The  prevalence of  dialkylmercury in natural  gas  is
                                          largely unknown but thought  to  be low  (less  than 1
                                          percent of total) based on the limited speciation data
                                          reported in the literature for gas condensates (Tao et al.
                                          1998).  Organic mercury compounds in produced  gas
                                          would be expected to partition to separated hydrocarbon
                                          liquids  as the gas is cooled. Therefore,  if dialkylmercury
                                          is present in  the reservoir, it would be found mostly in
                                          condensate, less so in gas, in those situations where
                                          hydrocarbon  liquids  separate  due  to  natural cooling.
                                          Likewise in gas processing, little organic mercury would
                                          be expected  in sales gas due  its partition to  liquid
                                          streams.

                                          Crude  oil  and gas  condensate  can  contain  several
                                          chemical  forms  of  mercury,  which  differ  in  their
                                          chemical and physical properties.

                                              1.  Dissolved elemental mercury (Hg°) - Elemental
                                                 mercury is soluble in crude oil and hydrocarbon
                                                    25

-------
    liquids in atomic form to a few ppm. Elemental
    mercury is absorptive and adsorbs on metallic
    components  (pipes  and  vessels),  suspended
    wax, sand and other suspended solid materials
    in  liquids.  The   measured  concentration  of
    dissolved    elemental     mercury   typically
    decreases with distance from the wellhead due
    to adsorption, reaction with iron, conversion to
    other forms and loss of the suspended fraction.

2.   Dissolved organic mercury (RHgR and  RHgX,
    where R = CH3, C^Hs, etc. and  X = CI" or other
    inorganic anion) - Dissolved  organic mercury
    compounds are highly soluble  in crude oil and
    gas condensate.  Organic mercury compounds
    are  similar to elemental mercury in  adsorptive
    tendencies but differ in  their boiling  points and
    solubilities and thus they  partition to distillation
    fractions  in a different  fashion from Hg°.  This
    category    includes    dialkylmercury    (i.e.,
    dimethylmercury,     diethylmercury)     and
    monomethylmercury halides (or other inorganic
    ions).

3.   Inorganic  (ionic)   mercury salts  (Hg2+X  or
    Hg2+X2, where X is an  inorganic ion) -Mercury
    salts (mostly halides) are soluble in oil and gas
    condensate  but preferentially  partition to  the
    water phase in primary separations. Mercuric
    chlorides have a  reasonably high solubility in
    organic  liquids (about  10 times  more  than
    elemental mercury). Ionic salts  also may  be
    physically suspended in oil or  may be attached
    (adsorbed) to suspended particles.

4.   Complexed mercury (HgK or HgK2) - Mercury
    can exist in hydrocarbons as a complex, where
    K is a ligand  such  as an organic acid, porphyrin
    or thiol.  The existence  of such compounds in
    produced  hydrocarbons   is    a  matter   of
    speculation at  present depending in large part
    on the particular chemistry of the hydrocarbon
    fluid.

5.   Suspended mercury compounds -  The most
    common  examples are mercuric sulfide (HgS)
    and selenide (HgSe),  which  are insoluble in
    water and oil but may be present as suspended
    solid particles of very small particle size.

6.   Suspended adsorbed mercury -  This category
    includes elemental and  organic mercury that is
    not  dissolved  but rather adsorbed on inert
    particles  such as sand  or wax.  Suspended
    mercury  and  suspended  mercury compounds
    can be separated  from liquid feeds to the plant
       by  physical  separation  techniques such  as
       filtration or centrifugation.

There  is  considerable  debate   in   the   scientific
community  as  to the  prevalence  of  dialkylmercury
compounds in produced hydrocarbons. Their existence
is  inferred when analysis  for total  mercury in  a liquid
matrix  does not mass balance with speciated forms.
Dialkylmercury compounds have been directly detected
in  a few instances  but  at  very  low  concentrations
possibly inferring an analytical artifact.

Gas and  liquid processing can cause transformation of
one  chemical form of mercury to another.  A common
example  is the reaction of elemental  mercury with sulfur
compounds. The mixing of gas and/or condensate from
sour and sweet  wells  allows  reaction  of  elemental
mercury  with S8  or  ionic mercury  with  H2S  to form
particulate HgS that can settle out in tanks and deposit
in  equipment.  In  theory,  high temperature processes
such  as hydrotreating  in refineries  should  convert
dialkylmercury  and   complexed   mercury   to   the
elemental form.

The  partitioning of mercury into product and  effluent
streams  in  petroleum processing is  largely  determined
by  solubility.  Table  5-4   provides  the approximate
solubility  of the  common species  in  several  liquid
matrices. The solubility of  elemental mercury in normal
alkanes (IUPAC 1987) as  a function of temperature is
shown  in  Figure 5-1.

Crude  oil and  gas condensate, when  sampled soon
after primary separation of water and gas, can contain
significant amounts of suspended mercury compounds
and  or mercury adsorbed on suspended solids. The
suspended  compounds usually  are mostly HgS  but
include other mercury species adsorbed  on silicates
and  other suspended colloidal material. The amount of
suspended  mercury can be a substantial percentage of
the total  concentration  of  mercury in liquid samples of
produced hydrocarbons and  they must be separated
(filtered)  prior to any analytical speciation of dissolved
forms.

The  term gas  condensate refers to  liquids that can
originate  at several  locations  in  a  gas  processing
scheme.  A  generic  unprocessed  condensate is  the
hydrocarbon  liquid  that  separates  in  the  primary
separator, either at the wellhead  or at  the gas plant.
Processed  condensate  is the C5+ fraction that is a
product from a gas separation plant. Naphthas  typically
originate  from the primary  distillation of oil in the range
of 50  to  150 C.  The  distribution  of hydrocarbon
compounds  in  both  condensates  and naphthas  are
similar and mostly in the range C5 to C10. Processed
condensate  and   naphthas  typically  do not  contain
                                                26

-------
suspended  mercury  compounds  while  unprocessed
condensate can contain some amount.

Published total   Hg  concentrations  in  condensate,
naphthas  and crude  oil  often do not fully disclose
sampling  procedures  or  analytical processing steps
(filtration,  centrifugation,  exposure  to  air).  For these
reasons, some  data  are  suspect in that the  total
mercury  concentrations  reported  may or  may   not
include  a  contribution   from  suspended  forms.  In
addition, the distribution of compounds  could  reflect
species  conversion  due  to  aerobic processing  of
samples that is suspected to promote oxidation of Hg°
to ionic  forms and  thus to alter  the distribution of
species.

Reported total Hg concentrations in liquid hydrocarbons
(compiled in  Chapter  7)  vary  considerably.  Some
condensates and  crude oils are close to saturation with
respect  to  Hg° at concentrations  of  1 - 4 ppm as
determined  by sparging  of fresh,  filtered samples.
Adding  suspended,  ionic  and  organic  forms,  total
mercury  concentrations  in  crude  oil over 5 ppm  are
known.  Gas  condensates  in  Southeast Asia  have
dissolved total Hg concentrations in the 10 - 800  ppb
range. Most  crude oils  processed in the  U.S. have
relatively low  (<10  ppb)  mercury concentrations.  The
range of total mercury concentration in oil processed in
the U.S. is estimated to be  1 to 1000 ppb (wt.) with the
mean close to 5 ppb (see Section 7 and Wilhelm 2001).

Data  for total Hg in  naphthas (Tao et al.  1998)  are
similar   to    condensates   and    range   between
approximately 5  and 200 ppb.  High concentrations
have  not been reported in the  limited published data.
Naphthas  originating  from   distillations   would  be
expected to have lower concentrations than the  raw
produced liquids from which they originate.

Only limited data are available that allow examination of
the   distribution   of   concentrations  of   mercury
compounds in hydrocarbon liquids.  Of interest are the
natural abundance of  mercury compounds, the relative
distribution  of compounds  in  liquid samples,   the
partitioning   of   compounds   in   separations   and
distillations  and  transformation   of  species  during
processing.

The  data of Tao et al.  (1998) on gas condensates,
naphthas  and a  crude  oil,  are shown graphically in
Figure 5-2. The  origin (process location)  of samples
analyzed  by  Tao  were  not  disclosed.  Tao's  data
indicate that ionic mercury was the dominant species in
the condensates  examined.  Hg° did not exceed 25
percent  of the total in any of the condensate samples.
The  dialkyl  species was  detected  (>10%)  in some
condensates. The monoalkyl species was detected but
at very  low concentrations. Hg  was  not  seen  in
naphthas  as would be  expected assuming a normal
distillation profile.  The  more  volatile  Hg° would  be
expected to  partition to the lighter gas  fraction.  RHgR
appeared  to be the dominant species  in one naphtha
sample. Ionic forms of mercury were seen in all of the
samples.

Zettlitzer et  al.  (1997) used two methods to  measure
concentrations  of  mercury species.  The method  for
monoalkylmercury  provided suitable detection  limits.
The   concentrations  of  monoalkylmercury  in   the
condensate  analyzed by  Zettlitzer  were  low  and
generally  agree  with  the  data   of   Tao.  A  gas
chromatographic (separation) and  mass spectrometer
(detection) method was used to examine RHgR but the
detection  limit was high  and the  methodology suspect.
In Zettlitzer's  procedure,  extracting  condensate  with
HCI was postulated  to remove ionic and organic forms.
The  concentration  of acid-extractable  mercury was
operationally defined  as the difference  between  the
total amount extracted using HCI and the sum of ionic
and monoalkylmercury determined independently.

Zettlitzer's   distributions    of   compounds,   using
operationally defined values for extracted mercury,  are
compiled  in  Table 5-4.  The unprocessed condensate
sample exhibited a 2 ppm concentration of Hg° which is
close to the saturation value for elemental mercury in
hydrocarbon  liquids.  These  data  do  not show  the
dominance of ionic species seen in the data of Tao.

Freeh et  al. (1996)  analyzed  two condensates  and
found most  of the total mercury  in  ionic form.  The
dialkyl form  accounted  for approximately 10 percent
and the monoalkyl form less than  1  percent.  Similarly
Schlickling  and   Broekaert   (1995)    analyzed   2
condensates and  found   mostly  ionic  compounds.
Bloom's (2000) operationally defined speciation  (Table
5-6)  data account for the  majority of total dissolved
mercury as either Hg°  or KCI extractable (mostly ionic).

In spite  of the  fact that  dialkylmercury has  been
detected in some samples, the concentrations found for
this  class of  compounds  are  very  low  (<  10 ppb)
excepting one naphtha (Tao et al. 1998) in which it was
found at  a  concentration  of  approximately  50 ppb.
Based on the limited data, it is by no means apparent at
this  point in time  that dialkylmercury  is  prevalent in
petroleum.

Snell  et al. (1998) examined the stabilities  of mercury
species in synthetic gas condensate and demonstrated
conclusively that Hg  and  HgCI2 react  to  form  Hg2CI2
that is insoluble in hydrocarbons and precipitates.
Hg° +  HgCI2
                                Hg2CI2
                                                   27

-------
The reaction exhibited a half-life  on the order of about
10  days  at ambient temperature.  Most  condensate
samples  contain both species thus implying, given  the
clearly defined  observations  of Snell, that species
conversion is likely in gas condensate samples.  Bloom
(2000) likewise examined sample  stability  and found
standard solutions of Hg°, HgCH3+ and Hg(CH3)2 stable
in  paraffin oil stored  in glass. HgCI2 was not stable in
paraffin oil and Hg° and HgCI2 were unstable in natural
crude oil. Bloom's data generally support those of Snell.

Oxidative mechanisms  may  operate in  hydrocarbon
samples that are exposed to oxygen, that contact metal
surfaces  or that are treated with impure reagents as
part of the analytical method. If  this  is the  case, then
the high concentrations of ionic forms in some samples
may be an artifact of collection procedures, sample age
and analytical  processing methodologies. The author's
experience  with  crude   oils  and  gas  condensate
samples  is that very  fresh samples typically exhibit  the
dominance  of  the   Hg°  species.   No   reductive
mechanisms   are  known  that  would  account  for
generation of Hg° in samples of geologic hydrocarbons;
hence, the transformation of ionic or organic species to
elemental mercury is not likely.

The primary separation of water in gas or oil production
would be expected  to  segregate the  majority of ionic
species naturally present to the water phase. Produced
               water  that  has  low dissolved  mercury  content  is
               associated  with   co-produced  hydrocarbon   liquids
               containing   high   concentrations  of  ionic  species
               (analyzed days after collection). Such high  percentage
               concentrations  of ionic  species  in  the hydrocarbon
               liquid are not expected based upon the rationalization
               that the ionic species should  partition to the separated
               water phase during primary separations.

               If  one  compares  the concentrations  of  Hg°  in co-
               produced  hydrocarbon liquid and  gas, Hg°  typically  is
               dominant  in both.  This  suggests  that Hg    is the
               dominant species in  the  reservoir and the  ionic forms
               derive from it.  Reaction  mechanisms associated with
               sample stability certainly require further investigation. If
               the ionic content of liquid samples is  merely an  artifact
               of sample  aging, then  the  distribution  of  mercury
               compounds previously cited is suspect.

               There  is also considerable doubt that dialkylmercury
               exists   abundantly  in  crude  oil  and  condensate.
               Monoalkylmercury is  not  found  in   petroleum.  If
               dialkylmercury  were  abundant,  then  the  monoalkyl
               species would  be expected  to  be similarly abundant.
               Given  the  very  low  concentrations  of   HgCH3+  in
               condensate, it is  unlikely that discharges of produced
               water to the ocean would contain significant  amounts
               and  thus would  not  have any  direct contribution  to
               monomethylmercury  levels in sediments or in  fish  in
               proximity to platforms.
                             Table 5-3 -Approximate Natural Abundance of
                                  Mercury Compounds in Hydrocarbons
                           Coal
Natural Gas
Gas Condensate
Crude Oil
Hg°
(CH3)2Hg
HgCI2
HgS
HgO
CH3HgCI
T
?
S?
D
T?
9
D
T
N
N
N
N
D
T, (S?)
S
Suspended
N
T?
D
T, (S?)
S
Suspended
N
T?
       Abundance:    D (dominant) - greater than 50 percent of total;
                      S (some) - 10 to 50 percent
                      T (trace) - less than 1 percent
                      N (none) - rarely detected
                      ? indicates that data not conclusive
                                                   28

-------
        Table 5-4 - Approximate Solubility of Mercury Compounds in Liquids; 25 C
Species
Hg°
XHgX
HgCI2
HgS
HgO
CH3HgCI
Water
(ppm)
0.05
9
70,000
0.01
50
>10,000
Oil
(ppm)
2
miscible
>10
< 0.01
low
1,000
Glycol
(ppm)
<1
>1
>50
<0.01

>1,000
                   Table 5-5 - Concentrations of Mercury Compounds
              in Natural Gas Condensates (tig/liter Hg) (Zettlitzer et al. 1997)
      Sample
  Hg°
HgCI2
Other     RHgCI    Sum (a)    Total
(1) Sum =Hgu + HgCI2 + RHgCI + other; other = acid extracted - HgCI2; HgS = Total- sum
    HgS
Low-Temp. Separator
(percent)
Ambient temp.
Separator

Storage tank

250
19.2
2000
39.2
200
11.8
400
30.8
400
7.8
200
11.8
644
49.5
2600
51.0
1250
73.5
6
0.5
100
2.0
50
2.9
1300
100.0
5100
100.0
1700
100.0
3500 2200

5500 400

4300 2600

        Table 5-6 - Operational Hg Speciation in Petroleum Samples (Bloom 2000)
   Sample ID
                     unfiltered Hg, ng/g
Total
   Hg°
             0.8 \i filtered Hg, ng/g
   dissolved total       Hg(ll)
(1) This sample was contained participate Hg°that was re-dissolved in hexane.
CH3Hg
condensate #1
condensate #2
crude oil #1
crude oil #2
crude oil #3
crude oil #4
crude oil #5
crude oil #6
crude oil #7
20,700
49,400
1,990
4,750
4,610
4,100
15,200
1.51
0.42
3,060
34,5001
408
1,120
536
1,250
2,930
0.09
0.17
5,210
36,800
821
1,470
1,680
1,770
3,110
1.01
0.41
2,150
2,370
291
433
377
506
489
0.39
0.02
3.74
6.24
0.25
0.26
0.27
0.62
0.45
0.15
0.11
                                         29

-------
         •no


         5-





         OS


        -ion


        -Wl


        -IP St.


         us


        -110
             -••
                       SS    13

                          1000 /
      Figure 5-1 - Solubility of Elemental Mercury in
      Normal Alkanes as a Function of Temperature
        40
                  iHflCt,
                                              I
             Ct  «  C3  C4  C5  N1  Ni  NS  CO  «  C7

               Condeniat* |C), Kipfttha3(N| «nd Crude Oil (CO)
Figure 5-2 - Distribution of Mercury Compounds in Liquids
                     (Taoetal. 1998)
                            30

-------
Analytical    Methods   for   Mercury    in
Hydrocarbon Matrices

Advances in analytical techniques over the last decade
have  allowed extremely  accurate  determinations  of
mercury and  mercury species in virtually all matrices.
The advances have been  made in both technique and
instrumentation. The  most important contributions were
the development and application of ultraclean  sample
handling   techniques  (Bloom  1995;  Fitzgerald  and
Watras 1989) and the  development of more sensitive
analytical   methods,   such   as  amalgamation   pre-
concentration  (Bloom and Crecelius 1983; Fitzgerald
and  Gill  1979)  and  cold vapor  atomic  fluorescence
spectrometry,  or  cold  vapor  atomic  fluorescence
(CVAF)  (Bloom  and  Crecelius  1983;  Goddon  and
Stockwell  1989).  The  CVAF  method  for  total  Hg
determination  in  water was  adopted by U.S.  EPA as
Method 1631  (U.S. EPA 1995).

