SPE 138275

Integrated Discipline Approach to Conquer Asphaltene Challenges in Onshore Abu Dhabi Oil Fields

Mark Grutters1, Karthik Ramanathan1, Dennis Naafs1, Ed Clarke1, Zhongxin Huo1, Dalia Abdallah2, Simon Zwolle2,
Artur Stankiewicz3*
1
Shell Projects & technology
2
Abu Dhabi Company for Onshore Oil Operations
3
Shell Abu Dhabi B.V.
*
Current employer: Schlumberger Services Techniques, Testing HQ
Copyright 2010, Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper was prepared for presentation at the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition & Conference held in Abu Dhabi, UAE, 14 November 2010.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been reviewed
by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or
members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is
restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
This paper describes an integrated discipline approach to investigate and mitigate asphaltene challenges in an
onshore Abu Dhabi oil field. This large carbonate field produces from three reservoirs with substantial lateral variation
of fluid properties. Several wells in the northeastern part of the field producing from one of the three oil reservoirs
suffer from asphaltene deposition in the wellbore. A multidisciplinary team of experts from Shell and ADCO worked
closely together to evaluate the natural controls on asphaltene stability in this oilfield and to predict whether deposition
in other areas of the field may be expected in the future. In addition, a robust inhibition and mitigation strategy has
been developed.
A thorough review of production and well intervention data, combined with detailed analysis of field deposits confirmed
that wellbore deposition was due to asphaltenes in approximately one third of all the affected wells. In order to
understand the variability in fluid properties, a wellhead sampling and fluid analysis campaign was carried out (39 wells
distributed across the field). Analyses of basic fluid properties such as API, S%, Ni, V, SARA supported by more
sophisticated geochemical characterization data of the reservoir fluids clearly demonstrated that the lateral variability in
fluid properties from NE to SW is attributed to two processes: (1) geological mixing of fluids from different sources into
the reservoir, and (2) maturity variation of fluids form the same source in the reservoir. Furthermore, stock tank oil
asphaltene stability tests clearly indicated that fluids from the NE have a high tendency to be unstable with respect to
asphaltene precipitation, and fluids from the SW of the field are stable. These results are in agreement with field
observations. The confirmation of the field data with simple laboratory tests allowed for the development of empirical
correlations between certain fluids properties and the risk of asphaltene precipitation and deposition. Based on this it
was concluded that deposition is not expected to expand to the SW part of the field during the production lifespan.
Moreover, a cluster of wells has been identified in the NE were deposition has not occurred to date but with a high
propensity for deposition if production conditions will change. For these wells and the ones with confirmed asphaltene
deposition problems additional live-oil testing, thermodynamic modeling as well as a surveillance plan have been
suggested, which will further improve the correlations and help to identify challenges ahead of actual deposition.
Introduction
Asphaltene challenges are a relatively common flow assurance problem in the Middle-East, especially in carbonate
fields. Operational problems manifest themselves as (1) downhole deposits often resulting in complete blockage of
the production tubing (2) plugging of chokes, valves and flowlines, and (3) fouling and plugging of processing facility
equipment.

