2. 1
Shaletekk M
After 7 years of research and development we can finally present a viable and credible process/system
which will allow cost-effective cold and environmentally friendly extraction of shale oil from the substrate,
At Naturetekk we are dedicated to the promotion and commercialisation of this process;
Shaletekk M. Acknowledgement and thanks to the Jordanian Government bodies and companies:
The Higher Council
for Science and Technology
Yarmouk University The Natural
Resources Authority
Jordan Petroleum
Refinery Company
Jordan University of
Science and Technology
Extracting oil from oil shale is more complex than
conventional oil recovery.
Hydrocarbons in oil shale are present in the form of
solid, bituminous materials and hence cannot be
pumped directly out of the geologic reservoir. The rock
must be heated to a high temperature, and the resultant
liquid must be separated and collected. The heating
process is called retorting.
Surface mining can recover much higher percentages of
in-place resources. The thickness of oil shale deposits,
the amount of overburden and the presence of
subsurface water can make surface mining difficult.
Shale oil extraction is an industrial process for
unconventional oil production. This process converts
kerogen in oil shale into shale oil by pyrolysis,
hydrogenation or thermal dissolution. The resultant shale
oil is used as fuel oil or upgraded to meet refinery
feedstock specifications by adding hydrogen and
removing sulphur and nitrogen impurities.
As of 2010 shale oil extraction is in operation within
Estonia, Brazil, and China. In 2008 their industries
produced about 930,000 metric tonnes (17,700 barrels
per day) of shale oil. Australia, USA and Canada have
tested shale oil extraction techniques via demonstration
projects and are planning commercial implementation:
Morocco and Jordan have announced their intent to do
the same. Only four processes are in commercial use:
Kiviter, Galoter, Fushun and Petrosix.
Conventional Processes
America’s oil shale reserves will potentially produce
at least 1.5 trillion barrels of oil – approximately five
times the reserves of Saudi Arabia. Nobody is
producing commercial quantities of oil from these
vast deposits.
Obviously, there are some very real obstacles to oil
production from shale. “Oil shale is the fuel of the
future, and always will be,” is a popular saying in
Western Colorado.
3. 2
Shaletekk M
Oil Shale Deposit
Refining
Liquid Fuels By-products
Fracturing
Retorting
Product Recovery
Mining
In-situ Ex-situ (Conventional)
Spent Shale
Crushing
Retorting
Thermal & Chemical
Treating Hydrogenation }
Conventional Processes
Oil Shale Technology Prospects
Processes for producing shale oil generally fall into one of
two groups: mining followed by surface retorting and in-situ
retorting.
Mining and Surface Retorting
Underground mining using the room-and-pillar method or
surface mining. The current state of the art in mining – both
room-and-pillar and surface techniques, such as open pit
mining – appears to be able to meet the requirements for
the commercial development of oil shale.
Surface retorting involves crushing the mined oil shale and
then retorting it at about 900 to 1,000°F. The vessel in which
this heating occurs is called a retort. The hot shale oil
leaving the retort is not stable and must be sent directly to
an upgrading plant for catalytic processing with hydrogen
to remove impurities and produce a stable product.
This stable shale oil can be used as a refinery feedstock
and should compete favourably with sweet, light crude oil.
An oil shale plant operating on a commercial scale – that is,
producing a minimum of 50,000 barrels per day – would
need to incorporate multiple retorts. As the residence time
of oil shale in the hot zone of a retort is nearly a half hour, a
retort designed to produce 50,000 barrels of shale oil per
day would need to be sized to contain more than 1,500
tons of oil shale, which is well beyond the state-of-the-art.
In-Situ Retorting
In-situ retorting entails heating oil shale in place, extracting
the liquid from the ground and transporting it to an
upgrading facility.
The mainstream methods involved burning a portion of the
oil shale underground to produce the heat needed for
retorting the remaining oil shale. This was unsuccessful,
encountering serious problems in maintaining and
controlling the underground combustion process and
avoiding subsurface pollution.
4. 3
Environmental Issues of shale oil extraction
Thermally Conductive In-Situ Conversion
A volume of shale is heated by electric heaters placed in
vertical holes drilled through the entire thickness (more
than a thousand feet) of a section of oil shale. To obtain
even heating over a reasonable time frame, between 15
and 25 heating holes will be drilled per acre. After heating
for two to three years, the targeted volume of the deposit
will reach a temperature of between 650 and 700°F. This
very slow heating to a relatively low temperature
(compared with the plus-900 degrees F temperatures
common in surface retorting) is sufficient to cause the
chemical and physical changes required to release oil
from the shale. On an energy basis, about two-thirds of
the released product is liquid and one third is a gas similar
in composition to natural gas. The released product is
gathered in collection wells positioned within the heated
zone.
As part of site preparation, Shell’s current plan is to use
ground-freezing technology to establish an underground
barrier around the perimeter of the extraction zone.