Speciation techniques for mercury compounds in water
have evolved  along with  the development of the very
sensitive  detectors.  Mercury and  its compounds can
now be measured in aqueous media at below parts per
trillion  (ng/L)  levels.  Essentially  all  environmentally
important  mercury species,  including methylmercury,
dimethylmercury    [(Chb)2Hg],   inorganic   mercury,
particulate mercury, and elemental mercury (Hg°), can
be  accurately measured  in aqueous environmental
media. Clevenger  et al. (1997) provides  an excellent
review of the variety  of  methods  used to detect and
speciate   mercury in  environmental   media  (water,
sediments, atmosphere)  and  the  limits  of detection
presently achieved.

Determination of mercury in  hydrocarbon  matrices has
likewise evolved over the last  decade primarily  as a
result of  the  major  improvements accomplished  for
water.  In  hydrocarbon samples,  lower detection  has
been achieved by better sampling techniques and new
methods  for separating mercury from the hydrocarbon
matrix. Improvements have  also  been  obtained  by a
better understanding of the  chemistry of mercury  in
petroleum and gas and  from understanding  how  the
various species  distribute in phases during sampling
and analysis.

Sampling  of low  molecular weight  hydrocarbon liquids
(C2-C5) for  mercury  analysis is difficult to accomplish
when  the process stream is at elevated temperature
and/or pressure.  In  samples  taken  from elevated
temperature liquids, Hg°  can segregate to the vapor
phase in  a sample container thus causing a lower than
actual analytical  result of the  liquid phase. Losses of
volatile mercury also  occur when sampling pressurized
fluids. When  samples of pressurized  fluids are taken
into  a vessel at ambient  pressure, volatile  mercury
(Hg°) escapes  to  the  gas  phase  when  the  fluid  is
partially  depressurized.  This  problem  is especially
important  for sampling of condensed gases such as
propane  and  butane.  The  sampling techniques  for
volatile liquids often do  not account for volatile mercury
components thus placing  some of the reported data in
doubt.

Mercury concentrations  in  metal  containers used for
pressurized liquid samples can exhibit lower than actual
results due  to  adsorption  or  reaction with  corrosion
products   on   container   walls.   The   material   of
construction for pressurized sample containers must be
selected   carefully  to  obtain   quantitative  samples.
Stainless  steel  containers  minimize reactive  loss  of
mercury but  can introduce  errors  due to adsorption,
especially if the  mercury concentrations are low.

For multiple-phase samples  (water,  hydrocarbon liquid
and  gas),  mercury will  partition to the various  phases
disproportionately with elemental mercury  equilibrating
between  gas and  liquid and  other forms remaining
mostly in the  liquids. The  amount of elemental mercury
that  partitions to water is  usually a small percentage of
the total  mercury  concentration in  coexisting  phases
because  of the low solubility of elemental mercury in
water. Ionic mercury compounds, if a large percentage
of the total  mercury  concentration in crude  oil, will
partition  to  the  water   phase.   Acidic  water  can
encourage formation of  a   particle  rich  layer at the
water/oil  interface  that can  be very high in  mercury
concentration. Sampling  and analysis protocols  often
are not designed to take these factors into account,
thus supplying additional uncertainty to reported data.

Gas

Mercury   in  a   hydrocarbon   gas   matrix   at  low
concentrations   is  difficult  to  detect   directly   by
spectroscopic methods (UV,  visible, IR, X-ray) because
of interference  by  the hydrocarbon.  Pre-concentration
of the mercury in gas to a collector facilitates analysis.
Collection methods for mercury in natural gas are used
primarily  because  of the low  concentrations  that  are
often present. By using a collector, the total amount of
mercury  present  in a  large volume  of  gas  can be
concentrated into a liquid or solid matrix.

A  prevalent wet collection   method  is to  bubble  gas
(containing mercury) through a permanganate  solution
where all  mercury species  are converted  to mercuric
ion. Mercuric ion is then reduced to  elemental mercury
and separated by volatilization into an inert gas stream
                                                   31

-------
for  quantitative  detection.   Detection  methods  are
typically   UV   atomic   absorbance   or   UV   atomic
fluorescence. This method is accurate and reasonably
sensitive if sufficient volumes of gas  are used, but the
apparatus required to collect the samples is somewhat
cumbersome and  the  required  sample volumes  are
large.

A common dry collection method is to flow gas across a
gold collector  (sputtered  gold  on quartz).  The  gold
amalgamates  with  mercury  to  scavenge  elemental
mercury. Organic  mercury amalgamates  as  well  but
slower than elemental necessitating low flow rates  and
long sampling times if the total mercury concentration is
required. The  mercury/gold amalgam is heated  in an
inert (Ar) gas stream to volatilize mercury for detection.
The collection method is very effective for light, dry gas.
If   the  stream to  be   sampled   contains  heavier
components, hydrocarbon condensation is minimized
by  heating the  traps slightly (100° to 200° C) without
compromise of quantitative mercury collection.

lodated carbon  carbon impregnated with potassium
iodide  is  also  used to scavenge mercury  from gas
matrices  resulting  in  concentration  of   a  sufficient
quantity of mercury on the solid adsorbent for routine
digestive  analysis, lodated  carbon  traps  are  less
sensitive to contaminants in hydrocarbons than  gold
traps, lodated carbon traps also have complete capture
capability for elemental and dialkyl mercury and a high
capacity. In view of these attributes, the iodated carbon
trap is  used for  unprocessed  gas where  reasonably
high concentrations are expected.

Liquids

Analytical methods for  total  mercury in  hydrocarbon
liquids vary considerably and include combustion/trap
(Liang  et al. 2000), vaporization/trap (Shafawi  et al.
1999), acid digestion (reviewed by Liang  et al. 2000)
and oxidative  extraction  (Bloom  2000).  Combustion
techniques (Liang et al. 2000) oxidize and vaporize the
entire  liquid  matrix and mercury in the  combustion
vapors is trapped by amalgamation on gold. Mercury on
gold is then thermally  desorbed and detected  using
CVAF. The thermal vaporization/trap method §hafawi
et   al.  1999)  is  similar to  the  combustion  method
excepting that the  hydrocarbon  liquid is not combusted
and the matrix is  retained  but  in  vapor form.  The
vaporized liquid is  passed  over a gold trap in the same
fashion as the combustion method.

Acid digestion  methods chemically oxidize mercury to
mercuric ion that separates to the aqueous  solution.
The important considerations  in wet digestive methods
are to avoid losses to vaporization if the digestion is hot
and to avoid  introduction  of  mercury from impure
reagents or the air. Mercuric ion in acid  solution is
quantified by acid neutralization,  reduction (SnCI2) to
Hg°, evolution  by  sparging,  trapping  on  gold  and
detection  by CVAA or  CVAF.   Acid  digestions  are
reported  using  mixtures of nitric,  hydrochloric, sulfuric
acids and perchloric acids.

Extractive methods (Bloom 2000) also employ oxidants,
most typically BrCI, but as opposed to digestions do not
chemically  decompose the matrix. Thus  typically less
heat is required and losses due to thermal evolution of
volatile mercury forms do not occur. The mercuric ion in
the aqueous extract is  treated in the same  manner as
acid digestates  (reduction, sparging, trap on Au, detect
CVAF).   For   extractive  methods,  an   important
consideration  is  that  the  period  of  time  that  the
extracting solution contacts the sample must  be  long
enough   to  accomplish  complete   oxidation  and
separation of the entirety of the mercury present in the
sample.   Formation   of   emulsions   with   some
hydrocarbon   liquids   can   complicate   extractive
techniques and procedures such  as  centrifugation are
used to break oil/water emulsions.

Digestates  and  extracted liquids are treated chemically
to transform mercuric  ion into a  species that can be
detected. This is accomplished in a variety of ways, but
the  most  common  is  to  reduce  mercuric  ion  to
elemental mercury (in water) using stannous chloride or
sodium borohydride. The elemental mercury is evolved
from the solution using  inert gas and either sent directly
to a detector or collected on a trap (amalgamation) and
then thermally  evolved into  an  inert gas  stream for
detection.

The most  common   forms   of   detection   are   UV
absorbance and UV atomic fluorescence.  In cold vapor
atomic absorbance (CVAA), a  mercury lamp and optical
flux  detector are employed to measure absorbance of
UV light  by mercury atoms in argon or nitrogen. The
fluorescence (CVAF) technique is  similar but measures
emission (in argon)  following  absorbance  at 90° to the
excitation  light  path  thus  avoiding several  spectral
interferences and other optical limitations. CVAF is the
most sensitive detection method (10"13g).

For CVAF the overriding attribute  is  the  low detection
limit meaning that quantitative  analysis can be achieved
with very small gas sample volumes. By  using double
amalgamation,   extremely    low   concentrations   of
mercury in gas or liquids can be  measured  (1  ppt or
less). The low detection limits also dramatically reduce
matrix  effects  common to other  methods and allow
extreme   dilution   prior   to  analysis   to   reduce
interferences.
                                                   32

-------
Other methods of total mercury analysis in hydrocarbon
liquids  include  inductively  coupled  plasma   (ICP)
followed  by mass spectrometry (ICP-MS)  (Olsen et
al.1997)  or  atomic  emission spectrometry  (ICP-AES)
detection (Snell et al. 1996). The ICP technique avoids
digestion of the sample, hence minimizing some of the
potential  errors  that  can   occur  in  multi-step  wet
chemical  processing   of  liquid  samples.  The  ICP
procedure involves dilution of the sample with a solvent
and injection of a known quantity directly into a torch
that produces  a  gaseous  plasma.  A  portion of the
plasma is then fed directly to the MS or AES detector.

Neutron  activation analysis  (NAA)  methods,  in  which
samples  are irradiated  in a  nuclear reactor  and the
decay  radiation  (gamma)  is  quantitatively   counted,
have been  used successfully to measure total mercury
concentration in crude oil (Musa et al. 1995). The cost
and  availability   of  this   method  have  limited  its
application  to only very specialized circumstances but
the NAA method eliminates  essentially  all sample
preparation and blank  requirements and is  essentially
free of interferences.

Gas chromatography (GC) and high performance liquid
chromatography  (HPLC) (Schickling  and  Broekaert
1995) in  conjunction  with an element specific detector
such as ICP/MS (Tao et al.  1998) or ICP/AES  (Snell et
al. 1996) have been used to directly measure volatile
mercury  compounds  in  hydrocarbon  liquids.  These
compounds  include  elemental  mercury, dialkylmercury
compounds   and   monoalkylmercury   compounds
(determined  either   directly  or   after  alkylation).
Dialkylmercury compounds  are separated from  other
forms chromatographically  and can  be quantitatively
measured in simple matrices. The application of these
techniques to actual  petroleum is  limited  to refined
products.

Analysis for total mercury in a liquid hydrocarbon  matrix
provides  the sum of both  dissolved and suspended
species. If samples are not filtered prior  to analysis, the
result obtained from total mercury analysis includes the
contribution  from suspended mercury compounds and
thus  can be artificially  high  and  variable  because the
distribution of suspended mercury in  liquid samples is
seldom homogeneous.

Operational  speciation  of liquid samples (Bloom 2000)
involves  multiple and  sequential  analyses  for the
various forms and a mass balance exercise.

 THg = Hg° + (RHgR + HgK) + Hg2+ + suspended Hg

Suspended  mercury is quantitatively  determined  by
measuring total mercury of an agitated sample followed
by measuring total mercury of a filtered portion  of the
agitated sample. Ionic forms  are  determined by non-
oxidative extraction. The volatile elemental form (Hg°) is
determined  by sparging  and  collecting the  volatile
component  on a  trap. Total  mercury  concentration
typically is  determined  by combustion, extraction  or
acid  digestion. The  sum  of  the  concentrations  of
dialkylmercury and complexed mercury (RHgR  + HgK)
often is estimated from the discrepancy in  the mass
balance. To determine the exact  concentration  of the
organic forms, more sophisticated techniques  (GC-
CVAF,  GC-ICP/MS) are required.

References

Bloom, N. S.,  1995, Mercury as a case  study of ultra-
   clean sample handling and storage in aquatic trace
   metal research, Environ. Lab., March/April:20.

Bloom, N. S.,  2000,  Analysis and Stability of Mercury
   Speciation in Petroleum Hydrocarbons, Fresenius' J.
   Anal. Chem., 366:5.

Bloom, N.  S., and E.  Crecelius, 1983, Determination of
   mercury in seawater  at  sub-nanogram  per  liter
   levels, Mar. Chem., 14:49.

Clevenger, W. L,  Smith, B. W., and J. D. Winefordner,
   1997,  Trace Determination  of Mercury:  a Review,
   Crit. Rev. Anal. Chem., 27(1 ):1.

Fitzgerald, W. F.,  and G.A. Gill, 1979,  Subnanogram
   determination   of  mercury  by  two-stage   gold
   amalgamation  applied  to  atmospheric  analysis,
   Anal. Chem., 46:1882.

Fitzgerald, W.  F.,  and C. J. Watras, 1989, Mercury in
   surficial  waters of rural Wisconsin  lakes,  Sci.  Tot.
   Environ. 87/88:223.

Freeh,  W.,  Baxter, D.,  Bakke, B.,  Snell,  J.,  and Y.
   Thomasson, 1996. Determination and Speciation of
   Mercury in Natural Gases and Gas Condensates,
   Anal. Comm., 33:7H (May).

Goddon,   R.  G.,   and  P. Stockwell,   1989,  Atomic
   fluorescence spectrometric determination of mercury
   using a filter fluorimeter, J. Anal. Atom.   Spectrom.
   4:301.

IUPAC, 1987.  Mercury in Liquids,  Compressed Gases,
   Molten   Salts   and Other  Elements, Volume  29;
   Solubility Data  Series,  Pergamon  Press,  H. Clever,
   editor, New York, NY.

Liang,  L.,  Lazoff,  S., Horvat,  M.,  Swain,  E.,  and  J.
   Gilkeson, 2000, Determination of mercury in crude
   oil  by in-situ thermal decomposition using a simple
   lab built system, Fresenius' J. Anal. Chem., 367:8.

Musa,  M.,  Markus,  W., Elghondi, A., Etwir, R., and E. A.
   Arafa,  1995, Neutron Activation Analysis of Major
                                                   33

-------
    and  Trace  Elements  in  Crude  Petroleum,  J.
    Radioanal. Nucl. Chem., 198(1), 17.

Olsen, S.,  Westerlund,  S.,  and  R.  Visser,  1997,
    Analysis of Metals in Condensates and Naphthas
    by ICP-MS, Analyst, 122:1229.

Schickling, C., and J.  Broekaert, 1995, Determination of
    Mercury Species  in  Gas Condensates by On-line
    Coupled  HPLC  and  CVAA   Spectrometry,  App.
    Organomet. Chem., 9:29.

Shafawi, A., Ebdon, L, Foulkes, M., Stockwell, P., and
    W. Corns, 1999,  Determination of total mercury in
    hydrocarbons and   natural  gas  condensate  by
    atomic   fluorescence   spectrometry,   Analyst,
    124:185.

Snell,  J.   P., Freeh,  W.,  and  Y. Thomasson, 1996,
    Performance Improvements in the Determination of
    Mercury Species in  Natural Gas Condensate Using
    an On-line  Amalgamation  Trap  or  Solid-phase
    Micro-extraction   with   GC-MIP-AES,   Analyst,
    121:1055.
Snell, J., Johansson, M., Freeh, W., and K. Smit, 1998,
    Stability  and  reactions  of  mercury  species  in
    organic solution, Analyst, 123:905.

Tao, H., Murakami, T., Tominaga, M., and A. Miyazaki,
    1998,   Mercury   speciation   in   natural   gas
    condensate  by  gas  chromatography-inductively
    coupled plasma mass spectrometry,  J. Anal. At.
    Spectrom., 13:1085.

U.S. EPA, 1995, Method  1631:  Mercury  in water by
    oxidation,  purge and  trap,  and  cold vapor atomic
    fluorescence  spectrometry,   EPA/821/R-95/027,
    Office of Water, Washington, DC.

Wilhelm, S., and N. Bloom, 2000, Mercury in Petroleum,
    Fuel Proc. Technol., 63:1.

Wilhelm, S., 2001, An Estimate of Mercury Emissions
    from Petroleum, in press, Environ. Sci. Tech.

Zettlitzer,   M.,   Scholer,  R.,   and   R.  Falter,  1997,
    Determination  of Elemental, Inorganic and Organic
    Mercury in  North  German  Gas  Condensates and
    Formation Brines,  Proceedings of Symposium: Oil
    and Gas Chemistry, Houston, TX, SPE Paper No.
    37260.
                                                  34

-------
                                             Chapters
                   Fate Of Mercury in Refining and Gas Processing
It would be useful to understand how mercury partitions
in  separations,  distillations and catalytic processes so
as to be  able  to predict the  amounts of mercury in
emissions  or effluents  as  a  function of the  known
amount in feeds. Optimally one would have this type of
information for  each of the various  mercury species
present in hydrocarbon feeds to processing.  Very  little
data are presently available that provide evidence as to
the fate of mercury in refining and gas processing. Most
of the  reported  information   concerning  mercury in
processes is anecdotal and consists of observations of
mercury  deposition  in  equipment  and  detection of
mercury in certain waste streams.

In  some situations,  computational methods have been
used  to  estimate  the  distribution  of  mercury  and
mercury compounds in  processes.  Computer  models
can predict locations where mercury can condense or
accumulate in cryogenic processes and the distribution
of volatile species in distillations.  Calculations  of the
distribution of mercury in  a process require accurate
information  on   the  concentrations  of  the various
dissolved and suspended forms that exist in  liquid and
gas feeds as well as vapor pressures,  solubilities and
gas/liquid partition ratios of Hg species as a function of
temperature and pressure.

Vapor pressure  and  solubility for elemental mercury are
reasonably  well  known  or   easily  estimated.  The
solubilities    of   dialkylmercury    compounds   in
hydrocarbons are assumed to be infinite over  the range
of temperatures encountered  in  most  petrochemical
processes. Partitioning  of  mercury  species between
liquid and  gas phases can be estimated using chemical
approximation  principles  and  some  limited  empirical
data (Edmonds  et al. 1996, Bloom 2000).