SPE 138275

It is often difficult for operators to detect asphaltene deposition early enough to avoid severe plugging issues and loss
of production. Detection is often based on indirect observations, e.g. by increased pressure drop over the tubular or
declined production rates. It is not uncommon that these observations are mistakenly attributed to asphaltenes but are
in fact the result of other flow assurance issues, such as inorganic scale, viscous emulsions, or sludges that are the
result of to sub-optimal stimulation. The consequence of late recognition of asphaltene-related challenges is that the
applied mitigation strategy may be inadequate leading to high Opex without solving the cause of the problem.
Therefore, prediction of asphaltene precipitation and deposition is crucial to avoid production interruption and required
well interventions. Furthermore, prediction of asphaltene problems is particularly important in the face of imminent
implementation of secondary or tertiary recovery mechanisms such as CO2 injection, WAG, or gas lift since that may
further destabilize the asphaltenes in the reservoir or wellbore.
To add complexity, the large Middle-Eastern reservoirs often exhibit both vertical and lateral composition grading,
manifested by variation in PVT and fluid properties across the reservoir. Thus, wells in different parts of the field may
exhibit varying behaviour towards asphaltene precipitation and deposition with commonly only a small fraction of the
producing wells experiencing deposition in the wellbore. Studying the origin of the fluids and the mechanisms leading
to fluid property variations across the reservoir is a fundamental need to understand the stability of asphaltenes in the
reservoir and to develop successfully predict and mitigate flow assurance problems.
A potential challenge with the prediction of asphaltene stability is that there is no universal definition of asphaltenes,
making it difficult to share and compare data between different labs and oil companies. It is a common misconception
that asphaltenes are a well defined chemical class of species; they are a solubility class, which introduces systematic
difficulties. Varying separation techniques used by different labs yield different compounds. This complicates the
understanding of the actual molecular structure and, hence, behavior of asphaltenes. But even when asphaltenes are
extracted from crude oil by consistently using the same technique the structure will differ from one crude to another.
Although there are some commonalities in asphaltene properties like molecular weight and size (Mullins, 2008), the
actual molecular configuration of asphaltenes depends on the source from which it originates and the maturity level at
which it is expelled. Many studies have been carried out to investigate different aspects of asphaltene structure
(amongst many others: Strausz, 1992; Groenzin, 2000, Goual, 2002, Gonzalez, 2003, Sheremata, 2004, Purcell,
2007), yet there have been few attempts to correlate the structure and properties of asphaltenes to behavior in the field
(e.g. Lichaa, 1975, Smith, 2008, Daaou, 2009). While there are many theoretical studies being carried out, the oil
companies look for solutions that can be quickly implemented in the field to understand and control asphaltene related
challenges. It has been shown many times that empirical observations and correlations become very powerful tools in
understanding difficult problems. For example, it is well accepted now that asphaltene behavior changes with the
origin and maturity variations of the parent crude oil. Based on field observations and various interdisciplinary studies,
Stankiewicz (2003) proposed a theory that the stability of crudes with respect to asphaltene precipitation and
deposition is typically limited to a specific maturity range of oils. Heavy (i.e. high density) immature fluids and light (low
density) mature gas condensates do not exhibit asphaltene problems during primary production. This so-called critical
range concept is explained in Figure 1. The basis for this theory is that with increasing maturity the crude becomes
more paraffinic, and that the asphaltene concentration (together with e.g. Sulphur and metal content) always
decreases. It is important to note that in-reservoir mixing and other processes have some influence on exceptions to
this concept.
In this paper we will demonstrate the approach of investigating asphaltene deposition in an onshore carbonate oil field.
The field is producing from three different reservoirs, but deposition is limited to one reservoir and only in the northeast
part of the reservoir. The scope of the investigation was to evaluate the natural controls on asphaltene stability in this
oilfield and to predict whether deposition in other areas of the field may be expected in the future, by following the
workflow developed in Shell (Stankiewicz, 2002) that has been successfully applied to investigate and mitigate many
asphaltene deposition problems worldwide. Geochemists were involved to determine source, maturity and any other
secondary process (e.g. mixing) that affects asphaltene stability. Reservoir and well engineers were involved to
determine where in the reservoir the precipitation and deposition is most likely to occur, and under which production
scenario. Flow Assurance engineers carried out the fluid property characterization and evaluation of asphaltene
stability, and defined the inhibition and mitigation strategy. The successful application of this detailed investigation of
the fluid properties and all other engineering issues highlighted here are presented in papers SPE 238038 and SPE
238040 (Abdallah, 2010).

Asphalteneprecipitationtendency
(e.g.SARA)

SPE 138275

CriticalRange
LowMaturity
Fluids
heavyoil

HighMaturity
Fluids
Condensates
API

Sulphur
Asph.
Maturityproxy(e.g.API)

Figure 1. Cross plot of a maturity proxy (e.g. API) versus asphaltene stability to
demonstrate the narrow range of fluids where precipitation and deposition
problems usually occur. Low maturity oil is relatively rich in asphaltenes, but the
parent crude oil is a good solvent for the asphaltenes due to its high aromaticity.
Asphaltenes in high maturity crudes usually have a much lower solubility in the oil
due to the increased peri-condensed nature of the molecules, and the increased
paraffinic nature of the parent crude oil. However, the asphaltene concentration
has usually dropped so much in high maturity crude oil that asphaltene
precipitation and deposition is no longer a problem. It is the medium-mature crude
oil range that is problematic: the asphaltenes have started to lose their side-chains
and the oil has become a poorer solvent for the asphaltenes. Within this range of
medium-mature fluids asphaltene precipitation and deposition is most prone to
occur.