A “freeze wall” would be created by circulating a
refrigerated fluid through a series of wells drilled around
the extraction zone. In addition to preventing groundwater
from entering the extraction zone, the freeze wall is
intended to keep hydrocarbons and other products
generated by retorting, from leaving the project perimeter
during ground heating, product extraction, and post
extraction ground cooling. The site preparation stage also
involves the construction of power plants and power
transmission lines needed to supply electricity to the
underground heaters.
Post-production cleanup involves steam flushing to remove
remaining mobile hydrocarbons, ground cooling, removing
the freeze wall, and site reclamation.
Shell plans to use ground-freezing technology to control
groundwater during production. Ground-freezing
technology is a well-established method for controlling
groundwater during construction and mining operations.
Multi-kilometer barriers have been constructed and
sustained for years.
“The ICP process is clearly energy-intensive,
as its driving force is the injection of heat into
the subsurface.”
At the moment, Shell is not sure what the optimal size of
production zones ought to be. The issue here is how big
can a freeze-wall be to become effective, freezing the
groundwater surrounding a shale deposit? The test
projects as you can see, were quite small. Shell doesn’t
know, or isn’t saying, what the optimum size is for each
“pod” or “cell”.
Nonetheless, applying ground-freezing to in-situ
conversion of oil shale requires resolving significant
technical uncertainties to ensure that the frozen
barrier is structurally sound. Substantial uncertainties
remain regarding the impact of in-situ retorting on the
quality of groundwater. Retorting and removing
hydrocarbons will change aquifer properties and will likely
result in an increase in hydraulic conductivity. After the
removal of the freeze wall, such changes in aquifer
properties could result in the leaching and transport of
mineral salts and trace metals that are mixed with oil shale
deposits.
5. Objections to its potential environmental impact have
stalled governmental support for extraction of shale oil
in some countries.
• Shale oil extraction may involve a number of different
environmental impacts that vary with process
technologies;
• Depending on the geological conditions and mining
techniques. Mining impacts may include acid
drainage, induced by the sudden rapid exposure and
subsequent oxidation of formerly buried materials;
• The introduction of metals into surface water and
ground-water;
• Increased erosion, sulphur gas emissions;
• Air pollution caused by the production of particulates
during processing;
• Transport, and support activities;
• Surface mining for ex-situ processing, as with in situ
processing, requires extensive land use and ex-situ
thermal processing generates wastes that require
disposal;
• Mining, processing, spent oil shale disposal, and
waste treatment require land to be withdrawn from
traditional uses;
• Depending on the processing technology, the waste
material may contain pollutants including sulphates,
heavy metals and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons,
some of which are toxic and carcinogenic;
• Experimental in situ conversion processes may reduce
some of these impacts, but may cause other
problems, such as groundwater pollution;
• Depending on the technology and the oil shale
composition, shale oil extraction processes may also
emit sulphur dioxide, hydrogen sulphide, carbonyl
sulphide, and nitrogen oxides;
• Concerns have been raised over the oil shale
industry's use of water, particularly in arid regions
where water consumption is a sensitive issue;
• Above-ground retorting typically consumes between
one and five barrels of water per barrel of produced
shale oil; Depending on technology.
• Water is usually used for spent oil shale cooling and
oil shale ash disposal;
• In-situ processing, according to one estimate, uses
about one-tenth as much water. In other areas;
• Water must be pumped out of oil shale mines. The
resulting fall in the water table may have negative
effects on nearby arable land and forests.
Water Consumption
About three barrels of water are needed per barrel of
shale oil produced. Water availability analysis indicated
that the earliest constraining factors would be limitations
in local water supply systems, such as reservoirs,
pipelines, and groundwater development.
For mining and surface retorting, the major water quality
issue is the leaching of salts and toxics from spent shale.
4
Environmental Issues of shale oil extraction
Shaletekk M reduces the cost of extraction and has none of the environmental
issues linked to the current systems in use enabling companies to explore and
extract in more environmentally sensitive areas where shale oil is known to exist
in large quantities.
6. 5
Shaletekk M The Process
Shale Oil Pre-treatment
Step 1: 54.1% removal of carbonates and hydroxides
Step 2: 13.6% removal of quartz and silicates
Step 3: Desulfurisation
Ultrasonic Extraction
Special extraction mixture:
Effect of time: 1 hour is optimum
Effect of heating: No heating is required
Shale Oil Separation
Fast distillation
C
rushing
O
ilShale
Screening
M
ixing
U
ltrasonic
Exposure
Filtration
Solid
D
rying
D
istillation
Shale
O
il
Sonic
Extraction
Extraction
percentage
Gasoline
Content
Conserved No Emissions
88.4% Low Cost
Low Comparable to Crude Oil
Environmental
Aspect
Cost
Sulfur
Content
Oil
Properties
The Process
The Higher Council
for Science and Technology
Yarmouk University The Natural
Resources Authority
Jordan Petroleum
Refinery Company
Jordan University of
Science and Technology
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
1 2 3
Facilities and development assistance has been provided by:
7. We at Naturetekk are now looking for business partners to set up pilot projects in
order to prove our technology in the field, via a joint venture, licencing agreements
or outright sale of the intellectual property and the potential patents of the processing
and formulations.