In  low temperature  processes, chemical reactions to
transform  one mercury species to another typically do
not occur so a species mass balance  is  assumed.
Oxidation of Hg° to ionic compounds  and/or HgS likely
occurs in  some  high  temperature  refinery processes,
thus  making  predictive   calculations  more  difficult.
Distillations    and    separations   produce    major
redistribution of mercury compounds in refining as does
blending   crude  feeds having  differing  amounts of
reactive sulfur compounds.

Predictions of redistribution of mercury species based
on  assumptions  of thermodynamic equilibrium do not
account  for  some  major kinetic factors.  Rates of
condensation and dissolution of Hg° are slow in  liquids
at low temperature. Likewise, the rates of redistribution
of mercury and organic mercury to separated  phases
are slow compared  to the rates of phase separation.
Purely thermodynamic models thus  require  major
corrections for non-equilibrium conditions and empirical
verification.

Extraction

Oil  and   gas  production systems   provide   limited
opportunities  for  loss  of mercury from produced fluids
that are typically mixtures of hydrocarbon liquids, gas
and produced water. Essentially all production systems
employ separators to  accomplish  the  primary  phase
separation so that produced water can be disposed of.
Multiple stages of separation are typical as oil or gas is
transported to a processing facility.

A typical separator schematic  is shown in Figure 6-1
and,  although the  internals  (not shown) are  quite
complicated,  the  obvious result is that  hydrocarbon
liquid, natural gas and water  phases are separated.
The mercury  in the fluid produced  at the  wellhead will
contain  both  the  dissolved  and  suspended  forms.
Strictly based on gravity, most  of  the suspended
mercury  will  be retained in  the  liquid  phases  that
separate.

The distribution of dissolved and  suspended forms of
mercury in the produced  fluid to separated phases is
                                                   35

-------
difficult  to  predict  but  some  broad generalities  are
possible.  The  amounts of  mercury  that  enter  the
separated phases depend  on  physical,  chemical  and
kinetic factors.  The distribution of suspended  mercury
depends on particle size and whether the suspended
(colloidal) material  is  hydrophilic or oleophilic.  That
amount of suspended mercury that is attached to large
particles is  either  removed  in  the  water phase or
retained  in  the  separator  as  sludge  and  is  then
removed when  the separator is periodically cleaned. A
high percentage of truly  colloidal mercury is retained by
the liquid hydrocarbon phase in separations.

The  distribution  of  dissolved  forms  depends   on
numerous factors including the differences in solubility
of each  species  in the various phases, the chemical
composition  of the hydrocarbon  phases, pressure,
temperature and  kinetic  considerations.  Distribution
coefficients have  been  measured  by  Bloom (2000). In
Bloom's study,  equal volumes of paraffin oil spiked  with
the  particular   species  and  water  were   shaken
vigorously for 2, 6, or 12 minutes, and then allowed to
                      separate.  The results of these experiments  are shown
                      in  Table  6-1   and   agree   reasonably  well   with
                      expectations.  The  expected  coefficient  for Hg°  is
                      approximately 20, based upon the relative  solubilities of
                      Hg° in water (60 ng/mL) and paraffin oil (1200  ng/mL)
                      at  room   temperature.  The  trend   to  lower   K0w
                      (octanol/water partition ratio) for elemental  mercury was
                      thought to be due, in  part, to oxidation  (possibly by
                      oxygen  in air) of Hg°  that produces ionic  mercury that
                      partitions to water.

                      In general, purely ionic (un-complexed) mercury should
                      partition preferentially to the water phase while elemental
                      and  organic  forms should  be  retained  by  the  liquid
                      hydrocarbon phase. Henry's law (applied to condensate)
                      determines the amount of mercury in the gas  phase (to a
                      first   approximation).   In   practice  the   accuracy  of
                      computations to predict the distribution of  mercury  in
                      separations is complicated by kinetic factors because the
                      residence time in a  separator is  short and complete
                      equilibrium is seldom reached.
                        Table 6-1  - Oil-Water Distribution Coefficients (Bloom 2000)
           Shaking Time
Analytical measure
Hg°
        (1) KOW (oil/water partition ratio)
HgCI2
CH3HgCI

2 min


6 min


12 min

oil [Hg], ng/mL
water [Hg], ng/mL
Kow <1)
oil [Hg], ng/mL
water [Hg], ng/mL
Kow
oil [Hg], ng/mL
water [Hg], ng/mL
Kow
170.6
5.0
34.1
167.0
12.2
13.7
151.8
18.9
8.0
5.5
160.2
0.034
1.7
167.6
0.010
0.85
169.9
0.005
32.2
98.9
0.33
32.7
98.3
0.33
33.4
99.4
0.34
                                                    36

-------
           Fluid from
               Well
                                                   i
    Gas
                                                   T
                                                                          I   Cot
                        Condensate
    Water
Figure 6-1 - Primary Separation
Transportation

In most cases,  mercury is not lost in the movement of
fluids to  the  processing facility,  especially  mercury in
oil. For gas,  a  notable  exception to this statement is
transport of slightly  wet gas  in steel pipelines from
primary separations.  Elemental mercury reacts  with
steel corrosion products to form a mercury-rich layer on
pipe surfaces.  For  example,  natural gas produced
offshore that  contains low mercury concentration (1-20
ppb) when  measured at the wellhead,  may not present
any mercury at  the processing facility initially. The time
to detect  mercury  at  the   end of  the  pipeline  is
dependent  on the length of the pipeline, the amount of
moisture in the gas  and numerous  other factors. The
lag in  presentation  is due  to the  reaction  of  the
elemental  mercury  with  the  non-stoichiometric  iron
oxide/sulfide corrosion  products on pipe surfaces, with
participation of H2S in gas, if present.

Refining

Desalting is the process by which oil  is washed with
water  to remove  soluble salts (Figure 6-2)  and is
applied upstream of the atmospheric  distillation.  The
partition of  mercury in desalting is similar to that which
occurs  in  primary   phase separations.  The  greater
amount of water and the longer residence time of crude
oil in the desalter  make  it  more efficient  to  remove
suspended  mercury and those ionic species that have
affinity for water. As a result, the mercury in crude oil
after application of  desalting  should  be depleted  of
some  fraction  of  ionic species  and  contain  higher
percentages of the elemental and complexed species.
Mercury in desalter sludge was examined by U.S. EPA
(1996) at four U.S. refineries. The examined refineries
are a small subset of the total number (approximately
100) of U.S.  refineries and hence the sampling is not
statistically predictive. Total mercury concentrations are
reported in Table 6-2.

The distribution of total mercury in (filtered) crude oil to
primary distillation  products (Sarrazin  et  al.  1993;
Wilhelm and  Bloom 2000) is shown in Figure 6-3 and
generally  trends  toward  lower  concentration  in the
higher temperature fractions. Suspended HgS was not
present in the filtered crude examined  by Wilhelm
(unknown for  Sarrazin et al. 1993). For crude feeds that
contain large  amounts of suspended mercury, the non-
volatile  HgS  would  tend  to  remain with the  bottom
fractions in the primary distillation and with the heavy oil
and coke in  the vacuum distillation.  The HgS in resid
and  other  bottom  fractions  used  to fire  boilers  is
converted  in  combustion to volatile forms (Hg°, HgO)
that can be emitted to the atmosphere.

The  amount  of mercury in  petroleum coke is  known
with some certainty.  As part of the U.S. EPA study  of
fuel feeds to coal-fired  utilities,  a large database has
been   developed   that  contains  the  total  mercury
concentration of petroleum coke consumed  as  fuel  in
coal-fired boilers  at  electric generating facilities (U.S.
EPA  2000).  Analysis  of  these  data (Wilhelm 2000)
allows a clear and accurate determination of the mean
amount  of   mercury  in  coke.  The  mean  is   is
approximately   50    ppb.   The    distribution    of
concentrations  is  shown in  Figure 6-4. The origin  of
crude feeds in the refineries that produced the coke is
not reported.
                                                   37

-------
It is likely that the mercury  in coke  is HgS or HgSe
because the process to produce  coke includes both
atmospheric distillation (350 C) and vacuum distillation
(500° - 550° C). Coke is the solid residual material from
the  vacuum still  and  other  coking  processes. The
volatilization  (sublimation)  temperature  for  mercuric
sulfide is approximately 560°  C,  hence,  in the vacuum
distillation  and  coking  processes, the  sulfides and
selenides of mercury would be expected to concentrate
in residuum.

Little is known concerning  the fate of mercury in unit
processes   at  refineries.  Such  processes   include
catalytic cracking, visbreaking, alkylation, hydretreating,
etc.  Based  on  purely  chemical considerations, any
organic or ionic mercury in feeds to hydrotreaters would
be expected to be converted to Hg°,  which would then
incorporate to the separated gas streams (H2S, hfe, C1-
C4).

Mercury in refinery wastewater has been examined by
Ruddy (1982)  but prior to the development of the  more
accurate  and  sensitive analytical  methods  previously
discussed (Chapter 5). The early estimate  was that, on
average,  refinery wastewater contains  approximately  1
ppb  total  mercury,  but the precise  range and  mean
were  not  obtained from  a statistical  sampling.  This
amount is consistent with the  removal of the majority of
hydrophilic mercury species in the desalter.
                               Table 6-2 - Total Mercury in Desalter Sludge
                                             (U.S. EPA 1996)
                                       Refinery
                                          1
                                          2
                                          3
                                          4
   THg (ppm)
       41
       4
       39
      0.01
                           WATER,
                                   EI»ULS.'H£*i
                OIL

                 ..
                                        A
                            CRUDE
                                                         ELECTROSTATIC
                                                           DESAL1ER

                                                                      BRIHE
                                                FURNACE
Figure 6-2 - Crude Oil Desalting
                                                    38

-------
                                   BO
                                                                 I Sirrazmrti 1803

                                                                  Wih.lm »no fflwm 20CO
                                   10 -

                                                                    I       I
                                            -=IDO    MHO- 17D  »17D-3BD   >JBO -33D     > 330


                                                  Distillation Ternpsroture Range 1C;
Figure 6-3 - Mercury (Total) in Distilled Products
                                  SO
                                  40 •
                                  J0
                               o
                               £
                               0.
                                  10
                                    0   90   IH>   130   ZW   250  300  390  "tOD  4M  300


                                                         Hg(ppb)
Figure 6-4 - Distribution of Mercury (Total) Concentrations in Petroleum Coke
                                                         39

-------
Gas Processing

The  fate of mercury  in  gas processing is  easier to
predict because the process is simpler and less inclined
to cause transformation of the species initially present.
Gas  is subjected to primary separation, treatments to
remove  contaminants  and  cryogenic   separation or
liquefaction. Distribution  of mercury  compounds  in the
primary phase separation process has been discussed,
however, produced fluids from most gas wells typically
contain  lesser  amounts  of  suspended  and   ionic
mercury  compounds  than those  found  in crude  oil of
similar total mercury content (on a mass percentage
basis).  Some   heavy  condensate feeds   to   gas
separation  processes  can contain significant amounts
of suspended and oxidized forms, but still less than that
seen in crude oil on a percentage basis.

In treatments for contaminants, the elemental mercury
in gas will dissolve  in  the  liquid glycol  in  glycol
dehydrators  and  increase  in   concentration   until
equilibrium  is  reached.  Some  portion of elemental
mercury in  a glycol dehydrator is  removed in the  regen
cycle.  If the   concentration  of mercury  in gas is
sufficiently   high,  elemental   mercury  vapor   can
condense in the glycol  reboiler  vapor  condenser. In
amine  systems, it is postulated that mercury may react
with  the  H2S scavenged  by the amine and  thus be
removed from the process as HgS in the amine filters.

The  separation process for gas products is typically
cryogenic   and   provides   the    opportunity    for
condensation (precipitation) of elemental  mercury, if the
concentration is sufficiently high to  allow this to occur.
Such  condensation  is  reported  for  gas  separation
plants   having   mercury  in  feeds  in  excess  of
approximately 10-20 ug/m3.

LNG plants and many gas  separation  plants employ
mercury  removal  systems  to   minimize   problems
associated  with mercury  condensation and  mercury
attack  of heat exchangers. Mercury attack of aluminum
heat exchangers  caused  numerous  failures  in the
1970's and  1980's but newer process designs, the use
of  mercury   removal   technology  and  new   heat
exchanger   designs   have   succeeded  in  mostly
eliminating the problem (Wilhelm 1994).

Mercury  Removal Systems

One  approach to minimize the  amount of mercury that
appears  in   effluents  from  petroleum  processing
operations  is to remove the mercury  from  upstream
hydrocarbons.  Mercury removal close to  the production
well, in concept, would eliminate downstream  problems.
Unfortunately, removal systems for mercury are ill suited
to treating unconditioned hydrocarbons due to the fact
that  raw  produced  hydrocarbons contain  numerous
contaminants that interfere with the successful operation
of  mercury   removal  systems.   Offshore   production
facilities are not designed,  nor intended, to  have the
capability of mercury removal beds as part of the primary
treatment   (dehydration)  system.   Mercury   removal
systems are large  and, more  importantly, heavy which
precludes  their  use offshore  in most cases  (Wilhelm,
1999).

Mercury removal systems are most often located at gas
processing  facilities  that   produce  the  feedstock
materials  for   downstream  chemical  manufacturing
plants. The removal systems,  if properly designed and
operated,  can eliminate mercury  from  plant  products
and thus substantially reduce the impact of mercury on
downstream  plants.  Gas   processing  plants  vary
considerably in design depending on the composition of
the feed  and  the  market for products.  Plants are
optimized  to  make  particular  products such  as  LNG,
LPG,   NGL,  ethane,  propane,  butane and/or  C5+
depending on the feed to the plant and the consumer
market. There is less incentive to remove mercury at
plants  configured   to  make   fuels  than  for  plants
designed   to   produce   feedstocks   for   chemical
manufacture.

The principal method to prevent mercury contamination
at processing facilities is to remove mercury from the
various feeds  to  the  plant.  Several   commercial
processes  (see Table  6-3)   are  available  for  this
purpose. Mercury removal sorbent beds or treaters are
employed  in  which the removal  material  is specially
designed for the particular application. Sorbents consist
of an inert substrate (support) onto which is chemically
or physically bonded a reactive compound that  reacts
to form a stable mercury compound that is retained by
the sorbent bed.

The substrates  (supports)  are designed to selectively
adsorb mercury compounds but do not react with them
directly; the reactant  compound is  designed for this
task.  Most  supports  (activated   carbon,  aluminas,
zeolites)  are  porous  with  the  pore  size   carefully
controlled  to selectively adsorb mercury and  to  avoid
adsorption of high  molecular weight  hydrocarbons. For
efficient mercury removal bed  function, the adsorptive
capacity of the  support  is equal in  importance to the
reactive nature of the mercury-scavenging compound.

Some  commercial  mercury   removal   systems  are
targeted at gas phase treatment and some are targeted
at liquids.  Gas phase treatment systems   primarily
consist of sulfur impregnated  carbon, metal sulfide on
                                                   40

-------
carbon or alumina, and  regenerative molecular sieve
(zeolite)  onto   which   is  bonded  a   metal  that
amalgamates with mercury.

In  a  gas  treatment  system  that  utilizes  sulfur-
impregnated  activated carbon  (Nishino  et  al.  1985,
Matviya et al. 1987), mercury (Hg°)  physically adsorbs
and  then reacts to form non-volatile mercuric sulfide.
The  reaction between  Hg° and sulfur is a redox reaction
in which mercury  is  oxidized and  sulfur is  reduced.
Because the percentage  amount of  organic mercury in
gas  is usually  very low, the  efficiency  to react with
organic mercury is  less critical. Sulfur is soluble in liquid
hydrocarbon  and  is  removed  by  contact with liquid
hydrocarbon  rendering  it  ineffective.   Sulfur/carbon
sorbents are relatively less effective to treat heavy gas
where some liquid condensation is possible.

Metal sulfide (MS)  systems for gas (Sugier et al. 1978;
Barthel et al. 1993) have the advantage that the metal
sulfide is not soluble in liquid hydrocarbon and has less
sensitivity to water. The MS  systems  are  therefore
more  suited  to   moist   feeds  or  those  in   which
hydrocarbon carry  over or condensation may occur. In
a metal sulfide  mercury removal system for gas having
an alumina (AI2O3) support,  mercury reacts  with  the
metal  sulfide   directly,  adsorption  on  the   alumina
substrate is less kinetically favored than for carbon and
is not required for the reaction to occur.

Mol-siv sorbents Markovs 1988) that  contain  metals
(silver) selectively capture mercury by an amalgamation
process.  Mol-sieve treaters  serve  a  dual  role  to
dehydrate and  to   remove  mercury. The mercury is
released as  mercury vapor upon heating  in the  regen
cycle. The regen gas in these systems is treated with a
conventional mercury removal bed to prevent sales gas
contamination  or a mercury condensation system is
employed in the regen cycle.

Liquid removal processes consist of iodide impregnated
carbon, metal sulfide  on  carbon or  alumina, silver (on
zeolite), mol-sieve and a two step process consisting of
a  hydrogenation  catalyst followed  by   metal  sulfide
captation. The carbon/iodide  system (McNamara, 1994)
consists  of  an  iodide-impregnated  carbon  having  a
large pore diameter.  In  the iodide system,  mercury
must oxidize to  react with iodide. In theory the oxidation
step is assisted by carbon, which  provides catalytic
assistance to the oxidation step. The metal sulfide and
mol-sieve Markovs, 1993) mercury  removal systems
for  condensate are conceptually equivalent  to those
employed for gas.

Organic mercury (dialkylmercury) is more prevalent in
hydrocarbon liquids. The ability of sorbents to react with
the  organic  variety  is   less  certain.   One  system
addresses this situation by using a two-step process in
which  the  first step  is  hydrogenation  of  the  dialkyl
mercury using a catalyst  and hydrogen (Roussell et al.
1990;  Cameron  et  al. 1993). The dialkyl  mercury  is
converted to elemental mercury that  is scavenged  in
the second step using a metal sulfide sorbent.

References

Barthel,  Y.,  Cameron,  C.,   and  P.  Sarrazin,   1993,
    Mercury removal  from  wet  natural  gas,  Proc.  of
    European   Gas  Processors   Association,   10th
    Continental Meeting.

Bloom, N.  S.,  2000, Analysis and  Stability  of Mercury
    Speciation in Petroleum Hydrocarbons, Fresenius' J.
   Anal. Chem., 366: 5.

Cameron, C., Courty, P., Boitiaux, J-P.,  Varin, P., and G.
    Leger,  Method  of Eliminating  Mercury  or  Arsenic
    From a Fluid in the Presence of a Mercury/Arsenic
    Recovery Mass, U.S. Patent 5,245,106 (1993).

Edmonds,  B.,  Moorwood,  R.,  and  R. Szczepanski,
    1996, Mercury  Partitioning  in  Natural Gases and
    Condensates,    Proceedings:   GPA    European
    Chapter Meeting, London, UK (March).

Markovs,  J.,  1988,  Purification  of   Fluid  Streams
    Containing Mercury, U.S. Patent 4,874,525.

Markovs, J., 1993,  Removal  of Mercury from Process
    Streams, U.S. Patent 5,223,145.

Matviya, T., Gebhard, R.,  and  M. Greenbank,  1987,
    Mercury Adsorbent Carbon Molecular Sieves and
    Process for Removing  Mercury Vapor from  Gas
    Streams, U.S. Patent 4,708,853.

McNamara, J.,  1994,  Process for Removal  of Mercury
    From Liquid Hydrocarbon, U.S. Patent 5,336,835.

Nishino,  H.,  Tanizawa,  Y.  and  T. Yamamoto,  1985,
    Process  for  Removal   of  Mercury  Vapor  and
   Adsorbent Therefor, U.S. Patent 4,500,327.

Roussell, Courty, P. Boitiaux, J-P., and  J. Cosyns,  1990,
    Process for Removing Mercury and Possibly Arsenic
    in Hydrocarbons, U.S. Patent 4,911,825.

Ruddy, D., 1982, Development Document for  Effluent
    Limitations  Guidelines,  New Source Performance
    Standards,  and  Pretreatment  Standards  for the
    Petroleum   Refining    Point   Source   Category,
    EPA/440/1-82/014 (NTIS  PB83-172569), Office  of
   Water Regulations and Standards, Washington, DC.

Sarrazin,  P.,  Cameron,  C.,  and  Y.   Barthel,   1993,
    Processes prevent detrimental  effects from As and
    Hg in feedstocks,  Oil and Gas J., (Jan. 25).
                                                   41

-------
Sugier, A., and F. la Villa, 1978,  Process for Removing
    Mercury  from a  Gas or Liquid by Absorption on  a
    Copper Sulfide-Containing Solid  Mass,  U.S. Patent
    4,094,777.
U.S.  EPA,  1996,  Waste  Minimization for  Selected
    Residuals in the  Petroleum Refining Industry, Office
    of   Solid  Waste   and  Emergency  Response,
    EPA/530/R-96/009      (NTIS      PB97-121180),
    Washington, DC.
U.S. EPA, 2000,  Unified Air Toxics Website:  Electric
    Utility  Steam Generating Units, Section  112 Rule
    Making,  Office  of  Air  Quality  Planning   and
    Standards,   Research   Triangle    Park,   NC.
    www.epa.gov/ttn/uatw/combust/utiltox/utoxpg.html
                   Wilhelm, S. M., 1994, Methods to Combat Liquid Metal
                      Embrittlement   in   Cryogenic   Aluminum  Heat
                      Exchangers, Proceedings  73rd  GPA Convention,
                      New Orleans, LA.
                   Wilhelm, S. M., 1999, Conceptual  Design  of  Mercury
                      Removal   Systems  for  Hydrocarbon   Liquids,
                      Hydrocarbon Processing, 78(4):61.
                   Wilhelm, S. M., and  N.  S.  Bloom, 2000,  Mercury in
                      Petroleum, Fuel Proc. Technol., 63:1.
                        Table 6-3 - Mercury Removal Systems for Hydrocarbons

            Reactant                  Substrate          Complexed Form         Application
    Sulfur
    Metal Sulfide
    Iodide
    Hydrogen, Metal Sulfide
    Ag
   Metal Oxide
     Carbon
   AI2O3; Carbon
     Carbon
      AI203
      Zeolite
Sulfided metal oxide
     HgS
     HgS
     Hgl2
     HgS
Ag/Hg amalgam
     HgS
      Gas
Gas, Condensate
  Condensate
  Condensate
Gas, Condensate
Gas, Condensate
                                                  42

-------
                                             Chapter?
                     Mercury Emissions from Oil and Natural Gas
                                 Production and Processing
Mercury in produced  hydrocarbons may escape to the
environment  by  several  avenues  of egress.  These
avenues may be generally categorized as wastewater,
solid waste  streams  and air emissions.  Wastewaters
originate  in  production  operations  in  the  form  of
produced water and in  refining  and  gas processing as
wastewater.  Solid  waste  streams  are  generated  in
production, transportation  and in refining. Air emissions
originate   from  fugitive   emissions  from  process
equipment  and  from  combustion,  with  combustion
thought to be vastly dominant as a possible avenue by
which mercury in oil and  gas may be transferred  from
produced hydrocarbons to the environment.

It is  useful, therefore, to examine the major pathways
(solids,  liquids  and  gas) and  to  further categorize
mercury  emissions  by  industry  segment,  meaning
production,   transportation,  and processing systems.
Mercury in  combusted  fuels is examined in detail as
this is considered to be the dominant avenue of transfer
of mercury  in fossil fuels  to the atmosphere based on
the existing  data  and based on the analogy  to  coal
combustion  recently  developed  (U.S.  EPA  1997a,
Brown et al. 1999).

The  industry  distinguishes  between upstream  and
downstream operations. The upstream category refers
to primary   production  and whatever  processing  is
necessary  to  place   the  produced  fluids  in  the
transportation   system.   The   term    downstream
operations  refers  to  refining  and gas  processing  to
produce salable  products. Natural gas  is  transported
exclusively via pipeline in the  U.S. while crude  oil  is
transported  by a  variety  of ways with pipelines and
tankers conveying the overwhelming majority.

Mercury Emissions to Water

The  main   wastewater  streams   that  derive   from
petroleum production  and  processing  are produced
water from  both oil and  gas  production and refinery
wastewaters. Very minor amounts of water (relative to
produced water and  refinery wastewater) derive from
gas  processing  and  these  are  mainly  water from
separators at gas plants (essentially produced waters)
and condensed water from dehydration. No wastewater
streams originate from transportation systems  other
than the very small amounts that come  from  pipeline
pigging operations  and tanker ballast. The discussion
that follows will concentrate on the major streams as
mercury in water data are not reported for  the minor
sources.

Produced Water

Normal  production  operations of both  crude  oil and
natural gas involve  primary separation  of water, gas
and oil. Separated water (referred to as produced water
when  separated close to the well) is either discharged
(to an ocean, lake or stream or evaporation pond) or re-
injected (usually  to the formation it came from). Re-
injection is utilized to enhance oil recovery (EOR) or to
comply with regulatory requirements stemming from
environmental concerns.

Produced water is the largest waste stream in the oil
and gas industry.  Produced  water varies  greatly  in
composition  and salinity,  depending  on  the geologic
source of the  water,  type  of   production,  and the
treatment of the water once brought to the surface. The
salinity of produced water ranges  from essentially fresh
water to brines that are several times  more saline than
seawater.   Produced  waters  typically   have  total
dissolved solids (TDS) concentrations between 2,000 to
300,000 mg/L (natural seawater is about 34,000 mg/L).
The predominant cation in produced waters  is sodium
and chloride is usually the  predominant anion.

Some  states allow  surface  discharge  of  produced
water, but many do not. Produced water originating on
offshore platforms  can be discharged  to the ocean
unless the platforms  are located  in sensitive areas  or
                                                  43

-------
the water is  unusually  hazardous due to a  particular
characteristic (salinity, hydrocarbon content, toxicity). In
sensitive coastal areas  of the U.S., produced water is
closely regulated with permit requirements that severely
limit options for discharge thus necessitating treatment
or re-injection.

The U.S.  EPA establishes  controls on  produced water
discharges into U.S. waters through provisions of the
Clean Water Act (CWA; 33 U.S.C. 1251) that established
the  National  Pollutant  Discharge  Elimination System
(NPDES).  EPA  issues  effluent  limitation  guidelines
(ELGs)  and  discharge  permits  for  produced  water
discharged to waters under Federal jurisdiction. A permit
is required for discharge of water both onshore (issued
by  individual  States)  and to offshore waters  under
Federal or State jurisdictions. Granting  of a  permit is
contingent on testing to criteria (including metals) set by
the various States but  which  are based on the  human
and aquatic life criteria contained in the CWA and Safe
Drinking Water Act. Application of the Best Practicable
Control Technology for waters exceeding specifications
is required and applied  on a case-by-case basis.

Only limited data are available concerning mercury in
produced  waters  and   essentially   none  concerning
speciation. Produced waters may contain suspended
HgS, elemental  Hg° and/or oxidized  forms but the
relative  amounts  in  any  produced waters  are  not
reported relative to the forms that occur in co-produced
hydrocarbons. HgS  and Hg° are the dominant  forms
found in produced water associated with gas production
in the Gulf of Thailand (Frankiewicz and Tussaneyakul
1997). Gas  condensates  originating in  the Gulf of
Thailand  contain  between  100  and 1000  ppb  total
mercury (mostly elemental).

Total mercury concentrations in U.S. produced  waters
were only recently reported as, prior to approximately
1990, analytical methods were insufficient to detect the
low ppb and ppt levels typically now found. Tables 7-1
and 7-2 summarize the available data.  Petrusak et al.
(2000) has estimated the amounts and  fate of  waters
produced  onshore for the year 1995. Approximately 18
billion barrels of water were produced by onshore U.S.
oil and gas wells in 1995. 71  percent of this water was
re-injected for EOR and 21 percent was disposed of in
Class II  injection wells. Of the remaining 8 percent
(0.23 trillion liters), 3 percent was discharged, 2 percent
was put to beneficial use and 3  percent was disposed
of using miscellaneous  methods (public water treatment
works, evaporation ponds, etc.).

Waters  produced   offshore  are  more  likely  to be
discharged to the ocean unless the platform is located
in a  sensitive  coastal  area.  Approximately  2  billion
barrels  of water are  produced annually in offshore
areas  under Federal and  State  jurisdiction  (about  1
billion  bpy in  the Gulf of Mexico  and  1  billion  bpy
elsewhere, Stephenson 1992). About 70 percent of the
offshore  produced water is discharged to the  ocean
(approximately 0.3 trillion liters annually).

At this point in time it is not possible to assign  either a
mean or range to mercury  concentrations in  produced
and discharged water. It may be possible eventually to
obtain  such a  mean  amount by accessing the NPDES
databases of the  individual  states that require reporting
of mercury concentrations. As discussed previously, the
analytical methods recently adopted by the U.S. EPA
(EPA Method  1631,  U.S. EPA 1999)  are slowly being
applied under  statute and it may  be some time before
sufficient  data  are  available to obtain an  accurate
estimate of the amount of  mercury in  produced water
that  is discharged to the  environment.  The mercury
species present in produced  waters are unknown but
likely  include higher  percentages of suspended forms
(HgS) and ionic forms than the produced crude oil.

Applying an estimated  mean  mercury concentration in
produced water  of  1  ppb to 0.5  trillion  liters  (0.2
onshore and 0.3 offshore yearly), one obtains  the result
that  on the order of 250  kg mercury  may  enter the
aqueous environment annually from waters associated
with U.S. oil and gas  production.

Refinery Wastewater

The  chemical  compositions  of  refinery wastewaters
vary widely, as do the volumes of water (per barrel of
oil  processed)  produced   by  refineries. Major water
compositional    differences   stem    from    process
configuration (products produced) and from the  type of
crude  oil  that  is  processed (high sulfur crude,  sweet
crude).  The wastewater that enters  water treatment
systems   at  refineries  is  a   composite  of  water
discharges from individual processing units that differ in
type and  function. Water streams from process units
are  differentiated and  categorized  as waters that
contact hydrocarbons (including condensed steam from
stripping)  and  cooling  waters  that typically do  not
contact hydrocarbons directly but may contain some
hydrocarbon contamination  from leakage.

The  following  post-secondary  treatment wastewater
characteristics  are  typical  (API  1977, 1978,  1981).
Additional details are contained in Table 7-3.

    •    1-10 MMgal/D secondary treatment process
       wastewater
    •   Total mercury at up to 1 ppb, species unknown
        (Ruddy 1982)
    •    Residual petroleum compounds present (10 -
       40 ppm Total Organic Carbon typical)
                                                    44

-------
    .    10-100 ppb each of any trace metal(s): Cu, Zn,
        Pb, V, Se, Ni, Cr, Fe, As, etc.
    •    Ammonia (1 - 20 ppm), cyanide, chelating
        agents possibly present
    •    Total Suspended Solids at 10-30 ppm

Speciation of mercury in  refinery wastewater is largely
unknown.   Post-biological   treatment   waters   from
municipal  sewage  treatment  (similar  in  process  to
refinery biological water treatment) generates mercury
compound speciation such that less than 5 percent (of
the   total   mercury    concentration)    exists   as
monomethylmercury,  less   than  0.01   percent  as
dialkylmercury, less than 0.1 percent as Hg°, possibly
10-30 percent suspended particulate Hg, less than 10
percent labile Hg(2+), and  between  60  and 90  as
organochelated   Hg(2+).  The  concentration  of total
mercury in effluents from (municipal) sewage treatment
facilities is in the range of 5-20 ng/L (Bloom and  Falke
1996).
The  mean  and  range  of mercury  concentration  in
refinery wastewater  cannot  be stated with certainty.
Very  little  information  is  available in the  published
literature that speaks directly to this issue. The EPA
study of refinery  effluents  from the early 80's  (Ruddy
1982)  provides  a  mean  close  to  1  ppb  but the
methodology to  arrive  at  this   number  is   poorly
documented. The  advances  in  mercury  analysis
procedures that have occurred since that  time  (U.S.
EPA 1999) may allow a more accurate estimate in the
future, but  now it can only be  stated that the mean is
likely less than 1 ppb and that the  level  varies from
refinery to  refinery and with the amount of mercury in
processed crude.

The  amount of refinery  wastewater discharged to the
environment    (rivers,    lakes    and   oceans)    is
approximately 1.5 billion barrels yearly  (for  year 1998,
U.S. DOE  2000,  U.S. EPA 1996). Applying the 1982
EPA mean value  of 1  ppb  (max.) to this amount yields
approximately 250 kg  as  an upper  limit to the total
amount of mercury discharged in refinery wastewater.
                                 Table 7-1 - Mercury in Produced Waters
Location
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
North Sea
North Sea
North Sea
North Sea
North Sea
Gulf of Mexico

Ocean
Ocean
Coastal LA
Brent
Northern
Central
UK
Dutch
Coastal
Discharge Rate
(109 L/y)
0.64
0.40
1.74





140
THg
(ppb)
<0.010
<0.010
0.007 - 27;
Mean 7.08; SD 11.26
<3
<3
<3
<1
4
<0.01 -0.2,
n = 37
Reference
Ray 1998
Ray 1998
Meinhold et al. 1996
Jacobs et al. 1992
Jacobs et al. 1992
Jacobs et al. 1992
Jacobs et al. 1992
Jacobs et al. 1992
Trefry et al. 1996
                                                   45

-------
        Table 7-2 -Mercury Concentrations in Produced Water
                      (Southern CA, year 1990)
                           (Raco1993)
Platform
Elly
Edith
Hogan
Hillhouse
A
B
C
Habitat
Irene
Grace
Gail
Gilda

No.
Samples
2
1
2
1
2
2
2
1
4
2
5
2

Volume
(106 L/y)
1
176
225
361
1184
726
836
21
608
139
273
704
5,254
THg
(ppb)
<1
<1
<1
<1
0.5
2.5
<1
<1
0.5
1
1.6
<1

   Dafa from National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System discharge
    monitoring reports submitted to US EPA Region 9, San Francisco.
Table 7-3 - Pollutant Concentrations for a Typical Refinery Wastewater
Parameter

Trace Metals
Arsenic
Chromium
Copper
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
Trace Organics
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Acenaphthene
Benz[a]anthracene
Benzo[a]pyrene
Chrysene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
2,4-Dimethylphenol
Value
(mg/L)

0.0050
0.0680
0.0180
0.0009
0.0100
0.0172
0.0610

0.0005
0.0005
0.0008
0.0011
0.0004
0.0007
0.0003
0.0002
0.0005
0.0022
Basis


API (1978; 1981)
API (1978; 1981)
API (1978; 1981)
Ruddy (1 982)
API (1978; 1981)
Ruddy (1 982)
API (1978; 1981)

API (1978; 1981)
API (1978; 1981)
API (1978; 1981)
Ruddy (1 982)
API (1978; 1981)
API (1978; 1981)
API (1978; 1981)
Ruddy (1 982)
API (1978; 1981)
API (1978; 1981)
                                46

-------
Mercury Emissions to Air

The primary opportunities for atmospheric emissions of
mercury  in  oil  and gas  production  and  processing
operations   are   fuel   combustion   (discussed   in
subsequent  Sections), mercury  in  fugitive emissions
and gas flares at primary production operations.

The amount of gas that is flared annually in the  U.S. is
approximately 7 billion cubic  meters  (for year  1996,
U.S. DOE 1999) and the trend  is downward. Flared gas
typically  originates from  gas co-produced  with   oil
production in situations where economics dictate that
flaring  is less  expensive than  collection and transport.
The mercury concentration in flared gas is not reported.
If one  assumes flare gas contains on  the order of 1
ug/m3 then the annual amount emitted in flared gas is
on the order of 7 kg. This order of magnitude estimate
does not include mercury in flares at refineries. In most
refineries, gas used  to  regenerate  catalysts  (some
catalysts  collect   mercury   and   release  it   when
regenerated)  is sent to flares  and may  contain higher
amounts of mercury than typical for other types of gas
flares.