Shaletekk M The Process
6
Shale oil distillation curve as compared to crude
oil and shale oil extracted by shale retorting
Effect of ultrasound extraction time
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
CumulativeVolume%
ExtractionPercentage%
100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260
7.0
6.6
6.0
5.5
5.0
4.5
4.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Temperature (°C) Time (min)
Crude oil Shale oil
(by retorting)
Shale oil
(this work)
Conclusions
The proposed technology is efficient from the view points of:
• Extraction Percentage: Higher
• Operating Costs: Lower
• Environmental Aspects: None
• Extracted Oil Properties: Higher
Recommendations
It is recommended to start a pilot scale production.
8. Academic Rank
• Full Professor in Chemical & Pharmaceutical Engineering.
Education
• B.Sc. in Chemical Engineering, Baghdad University M.Sc.
in Chemical Engineering, University of Tulsa, Oklahoma,
1979
• Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering, University of Tulsa,
Oklahoma, 1980
• M.Sc. in Chemical Engineering, University of Tulsa,
Oklahoma, 1979. Dissertation title: "Numerical Solution of
Multi-Component Absorption from A Stirred Bath".
• Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering, University of Tulsa,
Oklahoma, 1980. Dissertation title: "Numerical Solution of
Liquid Phase Multi-Component Absorption in Fixed
Beds".
Graduate Courses
• Advanced Engineering Mathematics, Physiochemical
Processes, Water Supply and Air Pollution, Advanced
Heat Transfer, Advanced Numerical Methods.
Published Papers
• Over 100 research papers, published or in press in
refereed specialised international journals.
Books
• 62 published scientific books in computer programming
and applications in science and engineering that were
adopted in a number of Arabic, American and Canadian
Universities.
• 61 Books in Medicinal Herbal Technology to be published
in U.S.A. & Canada in 5 international languages.
• A. R. Mansour, “A new Technology for Liquefaction of
Jordanian Oil Shale Kerogen”, submitted for publication
(2004).
• A. R. Mansour & K. J. Takrouri, “Radiation Effect on Mixed
Convection Over an Isothermal Wedge in Porous Media:
Model Solution by Hybrid and Numerical Methods”,
submitted for publication (2004).
• A. R. Mansour & K. J. Takrouri, “Convection-Radiation
Interaction in Boundary Layer Flow Over a Horizontal
Surface”, submitted for publication (2004).
Patents in the Polymer, Water & Oil Industries
• Multi-Purpose Surfactant/Detergent for Oil Recovery from
Water, Oil Spills, Tar Sands, Beach Sand and Shale Oil,
Drag Reduction and Emulsification Processes, Kansas,
D.S.A (GemTech Solvents Inc., 1983-1993).
• A New Drag Reducing Additive for Crude Oil Pipelines &
Sanitary Sewers, High Tech Technology, Cleveland, Ohio,
D.S.A., 1983-1995.
• Bio-Filter to Treat Water/Wastewater from Bacteria and
Viruses, Jordan and D.S.A., (1990-1994).
• A New Surfactant to Separate Oil from Canadian Oil
Sand, High Tech Inc. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, 1994-
1995.
• New Surfactants to Solve Oil Spill Problems on Beaches
and in the Sea, High Tech Technology, Cleveland, Ohio,
U.S.A. 1983-1995.
• New Polymer Composites, Case Western & Reserve
University, Cleveland, Ohio, U.S.A., (1993-1994).
Inventions
• 28 inventions and formulas in herbal medicines for:
Malaria, Dengue, Diabetes 1&2, Asthma, Cancer,
Hepatitis B and C, Cholesterol and Triglycerides,
Rheumatism, High Pressure, Arthritis, Pain, Headache,
Migraine, New Therapies for Autoimmune Diseases such
as HIV, Multiple Sclerosis & Behest’s Disease, Psoriasis,
Prostate…etc
• 11 International Conferences in different fields
• A member of the American Chemical Engineers Society,
the International Society of Pharmaceutical Engineering
and the American Herb Research Foundation
• Candidate for UNESCO Prize for Science & Technology
for 1993
• International Man of the Year ‘98, Cambridge
• The 20th Century Man of Achievements in Science &
Technology, 1998
• International Man of ‘99 in Science & Technology,
USA, 1999
Membership in Scientific and Professional Societies
• American Institute of Chemical Engineers
• American Herb Research Foundation
• American Health Sciences Institute
• International Society of Pharmaceutical Engineering
• New York Academy of Sciences
Naturetekk Ltd 111 Guthrum Place Newton Aycliffe
Co. Durham DL5 4QE United Kingdom +44 (0)7587 494141
info@naturetekk.co.uk www.naturetekk.co.uk
Dr. Awad Mansour
Profile