Approximately 9  billion  m3  of  methane  is  emitted
annually by the gas industry  (Kirchgessner et al. 1997).
Approximately  90  percent  of emitted gas  is non-
combusted methane and  about 10 percent compressor
discharge. The concentration  of  mercury  in wellhead
natural  gas  is likely higher  than  in pipeline gas by a
factor of 2-3 based on the distribution of mercury in gas
processing (Wilhelm 1999). Assuming  an upper  limit of
1  |jg/m3 mercury  in wellhead  gas,  the  amount  of
mercury  in fugitive natural  gas  emissions is on  the
order of 10 kg.

Approximately  1  million  metric  tons  of  methane
(equivalent) are estimated to be emitted from petroleum
production, transportation and processing  (year  1999,
U.S. DOE  1999).  90 percent of such  emissions  are
associated  with  production  and  about  half  of  the
production related amount is from vents on oil tanks.
While the amount of mercury in such  emissions  is  not
known, a rough estimate is possible. The distribution of
mercury  in  oil to vented gases can determined  by
Henry's law. Henry's constant for mercury in oil  is  the
solubility divided by  the  vapor  pressure  (2  ppm/25
mg/m3). The upper limit amount of mercury in 1 million
metric  tons  (1.5 billion  m3  methane)  would  be  no
greater than approximately 185 kg if the  mean mercury
in oil concentration is 10 ppb.

The  Clean Air Act  (CAA; 42  U.S.C.  85) requires  the
U.S. EPA to develop national emission standards for
hazardous   air   pollutants   (NESHAP)   for   source
categories.   The  CAA   implements  NESHAP   via
requirements   for   maximum   achievable    control
technology  (MACT). Mercury is a listed hazardous air
pollutant  (HAP)  under  Section  112 of the CAA.  The
source categories that are of interest to petroleum
producers  and  refiners  are boilers,  certain  refining
process units and miscellaneous combustion sources.

NESHAP for  petroleum  refineries  apply  to  catalytic
cracking  units (CCU), catalytic reforming  units (CRU),
and  sulfur  plant units  (SPU).  Of these, only process
vents associated with  CRU catalyst regeneration  are
scrutinized   relative  to  mercury.  While  EPA  has
identified particulate  metals  (PM  =  antimony, arsenic,
beryllium,   cadmium,    chromium,    cobalt,    lead,
manganese, and nickel) as  HAPs from CRU process
vents, mercury is not included because it  is volatile in
atomic form  and  not easily controlled  by existing
particulate  control  technology.   EPA, as of  1998,
concluded that because mercury  is not well controlled
by PM air  pollution control  devices ESPs as well as
PM scrubbers), the MACT floor for Hg in CCU process
vents is determined to  be no control for both new and
existing  units. Data  are  not  available   to  estimate
mercury emissions from either CCUs or CRUs.

Metal  emission  factors   are  used to  estimate  air
pollutant  emissions to  the  atmosphere of volatile or
particulate  metals or  metal compounds  (U.S. EPA
1997c). They relate the quantity  of pollutants  released
from  a  source to an  activity associated with those
emissions.   For  metals  in  refinery  unit  processes,
emission factors are usually expressed as the weight of
pollutant  emitted divided by a unit weight or volume of
the  activity emitting the pollutant (e.g.,  pounds of
mercury emitted per gallon of fuel  oil burned). Emission
modification factors are  used  to  estimate a  source's
emissions by the general equation:

       EMF =AxEFx[1-(ER/100)]

       where:

       EMF = emissions modification factor,
       A = activity rate,
       EF  = uncontrolled emission factor, and
       ER  =  emission reduction  efficiency in  %  for
       pollution control.

California Assembly  Bill 2588 (entitled the Air  Toxics
Hot  Spots  Information  and  Assessment Act of 1987)
required  petroleum processing facilities in  California to
inventory  their  air  emissions  of designated  toxic
materials  (including  mercury)  for  the   purpose  of
assessing the  health  risks to surrounding communities.
                                                   47

-------
Data  for  compliance with the  California statute  are
compiled  and  reported  by the  American  Petroleum
Institute  and Western  States  Petroleum Association
(API  and  WSPA  1998).  Emission  factors  were
developed for  externally  fired  boilers and  heaters,
internal combustion  engines, gas turbines and direct-
fired  processes.  The test method  used  for  mercury
involved isokinetic collection of particulate and gaseous
mercury in potassium permanganate (KMnO4)  solution.
In the method  employed, the collected mercuric form
(produced  by  oxidation  by  the  permanganate) was
reduced  to elemental Hg and then  sparged from the
solution into  an optical  cell and  measured  by atomic
absorption spectrometry.

Table 7-4 summarizes the emission factors reported in
the  API/WSPA  study   (1998).  The  compiled  list
represents data from ongoing  activities  and  includes
only a small fraction  of the unit operations and process
systems  that are  potential  sources. The  California
program   that  examined  air  toxic  emissions  from
refineries   adopted  priorities  based  on  suspected
sources  for  a   large  number  of  pollutants.  Thus,
although  mercury was   examined  as a  part of the
program,  it was  (and is) not necessarily the primary
focus or  priority. The data  do provide some clues  and
insights  into   certain   refinery  operations   and  the
magnitude of their mercury emissions.

The asphalt  blowing process  polymerizes  asphaltic
residual oils  by oxidation with air. The objective is to
increase the  melting temperature and  hardness  of the
asphalt  and  thus  achieve   improved   properties
depending on   the  type  of asphalt  product  (road
materials, construction materials, roofing material,  etc)
desired.   The   process  involves blowing heated air
through the oils  in a batch or continuous process to
oxidize   the  polycyclic   aromatic   compounds   that
comprise  the majority of the asphaltic material.  The
process  operates at approximately 400-450° C  and
thus may partially volatilize  HgS. The distribution of
mercury  compounds emitted in asphalt blowing is
unknown.
Process  heaters  or furnaces are used  to  heat feed
materials  to  the  required   reaction  or  distillation
temperature levels. The fuel  burned may be still gas,
natural   gas,   residual  or  distillate  fuel  oils,  or
combinations,   depending  on  economics,  operating
conditions,  and   emission   requirements.  Assuming
mercury  in  distillate  and residual  fuel  oils  is  the
elemental form, then one would expect that the emitted
mercury  species  would  be  the  elemental  form  and
mercury  oxides,   the  relative  percentage  of  each
depending upon furnace type  and  efficiency.

Coke  calcining  is a  high  temperature  pyrolysis
treatment of raw  petroleum  coke with  the  primary
objective to  produce  coke properties suitable  for  a
particular end use. In  the  calcining process, moisture
and  volatile material  are removed and  carbonization
and  aromatization processes that started  in the coker
are completed. The calciner can be heated by a variety
of fuels and to  a  variety of temperatures depending on
product properties but  typically in the range of 400 to
500° C.  These temperatures are sufficient to  cause
partial volatilization of HgS in coke.

In Table 7-4,  the mercury emissions  factors  are
calculated from crude  fired steam generators  in three
tests using 3 crude sources.  One  source has elevated
mercury (5 x 10~3  Ib/Mgal,  700 ppb) while the other two
were
ppb).
were much lower (5 x  10~5, 9 x  10~6 Ib/Mgal; 7 ppb, 1
Some additional evidence for fuel oils is available from
U.S. EPA studies (U.S. EPA 1998) of mercury emission
factors  for  utility  boilers.  EPA  measured   mercury
emission factors for  several  furnace  types  used  by
utilities. In this study, U.S. EPA (1998) cited mercury in
residual  fuel oil  as 0.6  Ib  per trillion  Btu  based  on
analysis  of 4  samples  of fuel oil  (mean  standard
deviation =  0.3). The conversion factor applied was
150,000 Btu/gallon of density 8.2 Ib/gallon, thus yielding
a  mean  mercury concentration  of  approximately  10
ppb.
                                                    48

-------
                       Table 7-4 - Mercury Emission Factors for Refinery Processes
                                            (API/WSPA 1998)
Process
Asphalt Blow
Boiler
Boiler
Boiler
Coke Calcining
Heater
Heater
Heater
Heater
Steam Generator
Steam Generator
Turbine
Turbine
Fuel
Gas
Fuel Oil
Still Gas
Still Gas
Gas
Fuel Oil
Still Gas
Still Gas
Still Gas
Crude
Crude
Still Gas
Still Gas
APC(1)
TO
None
None
SCR
SD/FF
None
DeNOx
None
SO2 Scrub
None
SO2 Scrub
SCR/COC
COC
Emission
Factor
9.00E-03
1 .03E-05
3.23E-04
3.23E-04
4.63E-05
1 72E-05
2.02E-04
2.02E-04
2.02E-04
2.19E-03
2.19E-03
4.63E-03
2.15E-02
Units
Ib/MMcf
Ib/Mgal
Ib/MMcf
Ib/MMcf
Ib/ton coke
Ib/Mgal
Ib/MMcf
Ib/MMcf
Ib/MMcf
Ib/Mgal
Ib/Mgal
Ib/MMcf
Ib/MMcf
No. of
Tests
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
2
1
Hg(2)
146 (3)
1.4
5.2
5.2
23
2.4
3.3
3.3
3.3
327
327
75
348
Units
l-ig/m3
ppb
|ig/m3
l-ig/m3
ppb
ppb
l-ig/m3
|ig/m3
l-ig/m3
ppb
ppb
l-ig/m3
|ig/m3
(1) APC - air pollution control; COC - CO Oxidation Catalyst; DeNox (SNCR) - Selective Non-Catalytic A/Ox
Reduction; FF - Fabric Filter; SCR - Selective Catalytic A/Ox Reduction; SD - Spray Dryer; TO - Thermal Oxidizer.
(2) Calculated concentration in the fuel assuming the emission ratio (THg out/ THg in) is 1.
(3) Calculated Hg concentration  in air emitted to the atmosphere.
Mercury   Emissions   Via   Solid   Waste
Streams

Under the  Resource Conservation  and Recovery Act
(RCRA; 42 U.S.C. 321), materials containing mercury or
mercury compounds are regulated as  hazardous solid
waste if they meet the regulatory definition of solid waste
and the definition of hazardous waste. The hazardous
category is achieved if the material  exhibits  either  a
defined  characteristic or is specifically listed by EPA as
hazardous. At present,  U.S.  EPA does not list waste
streams  from exploration,  production  or  refining as
hazardous according to  any mercury content criteria.

Solid wastes directly associated with  exploration and
crude oil or natural gas production are exempted from
regulation  as   hazardous  wastes.   The  exempted
categories  include  drilling  fluids and other  wastes
directly  related  to  production.  For this  reason,  such
wastes  are infrequently scrutinized  for metals content
and data are scarce upon which one might estimate the
totals for this category.

Wastes are designated  as  characteristically hazardous
based   on  the  concentration  of mercury in  waste
leachate as determined by the  Toxicity Characteristic
Leaching  Procedure (TCLP).   Refinery  solid  waste
streams are routinely examined using TCLP for metals
leachability  characteristics and  treated  according to
RCRA requirements.  In general, solid waste  streams
from refineries are not characteristically hazardous due
to mercury content.  RCRA data  on  TCLP  are  not
typically reported unless the waste stream does not pass
and then they are reported under TRI  (see  discussion
below).

Drilling  wastes   primarily  consist  of the   extracted
cuttings  and  drilling  mud  from  the boreholes of
exploratory wells  (also workovers and  injection wells).
The drilling industry generated approximately 24 billion
liters of such waste in 1995 (API 1995). Petrusak et al.
(2000) reports  statistics  for  drilling wastes  produced
onshore in the  U.S. About 13 percent  of such wastes
are re-injected,  47 percent are evaporated on  site  and
most of the remainder is buried on site.

Data  on  mercury content of drilling  wastes  are  not
generally reported but TCLP test results typically do not
identify this category of waste as characteristically toxic
due to mercury content. The reason for this fact is  that
subterranean mercury (as  would  be  in the cuttings from
drilling operations) is  found almost exclusively as HgS
or as  a  substitutional  element in minerals (mostly
pyrites). In addition most of the mercury in drilling muds
comes from the  mineral  ingredients  (barite)  used to
make the mud, not from the drill cuttings, except in  rare
situations. In these mineral forms mercury is not water
soluble and thus not extractable by TCLP.
                                                    49

-------
Mulyono  et al. (1996) reported analysis of four water-
base  drilling  muds  (Indonesia)  as  having  mercury
concentrations between  144 and 2141  ppb (mean 750
ppb). These concentrations were  for fresh mud  and the
concentrations did not change after use. Approximately
20 percent of the mercury was nitric acid extractable.

Under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-
to-Know Act (EPCRA; 42 U.S.C.  116),  companies that
manufacture,  process, or use  toxic chemicals must
report annually a Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) to both
the U.S.  EPA  and  the appropriate  state  agency.
Mercury and  mercury compounds are  included in the
list of more than 650 chemicals that must be reported.
Although petroleum production is generally excluded,
refineries are not if they process crude oil containing
more than the threshold  reporting amount. Prior to this
year (2000)  the threshold  was sufficiently   high  to
exclude reporting of mercury in  crude  oil and  refined
products.

In  1997,  the  U.S.  EPA  expanded  the  types   of
companies  that  report TRI to include  electric utilities
and petroleum  bulk terminals and stations  (amongst
others). In 1999, under EPA's PBT Chemicals Initiative,
EPA created  a new PBT group  within TRI,  and then
significantly modified the TRI reporting requirements for
this group of chemicals by lowering the thresholds that
trigger  reporting. The final rule (EPCRA, Section 313)
criterion for PBTs  was  promulgated  this year  (2000)
and defines the threshold  reporting amount for mercury
as 10 pounds.

In the  new  rules  promulgated for  2000  for PBT
pollutants,  EPA  also  eliminated  the  de   minimis
exemption  of  0.1   percent  that previously  excluded
reporting of trace constituents of chemical feedstocks.
Thus   refineries,  bulk  terminals  and  some  other
petrochemical processors must now report mercury if it
exceeds  the  yearly threshold  amount  of 10  pounds.
Given the new requirements it is likely  that it will soon
be possible to estimate  the  contribution of mercury  in
solid waste  from petroleum and gas  production and
processing  to  the  global burden  based on  a better
statistical  database.  At   this point in  time  it  is not
possible to accomplish this task with any confidence as
to accuracy.

Mercury in Crude Oil

Crude  oil  contains  both dissolved  and suspended
mercury  compounds  and, although analysis  for total
mercury in crude oil yields the sum of  both forms, the
concentration of suspended forms that is obtained from
sampling crude oil  is  highly  dependent  on the  location
that samples  are taken  in the production and  refining
process.   Furthermore,   given   that   the   fates  of
suspended  forms  (HgS)  and  dissolved forms  are
different,  the  concentration  of each  is  important to
predicting the fate of mercury in a refinery.

Filby and  various colleagues (Shah,  Filby and Haller
1970, Filby and Shah 1975,  Hitchon,  Filby and Shah
1975, Hitchon and  Filby  1983) measured mercury in
crude oils using neutron activation  analysis. This early
work   was   directed   to   associating   chemical
characteristics of crude  oil with  geologic  origin  for
exploration purposes.

Shah et al.  (1970) report concentrations  for 10 crude
oils as shown in Table 7-5. The procedure involved pre-
filtration (1  |im pore size) of the  oil; hence mercury
existing as particulates above 1 |im was not measured.
One of the  crude  oils examined by Shah (California
Cymric) was unusual in  having  had a  total mercury
concentration above 10 ppm. This crude was popularly
analyzed  during the 1970's  because the high mercury
concentration was advantageous to analytical  method
development and thus  it became popular amongst
analysts in the early studies.

Shah's data are the  basis for U.S. EPA early  estimates
(Brooks 1989) of ppm levels for the  mean amount of
mercury in crude oil. The exercise (by EPA) to arrive at
a  mean   amount involved  averaging  the  mean  or
median of the range of concentrations from the early
studies of Shah and Filby. The inclusion of Cymric in all
of the early  compilations provided a disproportionate
emphasis of this anomalous source.

Filby  and  Shah  (1975)  report crude oil data  for four
samples identified by country of origin (see Table 7-6).
It is not known if the California oil analyzed by Filby and
Shaw is Cymric, but likely so. Hitchon and Filby (1983)
measured total mercury in 86  crude  oils (and two  tar
sands) from Alberta, Canada.  Thirty-seven samples
had  mercury concentrations below the detection limit
(DL) of 2 ppb. Forty-nine samples were above  DL with
a mean of 50.0 ppb  (maximum concentration of 399
ppb). The  data  are summarized  in Table  7-7. The
average of 86 crude oils (22 ppb) was calculated  by
assigning a value of half the DL to those exhibiting total
mercury (THg) below the detection limit.

Musa et  al.  (1995)  reported total mercury  in  Libyan
crude oils to be in the range  of 0.1  to 12 ppb (Table 7-
8). Liang et al. (2000) reported the  mean concentration
of mercury in 11 crude oils  (source not identified) as  4
ppb (range = 1 to 7 ppb). Magaw et al. (1999) reported
data on 26  crude  oil types purchased  by U.S. west
coast refineries as less than  10 ppb (the detection limit
of the CVAA instrument). Magaw et al.'s data (Table 7-
                                                   50

-------
9) span the major U.S. crude streams and include both
domestic and imported crudes. Magaw et al. report one
California crude oil (Cymric) as having 1.5 ppm THg.

Bloom (2000) found total Hg  in  unfiltered  crude oils
ranging between sub-ppb levels  to  over saturation
(several   ppm,   see   Table   7-10).   The   mean
concentrations for total mercury in crude oil (1.5 ppm)
that Bloom reported is much higher than other reported
data. This is due to the fact that the data set contains a
large number of samples from one field that presented
processing  difficulties  and hence  was  extensively
analyzed.  Bloom's reported mean is  derived from the
number of samples  analyzed in his laboratory and not
based  on  crude oil  sources. The crude oil samples in
the upper half of Bloom's data  come mostly from one
field in South America producing less  than 30,000 bpd.
The mean of the lower half of Bloom's data for crude
oils is 1 ppb.

Much  of  Bloom's  condensate  data  reflects samples
from the Gulf of Thailand. These  Asian  condensates
are not processed  in  the  U.S. but  are  prevalent in
reported data (Tao  et al. 1998,  Shafawi  et  al. 1999,
Bloom  2000)   because  they  are   problematic  to
petrochemical manufacture. The mean concentration of
the  lower half of  condensate  samples  that  were
analyzed  in  Bloom's  laboratory  was   reported  as
approximately 20 ppb.

The   New  Jersey   Department  of  Environmental
Protection Mercury Task Force, in a recently completed
study  of  oil  processed  in  New Jersey  refineries,
reported mercury concentrations in crude oil compiled
in Table  7-11  (Morris  2000).  The  reported  data
identified  crude oil  origin. The number of samples
analyzed and  standard deviations were not reported.
According to Morris' data, the mean amount of mercury
in crude oil  imported to the U.S. East Coast refineries is
less than 5 ppb.

Environment Canada (2000) has compiled a database
on oil  properties  that includes  metals  analysis using
ASTM  method D  5185 (Inductively  Coupled Plasma
Atomic Emission Spectrometry;  ICP-AES). Table 7-12
compiles the reported mercury concentrations in the EC
database. The ICP-AES method has a detection  limit
for mercury of 15 ppb.

Duo et al. (2000) reports analytical data  for 8 crude oils
that are  representative of 50 percent of all crude oil
processed in  Canada. The exact origins  of the crude
oils were not divulged but many of these same oils are
also  processed in  the  U.S. The method used was a
variation  of  digestion/CVAA.   The  method   had  a
minimum detection limit for mercury of  2  ppb. Most of
the data are below this amount as shown in Table 7-13.

Total mercury  concentrations in  crude oil  (summarized
in Table 7-14)  cannot be statistically treated at present,
in  part because of the uncertainties in the analytical
data, and also due to the fact  that much of  the data
reported in the literature are not well documented as to
origin. While the majority  of recently reported  data are
less than 20 ppb total mercury there are exceptions in
the ppm range, notably Bloom 2000,  Shah et  al.  1970
and Magaw et al.  1999  (one sample from California).
The data for condensates are generally higher than for
crude  due  to  a  preponderance of data on  Asian
condensates that are more frequently analyzed due to
their difficulty in processing.
                                                   51

-------
          Table 7- 5 - Total Mercury Concentrations in Crude Oil by NAA
                               (Shahetal. 1970)
Source
California
California
California
California
California
Libya
Libya
Libya
Louisiana
Wyoming
Mean
Amount
(ppb)
114
81
88
29,688
78
2,079
62
75
23
77
3,200
SD
(ppb)
2.8
1.9
3.0
103.9
2.4
11.9
5.1
1.7
1.8
3.4

Notes
Detection Limit 4 ppb



Cymric






Range 23 - 30,000 ppb
          Table 7-6 - Total Mercury Concentrations in Crude Oils by NAA
                             (Filby and Shah 1975)
      Source
 THg
 (ppb)
              Notes
 California (Tertiary)
Venezuelan poscan)
Alberta (Cretaceous)
       Libya
       Mean
23,100
  27
  84
  <4
 5,803
5 Replicates; Mean = 21,200; S.D. 0.36
        Detection Limit 4 ppb
                                      52

-------
Table 7-7 - Total Mercury Concentrations in Alberta Crude Oils
                  (Hitchonand Filby 1983)
Stratigraphic Number
Era _ ,
Samples
Upper Cretaceous 21
Lower Cretaceous 18
Jurassic 3
Triassic 4
Carboniferous 8
Devonian 32
Total 86
(1) Detection limit = 2 ppb
(2) Calculated by assuming 

-------
     Table 7-9 - Mercury Concentrations in U.S. West Coast Crude Oils
                          (Magawetal. 1999)
Region
Middle East
Africa
North America
Asia
South America
North Sea

Number
of
Samples
2
4
11
4
4
1
26
Range
(ppb)
<10(1)
<10
<1 0-1, 560
<10
<10
<10
ND- 1,560
Mean
(ppb)
<10
<10
146
<10
<10
<10
65
       (1) DL = 10 ppb
          Table 7-10 - Total Mercury Concentrations in Crude Oils
                             (Bloom 2000)
Number of
Samples
76
37
39
Range
(ppb)
NR(1)
NR
NR
Mean
(ppb)
1,505
1
3,000
SD
3,278
1.49
4,140
Notes
All
Lowest 37 samples
Top 39 samples
(1) NR - not reported
                                  54

-------
Table 7-11 - Mercury Concentrations in Crude Oils
       Processed in New Jersey Refineries
                 (Morris 2000)
Type
Africa (Angola)
Africa (Angola)
Africa (Congo)
Africa (Gabon)
Africa (Nigeria)
Africa (West)
Africa (West)
Arabia (Dubai)
Canada (Newfoundland)
Mexico
Mexico
Mixed
North Sea
North Sea
North Sea
North Sea
Saudi Arabia
South America (Columbia)
South America (Columbia)
South America (Venezuela)
South America (Venezuela)
South America (Venezuela)
South America (Venezuela)
MEAN
Mean THg
(ppb)
2.7
1.5
1.8
1.8
1.0
3.2
1.5
2.9
1.9
2.7
0.1
3.1
3.4
9.3
2.5
4.7
5.7
12.3
2
4.8
5.1
0.8
6
3.5
Field
Palanca
Soyo
Kitina
Rabi
Escravos


Nemba





Ecofisk
Gullfaks
Nome







Range = 0.1 - 12.3
                      55

-------
           Table 7-12 - Total Mercury Concentrations in Crude Oils
                    (Environment Canada 2000, Cao 1992)
    Field Name
      Location
THg
(ppb)
Notes
    Alberta Sweet
  Cold Lake Bitumen
 Transmountain Blend
     Terra Nova
   Bent Horn A-02
      Taching
    Iranian Heavy
       Maya
    Ninian Blend
      Oseberg
    Arabian Light
  California (API 11)
     Carpinteria
    Dos Quadras
       Hondo
    Platform Irene
    Port Hueneme
     Santa Clara
      Sockeye
W. Texas Intermediate
   W. Texas Sour
  Alaska North Slope
      BCF24
      Boscan
     Lagomedio
   Canada (Alberta)
   Canada (Alberta)
   Canada (Alberta)
Canada (Newfoundland)
    Canada (NWT)
        China
         Iran
       Mexico
      North Sea
      North Sea
     Saudi Arabia
      U.S. (CA)
      U.S. (CA)
      U.S. (CA)
      U.S. (CA)
      U.S. (CA)
      U.S. (CA)
      U.S. (CA)
      U.S. (CA)
      U.S. (TX)
      U.S. (TX)
      U.S. (AS)
      Venezuela
      Venezuela
      Venezuela
              Crude
              Bitumen
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
              Crude
  (1) DL = 15 ppb
                                    56

-------
            Table 7-13 - Mercury Content of Crude Oils Processed in Canada
                                 (Duo et al. 2000)

                 Crude Oil             Concentration (ppb)
                              Minimum    Maximum       Mean









A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
Mean
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2

Table 7-14 - Summary of THg
Reference
Shahetal. 1970
Hitchon and Filby
1983
Filby and Shah.
1975
Musa et al. 1995
Taoetal. 1998
Magaw et al. 1999
Bloom 2000
Liang et al. 2000
Morris 2000
Cao 1992
Duo et al. 2000
Olsen et al. 1997
Bloom 2000
Shafawi et al. 1999
Tao et al. 1998
Type
Crude Oil
Crude Oil
Crude Oil
Crude Oil
Crude Oil
Crude Oil
Crude Oil
Crude Oil
Crude Oil
Crude Oil
Crude Oil
Condensate
Condensate
Condensate
Condensate
Number
of
Samples
10
86
4
6
1
26
76
11
23
<2
<2
<2
9
<2
<2
<2
7

in Crude Oils
Range
(ppb)
23 - 29,700
<2 - 399
<4- 23,100
0.1 -12.2

<1 0-1, 560
NR(1)
1.6-7.2
0.1 -12.2
24 AIKDL=15
8
4
18
5
7
<2-9
NR
NR
9-63
15-173









and Gas
Mean
(ppb)
3,200
22
5,803
3.1
<1
65
1,505
4.4
3.5
8
1.6
15
3,964
30
40
<2
<2
<2
2
<2
<2
<2
4
1.5
Condensates
SD Notes
U.S. and imports
63.6 Canada
U.S. and imports
4.2 Libyan
Asia
West Coast
Refineries
3,278 Origins not reported
1.0 Origins not reported
New Jersey
Refineries
Canada and Imports
Canadian
Refineries
Origins not reported
1 1 ,665 Mostly Asian
18.6 S.E.Asia
Asian
(1) NR - not reported
                                       57

-------
Mercury in Refined Products

Recently reported data for mercury in refined products
are compiled  in  Table 7-15.  Bloom (2000) reported
mercury in U.S. light distillates and fuel oil close to 1 ppb
(46 samples).  Liang  et al.  (1996) reported mercury in
U.S. gasoline and diesel less than 5 ppb.

A statistical  ensemble for  mercury  in refinery products
exists in only one case. Total mercury in petroleum coke
was reported   as part of  the  U.S.  EPA  reporting
requirements  on fuel feeds to  utility boilers (U.S.  EPA
2000) and the mean is approximately 50 ppb (1000 data
points, 2  million tons).  The  distribution  of mercury
concentrations in petroleum coke is shown in Figure 6.4.

Table  7-16   summarizes   the  data  for  mercury
concentrations  in fuel  oil.  The U.S.  EPA  emissions
estimates  used in the  Report  to Congress (U.S.  EPA
1997a) are not well  documented as to  the origin of fuel
oil concentration  data.  Details are discussed  in  the
Section titled U.S. EPA Estimates.
                            Table 7-15 - Summary of THg in Refined Products
Reference
Liang et al. 1996
Liang et al. 1996
Liang et al. 1996
Liang et al. 1996
Liang et al. 1996
Liang et al. 1996
Bloom 2000
Bloom 2000
Bloom 2000
Olsen et al. 1997
Tao et al. 1998
U.S. EPA 2000
Type
Gasoline
Gasoline
Diesel
Diesel
Kerosene
Heating Oil
Light distillates
Utility fuel oil
Asphalt
Naphtha
Naphtha
Petroleum
Coke
Number of
Samples
5 0
Range
(ppb)
.22 - 1 .43
4 0.72-3.2
1
1
1
1
14
32
10
4
3
1000
0.4
2.97
0.04
0.59
NR
NR
NR
3-40
8-60
0-250
Mean
(ppb)
0.7
1.5
0.4
2.97
0.04
0.59
1.32
0.67
0.27
15
40
50
SD
NR(1)
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
2.81
0.96
0.32
NR
NR
NR
Notes
U.S.
Foreign
U.S.
Foreign
U.S.
U.S.
U.S.
U.S.
U.S.

Asian
U.S.
(1) NR - not reported, ND - not detected
Table 7-16 - Summary of Mercury
Reference
Liang et al. 1996
Bloom 2000
EPA1997b
EPA1997b
EPA1997a
EPA1997a
EPA1997a
EPA 1998
Type
Heating Oil
Utility fuel oil
RFO 6
DF02
Utility RFO
Commercial
RFO/DFO
Residential
RFO/DFO
RFO
Number of
Samples
1
32
6
3



4
Concentrations in Fuel
Range
(ppb)
0.59
NR
2-6





Mean
(ppb)
0.59
1
4 (1)
<120(2)
10
100
100
10
Oils
SD
NR(3)
0.96





0.3

Notes
U.S.
U.S.


Measured
Calculated
Calculated

        (1)Median (2) Average (3) ND - not detected
                                                   58

-------
Estimate of Mercury Emissions
from Refineries

Wilhelm  (2001  in  press)  constructed  an estimate  of
mercury  emissions from petroleum in the U.S. for the
year 1999.  The  macro-analysis  Wilhelm constructed
(Table  7-17) considered  the  amount of mercury  in
crude oil, the distribution  of  mercury in the refining
process  as well  as the combustion processes for the
fuel  products  derived  from crude  oil.  Wilhelm drew
attention  to  the  fact that  analytical  uncertainties and
lack  of   information   on  sample   origin  obfuscate
calculation of  the  mean concentration  of mercury  in
crude oil  and  many refined products. The estimation
model  was  constructed  to provide  a framework  to
identify major streams  that require statistical  definition
as to mercury concentration.

In Table  7-17, estimates of the total yearly amount in
major crude oil streams were calculated by multiplying
the source crude feedstock amounts (year 1999; U.S.
DOE  2000)  by  estimated mean  concentrations  of
mercury  reported for regional  crude oil sources, both
domestic and imported. Wilhelm based his estimates of
the mean  concentration  of mercury  in  major  crude
streams on the recently reported data of Morris (2000),
Environment Canada (2000) and  Magaw et  al.  (1999)
but acknowledged that  the  actual  mean concentrations
for crude oil from some sources could be an order of
magnitude higher or lower than those  used in Table  7-
17.

The model predicted that,  if the amount of mercury in
crude oil  (including condensates) processed in the U.S.
is close to 10 ppb on average, then the total amount of
mercury  in crude oil is  approximately 8,500 kg. Of this
amount,  approximately  7,000  kg  resides in refinery
products. Approximately 15 percent of refinery products
(asphalt,  lube  oils,  solvents)  are not burned, leaving
approximately  6,000  kg emitted to  the atmosphere
mainly by combustion  (Wilhelm included  refinery fuel
combustion and assumed an emission factor of 1). The
mean amount of mercury in  U.S. transportation fuels
(gasoline + diesel + jet fuel) had a major impact on the
estimate  (due to the fact that half of refined products fall
into this category). The mean  was considered to  be no
greater than 3 ppb based  on  the  data  of  Liang  et al.
(1996) and data for other distillates.

Wilhelm  estimated atmospheric emissions of mercury
from refineries from a mass balance with other avenues
of egress from refineries and assumed that combustion
of fuels accounts for the primary path of emission. From
energy  usage  at  U.S. refineries (U.S.  DOE   2000)
compiled in Table 7-18  and the estimated total mercury
concentrations in refined products,  Wilhelm estimated
the amount  of  mercury in  air emissions  from fuel
burning at all  U.S. refineries  to   be  no  more  than
approximately 1,500 kg/year or about 25 percent of the
total amount of mercury in refinery combusted fuel
products  (6,000   kg/year).   The  higher   percentage
amount assigned to refineries appears to be due to the
fact that the major fuels utilized at refineries (coke, still
gas) have higher, on average, mercury concentrations
than other fuel  products. While the  concentration of
mercury in coke is known,  the amount in  still gas is
much less certain.

Wilhelm argued that  mercuric  sulfide, originating as
either suspended in crude oil or as the reaction product
of other forms  of mercury  with sulfur in  the refining
process, is  suspected to concentrate in  the heavier
fractions so the  known amount in coke (50 ppb,  U.S.
EPA 2000) seemed reasonable (to Wilhelm) relative to
the amount in lighter  fractions. Even if mercury does
not concentrate in coke, its  concentration is known with
some confidence and should serve as an upper limit to
the amount in crude oil, given that light distillates exhibit
relatively lower mercury concentrations (<5  ppb). It was
argued  that if elemental mercury in  crude oil  partitions
to still  gas, then  the  mercury concentration in  light
distillates would  be expected to be elevated  as  well.
Based  on  these arguments,  it was concluded  that
mercury in  distillates likely  reflected the  amount  of
volatile  elemental mercury in crude oil and the amount
in  coke reflected  the   amount  of HgS  and  other
suspended forms.

Perturbation of the proposed model to a  lower mean
concentration for mercury in  crude oil actually  produces
a  somewhat better  fit  to  the existing data.  As an
example,   if   one   applies  the   origin   specific
concentrations  in  Table 7-11  (Morris  2000)  to  the
volumes of oil  that derive   from known major import
sources, then one may calculate with better confidence
that 35 percent of all crude processed by U.S.  refineries
contains no more than  approximately 1,500  kg  total
mercury as opposed to approximately 3,000 estimated
by Wilhelm based on an  upper limit  of 10 ppb in crude
oil. These calculations are  shown  in Table 7-19. The
mean concentration applied to imported oil streams is
rounded to 5 ppb due to the lack of statistical details.

Numerous major uncertainties exist in the cited analysis
including the estimates  for  refinery  wastewater and
solid waste (previously discussed), data for mercury in
refined  products, and  discrepancies between  crude oil
data obtained by differing analytical methods. Wilhelm
rightly cautioned that any estimation model for mercury
in petroleum should be  viewed with skepticism  until
additional data are obtained  and in light of the fact that
a complete statistical understanding of the amounts of
                                                   59

-------
mercury  in  crude oil  or in refined  products  is  not
presently available. In  addition,  Wilhelm cautions that
mercury emission factors for many combustion sources
that burn liquid fuels are not now (2000) known.

Duo  et al.  (2000)  examined emissions  from  Canadian
refineries. The  method  Duo  applied  was  similar to
Wilhelm's but did not consider mercury in wastewater or
solid waste streams in his mass balance. Duo concluded
that  the  amount of mercury  emitted  from  Canadian
refineries  (to  the  atmosphere)  was   the   difference
between  mercury in crude oil and  mercury  in refined
products. Based on  Liang et al.'s (1996) data for refined
products, Duo concluded that greater than 90 percent of
mercury  in  Canadian  crudes  is  emitted  during  the
refining process.
                   Table 7-17 - Estimates of Mercury in Crude Oil and Refined Products
                                       (for year 1999, Wilhelm 2001)
Type bpy
(U.S. DOE 2000) (U.S. DOE 2000)
(109)
Crude Oil
Domestic (40%)


Imported (60%)



Total (IN)
Refined Products
d = 0.75
d = 0.80
d = 0.85
d = 0.85
d=1.10
d = 0.90
d = 0.55

Wastewater
(Ruddy 1982)
Solid waste
(U.S. EPA 1996)
Air (Table 7-12)
Air (fugitive)
Total (OUT)

Alaska (18%)
COM (20%)
Other (62%)
Canada (15%)
Mexico (15%)
Middle East (20%)
Other (50%)


Motor fuels (60%)
Naphthas (5%)
Residual fuel oil
(5%)
Distilled fuel oil
(21%)
Petroleum coke
(3%)
Heavy oils (3%)
Still Gas (3%)





0.4
0.5
1.5
0.5
0.5
0.8
1.8
6.0

3.7
0.3
0.3
1.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
6.2
1.5


kg/y
do11)

0.5
0.7
2.0
0.7
0.7
1.1
2.4
8.1

4.4
0.4
0.4
1.8
0.3
0.3
0.3
7.9
2.5
0.3


T1 , Estimated
THg Total
ppb kg/y

<10 500
<10 700
<10? (1) 2,000?
<10? 700?
<10 700
<10 1,100
<10? 2,400?
8,100

<2? 900?
<5 200
<10? 400
<5 900
50 1 ,500
50 1 ,500
<30? 900?
6,300
1 250
40? 7,200?
(1,500) (2)
250?
8,000
        (1) question marks indicate major uncertainties in the estimated mean concentration
        (2) from fuels used in refineries, included in total for all refinery products
                                                    60

-------
                          Table 7-18 - Fuels from Crude Oil Used by Refineries
                                            (U.S. DOE 2000)
Fuel Type
LPG
Still gas
RFO/DFO (1)
Heavy Oils
Coke
Total
bpy
(106)
4
235
6
6
90

kg/y
(109)
0.4
20.6
0.8
0.9
15.8

THg
(ppb)
<10
<30?
<10
50
50

Amount
(kg Hg/y)
4
600
86
5
800
1,500
               (1) residual fuel oil/distillate fuel oil
          Source
                             Table 7-19 - Mercury in Major Crude Oil Imports
                                (Calculated from the data of Morris 2000)
                          bpy (1999)     Percent of U.S. Total
                            (10*)
                (6 x 10" bpy)
                 THg
                 (ppb)
            Yearly amount
              (kg Hg/y)
      Venezuela
      Middle East
      African
      Mexico
      North Sea
0.50
0.74
0.22
0.48
0.15
8
12
4
8
3
5
5
5
5
5
359
531
158
345
108
      Total
 2.1
35
                1,500
Mercury in Combusted Gas and Estimated
Emissions

Only limited data are  available that provide  specific
concentrations  of mercury in gas  or gas condensate
processed in the U.S. Chao and Attari (1993) surveyed
U.S. pipeline gas using gold collection  and CVAA to
measure  mercury. The sample volumes and detector
sensitivity combined  to  produce relatively high limits of
detection. Chao's data are reported in Table  7-20 and,
although the gas distribution system in the U.S.  is well
covered,  the reported  concentrations do not  provide
exact concentrations, only upper detection limits.
                        U.S. dry gas consumption in  1999 was approximately
                        525 billion cubic meters (U.S.  DOE 2000).  Using  Chao
                        and Attari's higher concentration (THg<0.2 ug/m3)  then
                        the maximum amount  of  mercury released to  the
                        atmosphere   from  burning  natural  gas  would  be
                        approximately  100  kg.  Using  the  lower  number
                        (THg<0.02  ug/m3)  the  maximum  amount  would be
                        approximately  10  kg.  Although  the  estimate for gas
                        provides some reassurance that natural gas is clean and
                        preferable to other types of fossil  energy, the actual
                        mean amount of mercury in U.S. gas supplies remains to
                        be demonstrated.
                                                  61

-------
                         Table 7-20 - Total Hg Concentration in U.S. Pipeline Gas
                                          (Chao and Attari, 1993)
                               Pipeline Composition (Source)
                      Mean THg
                       (ug/m3)
                           70-75% Gulf Coast, 25-30% Mid-continent              <0.2
                        70-75% Mid-continent, 25-30% Rocky Mountain           <0.2
                                     Offshore Gulf Coast                        <0.2
                                     Offshore Gulf Coast                        <0.2
                                         Coal Seam                            <0.2
                                        Appalachian                            <0.2
                                     Appalachian Shale                         <0.2
                                        Illinois Basin                            <0.2
                                       San Juan Basin                          <0.2
                     55% Permian, 15% NM, 6 % Anadarko, 24% San Juan        <0.2
                                 56% San Juan, 44% Permian                    <0.2
                             75% Rocky Mountain, 25 % Canadian                <0.2
                                          California                             <0.1
                                          California                             <0.1
                                          Canadian                             <0.1
                                          Canadian                            <0.02
                                 80% Permian, 20% San Juan                   <0.02
                                         Gulf Coast                           <0.02
                                         Guff Coast                           <0.02
U.S. EPA Estimates

U.S. EPA estimates of mercury emissions from fuel oil
and  gas  are  summarized in Table  7-21.  Estimated
emissions  of  mercury   to   the   atmosphere   from
combusted fuels were compiled  in  the  1997  Mercury
Report  to  Congress  (U.S.  EPA  1997a).  The  EPA
estimated that  approximately  11  tons  of  mercury
originated from burning  fuel  oil  in   boilers  (utility,
commercial, residential) in  the year analyzed  (1994-95).
The   method   of  estimation  involved   calculating  an
emission factor (Ib Hg/Btu)  and applying this factor to the
yearly fuel oil consumption.

The estimate for mercury emissions from  utility boilers in
the EPA Mercury Report to Congress was based on an
ongoing  (at  that time) investigation  of  hazardous  air
pollutants (HAPs) in fossil fuel fired  utility boilers  (U.S.
EPA  1998). The results of the utility toxics study  were
published the year following the EPA mercury report to
Congress. In  the  utility  HAP  study,  EPA analyzed  for
mercury  in fuel oil as part of an exercise to calculate
emission factors for  utility boilers.  The data for this
exercise are not published;  however, the mean amount
used in calculations was approximately  10 ppb,  which
translated  to an annual  emission amount from all U.S.
utility boilers that burn fuel oil of approximately 200 kg.

Emissions data were obtained from 58  emission tests
conducted by  U.S. EPA, the  Electric  Power Research
Institute (EPRI), the Department of Energy (DOE), and
individual utilities. The mercury concentration in as-fired
oil and natural  gas was estimated  from  emissions test
data for boilers burning these  fuels. In  the estimation of
mercury emissions,  all  oil-fired units were assumed to
burn residual  oil because trace  element  data were
available only for residual oil. An average density of 8.2
Ib/gal was chosen to represent all residual oils.  Trace
element analysis of natural  gas was performed for only
two available emissions tests; these concentrations were
averaged.  The  calculated mercury  concentration  in the
oil  and natural  gas  multiplied  by the  fuel feed rate
resulted in an  estimate of  the amount  of mercury (in
kg/year) entering each oil- and  natural gas-fired boiler.
                                                   62

-------
The emission ratios and modification factors for pollution
control devices pMFs)  were calculated by dividing the
amount of mercury exiting either the boiler or the control
device by the amount of mercury entering the boiler. The
average  EMF  for  specific  boiler  configurations  and
control devices was calculated by taking the geometric
mean of the EMFs for that type  of  configuration  or
control device. (The geometric mean was chosen rather
than the arithmetic mean  because the distribution  of
emission factors followed a lognormal  distribution.) To
calculate the control efficiency, the EMF was subtracted
from  1.  Boiler-specific  emission  estimates  were  then
calculated  by  multiplying the calculated inlet mercury
concentration by the  appropriate  EMF  for each  boiler
configuration and control device.

Mercury     emissions    for   oil    combustion    in
commercial/industrial  boilers were estimated on a per-
state  basis  using an emission factor of 6.8  lb/1012 Btu
for residual oil and  7.2 lb/1012 Btu)  for distillate oil and
the oil  consumption  estimates  for States.  The  total
annual   emission   for  oil-fired   commercial/industrial
boilers was estimated  as  7 Mg/yr (7.7 tons/yr). No
estimate  was  given for mercury emissions from gas
fired industrial boilers.

Mercury  emissions for  oil combustion in  residential
boilers were estimated  on a per-state  basis using an
emission factor of 6.8  lb/1012 Btu for residual oil and 7.2
lb/1012 Btu) for distillate oil and the  oil consumption
estimates  for  States.   The  total  annual   estimated
emissions  for oil-fired residential  boilers is  2.9 Mg/yr
(3.2 tons/yr).

It is thought that the emissions estimates reported in
the 1997 EPA Mercury  Report to Congress (U.S.  EPA
1997a)  were  based  on  ongoing  studies  that  were
reported  independently.  One report, issued  the same
year,  compiled data specific to mercury as  part of the
ongoing EPA Air Toxics program.

U.S. EPA (1997b)  estimated concentrations  of mercury
in  fuel oil based  on data compiled by  Brooks (1989).
Brooks assembled data for fuel oils and crude oils from
studies conducted in the 70's and early 80's. The  EPA
report  admitted  no comprehensive oil characterization
studies had been done, but cited data in the  literature
for  the range of mercury  concentrations in crude oil
between  0.023  to  30 ppm  wt,   and  the  range  of
concentrations in residual fuel oil as 0.007 to 0.17 ppm
wt.  Because only a single mean  value was found in the
literature for mercury concentration in distillate fuel oil,
no conclusions were drawn about the  range  of mercury
in distillate oil.

Table 7-22 lists  the values for mercury in oils used by
U.S. EPA  (1997a)  to  calculate  emission factors. The
numbers used were obtained by taking the  average of
the mean  values found in the  literature (Shah et al.
1970).  The value for distillate oil  was the single  data
point found in the literature and was not  considered as
representative as the values for residual and crude oils.

Additional  evidence  concerning  mercury in  fuel oils is
available from the U.S. EPA studies  of hazardous air
pollutants from electric utility  boilers (U.S. EPA 1998).
U.S.  EPA  (Radian  1993  as  contractor  to  EPRI)
measured mercury emission factors for several furnace
types used by utilities. In  this study, U.S.  EPA cited
mercury in residual fuel oil as 0.6 pounds per trillion Btu
based  on  analysis  of 4  samples of fuel oil  (mean
standard  deviation  =  0.3).  The conversion  factor
applied was 150,000 Btu/gallon of density 8.2 Ib/gallon,
thus  yielding   a   mean   mercury   concentration  of
approximately   10   ppb.   The   mercury   in   gas
concentration utilized in calculation of emission factors
was 0.5 ug/m3 but its origin  was not documented.

The origin of the EPA estimate for  mercury from oil
combustion (11  tons) cited in the  Report to Congress
derives  mainly  from  the   estimate  for  mercury
concentrations in residual and distillate fuel oil cited for
commercial and  residential boilers (7  Ib/trillion  Btu).
These   concentrations  (100   ppb) are   an order  of
magnitude higher than those  derived  from emission
measurements for utility boilers  (U.S.  EPA 1997a) and
for  the  mean cited  in U.S. EPA, 1997b,  Locating And
Estimating Air  Emissions  From Sources Of Mercury
And Mercury Compounds and with the amount cited in
U.S. EPA 1998 (0.6 Ib/trillion Btu).
                                                    63

-------
                          Table 7-21 - U.S. EPA Estimates of Mercury in Fuel Oil
Boiler
Btu/year
do12)
Fuel Type
Fuel Oil
Amount
(1010 L/year)
Emission
Factor
(kg/1012Btu)
Hg
(kg/year)
THgin
Fuel
(ppb)
      Utility
      Industrial
      Residential
 840
2,178
 890
  RFO
RFO/DFO
RFO/DFO
2.4
6.2
2.5
  0.24
3.09/3.27
3.09/3.27
 200
7,000
2,900
10
100
100
      Total
                                                        10,100
                        Table 7-22 - Mercury Concentration In Oils Used as Fuels
                                            (U.S. EPA 1997b)

                                                              Mercury concentration

Residual (No. 6)
Distillate (No. 2)
Crude Oil
Number of
samples
6
3
46
Range Mean
(ppb) (ppb)
2-6 4(1)
<120(2)
7 - 30,000 3,500 (3)
       (1) Midpoint of the range of values. (2) Average of data from three sites.
       (3) Average of 46 data points was 6,860; if the  single point value of 23,100 is eliminated, average based on
       45 remaining data points is 1,750. However, the largest study with 43 data points had an average of 3,200
       ppb wt. A compromise value of 3,500 ppb wt was selected as the best typical value.
References

American  Petroleum  Institute,  1977,  Water  Reuse
    Studies, API Publication No. 949, Washington, DC.

American   Petroleum   Institute,  1978,  Analysis   of
    Refinery  Wastewaters  for   the  EPA  Priority
    Pollutants, API Publication No.  4296, Washington,
    DC.

American   Petroleum    Institute,   1981,   Refinery
    Wastewater  Priority  Pollutant  Study  -  Sample
    Analysis and  Evaluation of Data, API  Publication
    No. 4336, Washington, DC.

American  Petroleum Institute,  1995, Management  of
    Residuals, API Publication No.  4296, Washington,
    DC.
                               American  Petroleum  Institute  and  Western States
                                   Petroleum  Association,  1998,  Air Toxic Emission
                                   Factors For Combustion Sources Using Petroleum
                                   Based   Fuels,   Final  Report,  Volume   2   -
                                   Development  of  Emission  Factors  Using CARB
                                   Approach,  API Publication  No. 348, Washington,
                                   DC.

                               Bloom, N. S. and A.  Falke, 1996, The  Importance  of
                                   Chemical   Speciation  in  the  Assessment  and
                                   Treatment  of Hg, As, and Se Contaminated Waste
                                   Streams,   Pacific  Northwest   Pollution   Control
                                   Association Conference, Boise, ID, October 27-30.

                               Bloom, N. S., 2000, Analysis and  Stability of Mercury
                                   Speciation  in Petroleum Hydrocarbons,  Fresenius'
                                   J. Anal. Chem., 366(5):438.
                                                  64

-------
Brooks, G., 1989, Estimating Air Toxics Emissions from
    Coal  and Oil Combustion  Sources, EPA-450/2-89-
    001  (NTIS PB89-194229), U.S. EPA, Office of Air
    Quality and Standards, Research Triangle Park,
    NC. April.

Brown, T., Smith, D., Hargis, R., and W. O'Dowd, 1999,
    Critical Review  -  Mercury Measurement  and  Its
    Control: What We Know, Have Learned,  and Need
    to Further Investigate, J.  Air &  Waste  Manage.
    Assoc., June, pp. 1-97.

Cao, J.  R., 1992, Microwave  Digestion of Crude  Oils
    and  Oil  Products for the  Determination  of Trace
    Metals and Sulphur  by Inductively-Coupled Plasma
    Atomic  Emission   Spectroscopy,   Environment
    Canada   Manuscript  Report  Number   EE-140,
    Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Chao, S.  and A.  Attari, 1993 Characterization  and
    Measurement of Natural  Gas Trace  Constituents,
    Part  1:  Natural  Gas  Survey,  Institute of Gas
    Technology Report  to  Gas  Research   Institute,
    Contract  No.   5089-253-1832  (November),  GRI,
    Chicago, IL.

Duo, W., Guthrie, T., and W.  Edwards, 2000, Mercury
    Emissions  from The Petroleum Refining  Sector In
    Canada, for Environment Canada, Trans-boundary
    Air  Issues Branch,  Hazardous  Air   Pollutants
    Program,  Ottawa, Canada, EC Contract:  K2216-9-
    0078.

Environment Canada, 2000, Properties of Crude  Oils
    and  Oil  Products  - 12/99,  Emergencies Science
    Division, Ontario, Canada.

Filby,  R. H., and K. R. Shah,  1975, Neutron  Activation
    Methods for Trace Metals in Crude Oil, in  The Role
    of Trace  Metals in  Petroleum,  by  T.  F.Yen, Ann
    Arbor Science Publishers, Ann Arbor, Ml.

Frankiewicz,  T.  C  and  S.  Tussaneyakul,  1997,
    Upgrading  production   facilities  on  the  Funan
    platform to remove hydrocarbons and heavy metals
    from   produced  water,   Proceedings:   Offshore
    Technology Conference, May 1997, pp. 299-310.

Hitchon,  B.,  Filby,   R.  H.,  and  K. R.  Shah, 1975,
    Geochemistry  of Trace Elements  in Crude Oils,
    Alberta, Canada, in   The  Role of Trace  Metals in
    Petroleum;  by  T.  F.  Yen,  Ann  Arbor Science
    Publishers: Ann Arbor, Ml.

Hitchon, B. and R.  Filby, 1983, Geochemical Studies -
    Trace  Elements in  Alberta Crude Oils, Open  File
    Report 1983-02, Alberta   Research  Council  for
    Alberta Energy  and  Utilities  Board and Alberta
    Geological Survey.
Jacobs, R., Grant, R., Kwant, J., Maequine, J., and E.
    Mentzer,  1992,  The  Composition of  Produced
    Water from Shell Operated Oil and Gas Production
    in the North Sea, in Produced Water, Technological
    and Environmental Issues and Solutions, Ray, J.,
    ed., Plenum Press, New York, NY.

Kirchgessner,  D.  A.,  Lott,  R.  A.,   Cowgill,  R. M.,
    Harrison,  M. R., and T. M. Shires, 1997, Estimate
    of Methane Emissions from  the U.S. Natural Gas
    Industry, Chemosphere, 35, 6:1365.

Liang, L., Horvat, M., and P. Danilchik, 1996, A  Novel
    Analytical Method for  Determination  of Picogram
    Levels  of Total Mercury  In  Gasoline  and  Other
    Petroleum Based Products, Sci. Tot.  Environ.,
    187:57.

Liang, L.,  Lazoff,  S.,  Horvat, M., Swain,  E., and J.
    Gilkeson,  2000, Determination of mercury in  crude
    oil by in-situ thermal  decomposition using a simple
    lab built system, Fresenius' J. Anal. Chem., 367:8.

Magaw, R., McMillen, S., Gala, W., Trefry, J., and R.
    Trocine, 1999,  Risk  evaluation of metals in  crude
    oils,   Proceedings   SPE/EPA   Exploration   &
    Production Environmental  Conference, SPE  Paper
    No. 52725.

Meinhold, A.,  DePhillips, M., and S.  Holtzman,  1996,
    Final Report: Risk Assessment for Produced Water
    Discharges to Louisiana Open  Bays,  Brookhaven
    National Laboratory Report No. BNL-62579 for U.S.
    DOE, Brookhaven, NY.

Morris, R., 2000, New TRI Reporting Rules on Mercury,
    Proceedings    National   Petroleum    Refiners
    Association    Meeting,   San    Antonio,    TX,
    (September).

Mulyono, M.,  Desrina, R., Priatna, R.,  Sudewo, B., and
    M. Sawolo, 1996, Heavy Metals  in Water  Base
    Drilling  Muds  Used  in Several  Locations  of Oil
    Fields in Indonesia, SPE paper No. 35980.

Musa, M., Markus, W., Elghondi, A., Etwir,  R., Hannan,
    A., and E. Arafa, 1995, Neutron Activation Analysis
    of Major and Trace Elements in Crude Petroleum,
    J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem., 198(1): 17.

Olsen,  S., Westerlund,   S.,  and  R. Visser,   1997,
    Analysis of Metals in Condensates and Naphthas
    by ICP-MS, Analyst, 122:1229.

Petrusak.R.,  Freeman,   B., and G.  Smith,    2000,
    Baseline  Characterization  of U.S. Exploration and
    Production Wastes and Waste Management,  SPE
    Paper No. 63097 presented at  the  SPE Annual
    Technical Conference  and  Exhibition,  Dallas, TX,
    October.
                                                  65

-------
Raco, V., 1993, Estimated Discharges from Offshore
    Oil  Platforms  in  the  Southern  California  Bight
    (Santa Barbara Channel and Santa Maria Basin) in
    1990, Southern California  Coastal Water Research
    Project Annual Report 1992-93, Los Angeles, CA.

Radian Corporation, 1993, Preliminary Draft Reports on
    Field  Chemical  Emissions  Monitoring   Project.
    Prepared for Electric Power Research Institute from
    the following reports: Site 10, October 6, 1992; Site
    11, October 6, 1992; Site 12, November, 23, 1992;
    Site 15,  October  6, 1992; Site 21, May 14, 1993.
    Austin, TX.

Ray, J.  P., 1998, Findings of the  Offshore Operators
    Committee   Produced   Water   Bioaccumulation
    Study, SPE Paper No. 46838, Society of Petroleum
    Engineers, Dallas, TX.

Ruddy, D.,  1982, Development Document  for Effluent
    Limitations  Guidelines, New Source Performance
    Standards,  and  Pretreatment  Standards  for  the
    Petroleum    Refining   Point   Source   Category,
    EPA/440/1-82/014 (NTIS  PB83-172569),  Office of
    Water Regulations and Standards, Washington, DC.

Shafawi, A.,  Ebdon, L.,  Foulkes, M., Stockwell, P., and
    W. Corns,  1999,  Determination  of total mercury in
    hydrocarbons and  natural  gas  condensate by
    atomic   fluorescence   spectrometry,   Analyst,
    124:185.

Shah, K. R., Filby,  R.  H., and W. A. Haller, 1970,
    Determination of  Trace Elements in Petroleum by
    Neutron    Activation   Analysis,    Journal    of
    Radioanalytical Chemistry, 6:413.

Stephenson, M., 1992, A  Survey  of Produced Water
    Studies,   Produced  Water:   Technological  and
    Environmental Issues and Solutions, Ray, J., ed.,
    Plenum Press, New York, NY.

Tao, H., Murakami, T., Tominaga, M., and A. Miyazaki,
    1998,   Mercury   speciation   in   natural   gas
    condensate  by  gas  chromatography-inductively
    coupled  plasma mass spectrometry, J. Anal. At.
    Spectrom., 13:1085.

Trefry, J., Trocine, R.,  Naito,  K., and  S. Metz, 1996,
    Assessing    the    Potential    for    Enhanced
    Bioaccumulation  of Heavy Metals  from Produced
    Water Discharges to the  Gulf  of   Mexico,  in
    Produced  Water  2,  Environmental  Issues  and
    Mitigation Technologies,  Reed,  M.  and Johnsen,
    S., eds.,  Plenum Press, New York, NY.
U.S. DOE, 1999,  Estimation of Greenhouse Gases,
    Energy Information Administration, National Energy
    Information Center, Report EIA/DOE-0573(99).

U.S. DOE, 2000,  Energy Statistics for 1998,  1999,
    Energy Information Administration, National Energy
    Information Center, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA,  1996,  Waste Minimization  for  Selected
    Residuals in the Petroleum Refining  Industry,  Office
    of   Solid  Waste  and   Emergency  Response,
    EPA/530/R-96/009     (NTIS       PB97-121180),
    Washington, DC.

U.S. EPA,  1997a, Mercury Study Report to  Congress,
    EPA/452/R-97/003 (NTIS PB98-124738),  Office of
    Air  Quality  Planning  and  Standards,  Research
    Triangle Park,  NC  and  Office of  Research  and
    Development, Washington, DC.

U.S.  EPA,  1997b,  Locating  And   Estimating  Air
    Emissions From Sources Of Mercury And Mercury
    Compounds,  EPA-454/R/97-012   (NTIS   PB98-
    117054),  Office  of  Air Quality   Planning   and
    Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC.

U.S. EPA,  1997c, Procedures For Preparing Emission
    Factor  Documents,  EPA/454/R-95-015,  Office of
    Air  Quality  Planning  and  Standards,  Research
    Triangle Park, NC.

U.S. EPA,  1998, Study  of  Hazardous  Air  Pollutant
    Emissions from Electric  Utility  Steam Generating
    Units  - Final  Report to Congress,  EPA/453/R-
    98/004a (NTIS  PB98-131774),  Office of Air Quality
    Planning  and Standards, Research  Triangle  Park,
    NC.

U.S. EPA,  1999, Method 1631:   Mercury in water by
    oxidation, purge and  trap, and cold vapor atomic
    fluorescence   spectrometry,   EPA/821/R-95/027
    (NTIS PB95-252433), Office  of Water, Washington,
    DC.

U.S. EPA,  2000, Unified Air Toxics Website: Electric
    Utility Steam Generating Units, Section  112  Rule
    Making,  Office  of   Air  Quality   Planning   and
    Standards,   Research   Triangle   Park,    NC.
    www.epa.gov/ttn/uatw/combust/utiltox/utoxpg.html

Wilhelm,  S. M.,  1999, Conceptual Design of Mercury
    Removal   Systems   for  Hydrocarbon    Liquids,
    Hydrocarbon Processing, 78(4):61-73.

Wilhelm,   S.  M.,  2001,  An  Estimate of  Mercury
    Emissions from Petroleum, in press, Environ, Sci.
    Tech.
                                                  66

-------
                                             Chapters
                 Data Requirements to Estimate Mercury Emissions
Mercury  extracted  from  the  earth  in  oil  and gas
including that in associated waste streams contributes
to the  global mercury  cycle. While  the amount  of
mercury that  derives from burning coal can be stated
with  reasonable confidence, the  amount  that derives
from petroleum cannot be stated with equal confidence
at present. The estimates compiled in this report merely
provide  a framework upon which one can gain a rough,
but preliminary,  idea of the  amounts that may  be
involved. With additional data inputs to the estimates, it
may   eventually  be  possible  to  estimate  the  total
amounts of mercury emissions from oil and gas with
better accuracy. Table  8.1  summarizes the estimates
compiled and  discussed in this report.

Currently available  data  for total mercury  (dissolved
and suspended) in petroleum and fuel products, when
applied  to a  mass balance for  mercury in  the U.S.
refining  system, provide an order of magnitude estimate
of the contribution of mercury in  oil and gas to U.S.
anthropogenic emissions  (Wilhelm 2001).  The model
finds the mean amount  of mercury in petroleum refined
in the U.S. to be close  to 10 ppb and predicts that the
amount  of mercury in fuel  products burned in the U.S.
is on  the order 6000 kg/y.  The amount of mercury in
U.S.  fuel oil was estimated to  be  approximately 1,500
kg/y, assuming a  10 ppb mean mercury concentration
in crude oil. This number is in conflict with current U.S.
EPA estimates of mercury in fuel oil (10,000 kg/year,
see EPA Estimates, Chapter 7).

While the estimates compiled in this report are useful in
the present timeframe,  they are insufficient to answer
some major issues and questions that are important to
the determination  of the  contribution  of  mercury  in
petroleum to global pools and fluxes. For example, data
on refined products are scarce and  undocumented  as
to the  refineries  from  which they  originate. Thus it
remains uncertain as to whether the mercury in crude
oil is mainly accounted for by the amount in products (>
50 percent) or if it  distributes more prevalently to other
avenues   of  egress  from  refineries  (solid  waste,
wastewater, fugitive emissions).

It does appear,  based on currently available data, that
approximately half of the entire amount of mercury
associated with oil  and gas  (exploration,  production,
transportation, processing, fuel combustion)  enters the
atmosphere in fuel combustion. Some unknown portion
of  this  amount  is  captured  by  pollution  control
equipment but the total is less than 6 Mg/y (if the mean
amount of mercury  in crude oil is less than 10 ppb).
This would suggest  that, while oil and  gas account for
approximately the same mass of fossil  fuel  burned
yearly in the U.S., the  amount of mercury in combusted
petroleum and  gas  is about  10 times less that that
which derives from coal (66 Mg/y, U.S. EPA 1997).

The  above estimate of course depends on the mean
amount of mercury  in petroleum. Data are  somewhat
limited on  mercury in crude oil of known origin, age and
condition,  all of which  are important to calculation of an
accurate mean concentration in crude oils processed in
the United States. The statistical ensemble of mercury
concentrations in coal that was developed in 1999 (U.S.
EPA 2000) serves as an example of the rigor that could
be applied to petroleum.  Given the estimated amount in
crude oil  presently available, one could certainly argue
that some lesser amount of data would  suffice to obtain
an  accurate mean  and distribution of total mercury
concentration in petroleum.

Wilhelm and Bloom (2000) and Bloom  (2000) point out
that   analytical    uncertainties  exist  with   currently
published   data.  Of  major  importance   are   the
percentage and species identities of suspended forms
of mercury. If, as suspected, mercuric sulfide is a major
component of the  total  mercury  in  crude  feeds to
refineries,  or if it is produced in the refining process at
the expense of other  forms, then  one can  rationalize
the amount  of  mercury in petroleum  coke and  thus
achieve better confidence in the distribution of mercury
to heavy products and  waste streams.
                                                  67

-------
The chemical stability and fate of elemental mercury in
refining are also important and largely unknown. Almost
certainly, any mercury that is found in light distillates is
volatile in the crude and enters light fractions  in the
primary distillation. The elemental form is thought to be
the dominant  volatile,  but it remains uncertain as  to
whether dialkylmercury is a  major component in crude
oil or if dialkyl  or other volatile species are generated in
the refining process.

The  distribution  of  mercury  to  effluents   and  air
emissions in the refining  process is an important issue
as well and little data are  available upon which  any
conclusions   can   be   drawn  relative  to   refinery
emissions.  Insufficient  data  are  available for many  of
the major streams including wastewater, solid waste,
still gas,  treatment fluids and products. If one were to
attempt to  obtain a  firm understanding  of the fate  of
mercury in refineries, it would be necessary to examine
individual  unit processes. Some of these have been
previously discussed (Chapter 6) and include  desalting,
distillations,  hydrotreating and  catalytic  cracking.  In
each case, the attempt to determine the distribution of
mercury would require tracking the various species  of
mercury (volatile, oxidized,  inert) through the process
and to  measure concentrations of each species in all of
the streams that enter and exit the process in question.

The relationship of mercury and sulfur in the refining
process may be essential to the task of understanding
the fate of mercury in hydrocarbon  processing. Little is
known  at present, but given  mercury's affinity  for  sulfur,
it would seem likely  that sulfides of mercury  are more
likely produced than  consumed in the refining and gas
separation   processes.   If   so,  understanding  the
chemical reactions that occur would help account for
the amount  known  to  exist in  petroleum  coke  as
opposed to gasoline, for example.

The fate of mercury in  gas processing also remains
uncertain, but this question may  be less important than
the questions that  relate to  the  fate  of mercury  in
refining. All current estimates for the amount of mercury
in natural gas conclude that the amount is very small,  at
least relative to the  amount in crude oil. The precise
mean amount and range of concentrations of mercury
in  natural  gas remain   to  be  exactly determined,
however. Thus while the data of Chao and Attari  (1993)
and the EPA estimates (U.S. EPA 1998) infer that the
amounts  are insignificant, it would be  useful to have
better data upon which to calculate  the contribution  of
mercury in natural gas to  the global cycle more exactly.

An interesting point to be  made relative to the  gas issue
is  that  mercury  removal systems  are commercially
available and  widely applied to gas having  sufficient
mercury   concentration    to   affect   petrochemical
processing. The percentage of gas that is subjected to
mercury  removal treatments as  a  percentage  of  the
total amount  processed  in the  U.S.  is  not  known.
Secondly, pipelines  are  quite efficient scavengers of
mercury  in gas  and it is likely that major portions of
mercury  that  enter a  pipeline,  never  exit  but  are
retained  on pipe interior surfaces indefinitely. Thus  the
concentration  of mercury at the  point  of  consumption
will always be less than the concentration upstream of
compressors at gas processing facilities.

Of minor importance, but still of some  curiosity, is  the
fate of mercury in gas treatment systems such as glycol
dehydration, amine treaters and sorbents. Glycol in
particular is suspected to remove mercury by transfer to
the glycol  regen gas and water  vapor  vents.  The
reactions  of  mercury   in  amine  systems   remain
unstudied.

Even  with  knowledge  of the  amounts of mercury in
fuels,  and their chemical  identities,  little  is   known
concerning the fate of mercury in liquid  fuel combustion
processes. It seems unlikely that mercury is retained in
internal  combustion  engines in any major proportion,
but some could  be. The amount  in used  motor oil as
compared to  new, and the amounts possibly  retained
by emission controls (catalytic converters) would then
need  to  be  determined to  answer this  question
conclusively.

Emission  factors for  a  limited  number  of  refinery
processes are discussed in the previous section of this
report. While  these  data are  useful and informative,
they are insufficient to allow major conclusions as to the
fate of mercury  in refineries or in other types of liquid
fuel combustion processes. In addition, speciation of
mercury  in  liquid  fuel  combustion processes  is  not
reported   and  detailed   investigations   would   be
necessary to  establish the forms of mercury  that  are
emitted in boilers and heaters that burn  liquid fuels.

The evolving database on mercury in both crude oil and
refined products is  optimistic to the  conclusion  that
mercury  that  derives  from  petroleum  is  small in
absolute  terms, and especially when compared to that
which derives from coal.  The  eventual conclusions to
be reached  regarding mercury in oil and natural gas
and the amounts and avenues of incorporation to  the
global cycle  await focused studies that account for  the
various species  of mercury, the reactions that occur in
processing and  the fate of mercury  in  the various
combustion process in which  petroleum products  are
consumed.
                                                    68

-------
References

Bloom,  N., 2000,  Analysis and  Stability of Mercury
    Speciation in Petroleum Hydrocarbons, Fresenius'
    J. Anal. Chem., 366(5):438.

Chao, S. S. and A. Attari, 1993,  Characterization and
    Measurement of Natural Gas Trace Constituents,
    Part  1: Natural Gas  Survey,  Institute  of  Gas
    Technology  Report  to Gas  Research  Institute,
    Contract  No.  5089-253-1832  (November),  GRI,
    Chicago, IL.

Ruddy, D., 1982, Development Document for Effluent
    Limitations  Guidelines,  New  Source  Performance
    Standards,  and  Pretreatment  Standards  for  the
    Petroleum   Refining   Point    Source   Category,
    EPA/440/1-82/014 (NTIS PB83-172569),  Office  of
    Water Regulations and Standards, Washington, DC.

U.S. EPA,  1997, Mercury  Study  Report to Congress,
  EPA/452/R-97/003  (NTIS PB 98-124738),  Office  of
  Air  Quality   Planning  and  Standards,  Research
  Triangle  Park,  NC and  Office  of Research  and
  Development, Washington, DC.
              U.S.  EPA,  1998,  Study of  Hazardous Air Pollutant
                 Emissions  from  Electric  Utility  Steam  Generating
                 Units -  Final Report  to Congress,  EPA/453/R-
                 98/004a (NTIS PB98-131774), Office of Air Quality
                 Planning and Standards, Research Triangle  Park,
                 NC.

              U.S.  EPA, 2000, Unified Air Toxics Website:  Electric
                 Utility Steam Generating Units, Section 112 Rule
                 Making,  Office   of  Air  Quality  Planning  and
                 Standards,    Research    Triangle   Park,    NC.
                 www.epa.gov/ttn/uatw/combust/utiltox/utoxpg.html
              Wilhelm,  S.,  and  N.  Bloom,  2000,   Mercury   in
                 Petroleum,  Fuel Proc. Technol., 63:1.
              Wilhelm,  S.  M.,  2001,  An  Estimate   of  Mercury
                 Emissions from Petroleum, in press, Environ.  Sci.
                 Tech.
  Table 8-1 - Summary of Estimates for Mercury Emissions from Oil and Gas Production and Processing
Type Industry Segment
Water
Oil and Gas
Production
Oil Refining
Oil Transportation
r Amount of THg Estimated Annual
category Discharge (ppb) Emission Rate
(109 kg/year) (kg/year)

Produced Water 500 1?(1)
Refinery 25Q
Wastewater
Tanker ballast ? 1?

500
250
?
       Total
   Solid Waste
       Total
       Air
                     Oil and Gas
                     Exploration
                     Oil refining
 Drilling Waste

Refinery Waste
50

30
100?

50?
                                                        >750
5,000

1,200
                                                        6,200





Total
TOTAL
Oil Production
Oil Production
Gas Production and
Transmission
Oil
Gas


Flared gas
Fugitive
Fugitive
Fuel Combustion
Fuel Combustion


4.5
1
5.9
790
341


1.5?
185?
?
<8
<0.3?


10
185
?
6,000
100
>6
13,250





,300

       (1)  Question marks indicate that the  mercury concentrations utilized are not based on definitive data
                                                  69

-------