Materials and methods

Thirty-nine wellhead samples were collected from the northeast (NE) and southwest (SW) part of the oil field (field 1).
The well selection was based on the well availability (accessible for sampling), production history (depositional
problems) and the need to obtain full lateral coverage of the field. All the oil samples were collected at the wellhead
into 1 or 5L cans. Sub-sampling for further analysis was done in two stages. One aliquot was acquired cold after
homogenizing the can by agitation. This aliquot was designated for geochemical analyses. The cold sub-sampling
was done to avoid the loss of light compounds in the oil that are essential for the geochemical analysis and
interpretation. The second aliquot was acquired after heating the can for several hours at 45C. This aliquot was used
for the fluid property and asphaltene stability measurements.
The following bulk fluid properties were carried out: density (ASTM D1298), water content (ASTM D4006), total
Sulphur (ASTM D2622), metals (ICP), Total Acid Number (ASTM D974), viscosity (rheometry). The asphaltene
stability testing was done by SARA (Shell modified IP143 with open column liquid chromatography separation of
maltenes), elemental analysis (CHNS) on the C7-asphaltenes, P-value titration (similar to ASTM 7060).
Results and discussion
Review of field production and well intervention data
From the review of field data, including well interventions, it became clear that the reported asphaltene deposition in
the wells were partially based on anecdotal evidence. From 21 affected wells distributed over a rather wide area of
the field, 17 had an actual well inspection/clean-up that provided further information. These wells are listed in Table 1.
In the majority of these wells where obstructions were observed deposits were not retrieved and analyses to confirm
their asphaltenic nature could not be conducted. Moreover, for the majority of wells with reported obstructions no fluid
property measurements or asphaltene stability tests were carried out. We concluded that there were only 6 wells in
the field (clustering tightly together in the central NE part of the field) that have severe asphaltene deposition in the well
during normal production. All of these wells exhibit no evidence that the deposition was related to secondary effects
like gas break-through, stimulation jobs, etc.

SPE 138275

Table 1. Overview of well intervention from 2002 until 2009. The gray boxes are well inspections by wireline, the black boxes are chemical clean-up
operations.
w ell

2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
J F MA MJ J A S ON D J F MA MJ J A S ON D J F MA MJ J A S ON D J F MA MJ J A S ON D J F MA MJ J A S ON D J F MA MJ J A S ON D J F MA MJ J A S ON D J F MA MJ J A S ON D

a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
j
k
l
m
n
o
p
q

AROMATICcarbonisotopeC13

SATURATEcarbonisotopeC13

Geochemical fluid characterization

26.6
26.4
26.2
26.0
25.8
25.6
A geochemical characterization requires multiple
25.0
analyses on the crude oil and SARA fractions. Usually
a
whole-oil GC is carried out, in combination with C7
25.1
compositional analysis by GC, compound specific
isotope analysis, GC-MS biomarker analysis, and bulk
25.2
carbon isotopes on the SARA fractions.
25.3
The geochemical analyses show that all samples
represent a mixture of oil generated from two source
rocks.
25.4
One source end-member has generated low-mature oil
that
25.5
has a high asphaltene and Sulphur content. The
second source end-member has generated peak to
25.6
field1,NE
mature oil that has a much lower asphaltene and
25.7
Sulphur content. Geochemical data also highlighted
the
field1,SW
presence of a strong compositional gradient from the
NE
to
25.8
the SW, illustrated in Figure 2. This is attributed to
mixing of oils from the two different source endFigure 2. Cross-plot of Carbon isotope values of the saturate and aromatic
members, producing an effective maturity variation
fraction in fluids from the NE (c) and the SW () of the field.
across the field.
The geochemical measurements used in the current study do not allow for the determination of the exact time of fluid
charge in the reservoir. The relative amounts of the two source end-members are unknown, although the presence of
the low mature asphaltene-rich oil is more pronounced in the NE.
Fluid property and asphaltene stability measurements

Figure 3. Fluid property distribution. Left panel shows the API gravity, the right panel shows the C7-asphaltene content. It is clear that the fluids in the
NE are heavier and richer in C7-asphaltenes than fluids from the SW.

SPE 138275

There is a clear trend visible with heavier, asphaltene-rich fluids in the NE. This may indicate that fluids in the NE are
different from fluids in the SW, which is supported by the findings from geochemical characterization of the fluids.
Figure 4 shows a cross plot of the C7-asphaltene content and Nickel. The good correlation between these parameters
shows that there is a maturity trend preserved in the heavy fraction of the fluids, which is also in line with conclusions
from the geochemical analysis that maturity variations are present and coming from the mixing of the low-mature
asphaltene and Nickel-rich end-member and high-mature end-member with much lower asphaltene and Nickel
concentration.
5
4.5
4

Nickel[ppm]

3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1

field1,North
field1,SW

0.5

field1,North[deposition]
0
0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

asphaltenes[wt%]
Figure 4. C7-asphaltene content versus Nickel for fluids from
the NE () and SW () part of the field.

Figure 5 shows the SARA stability screens. The SARA stability screen was developed based on in-house calibration
studies, to distinguish unstable fluids from stable fluids (with respect to precipitation) (Stankiewicz, 2002). The x-axis
shows the asphaltene/resin ratio, an indicator of the intrinsic stability of the asphaltenes. The y-axis shows the
saturate/aromatic ratio, an indicator of the solvency power of the oil for asphaltenes.
Fluids from the NE are marginally stable to unstable according to the SARA stability plot. Fluids from the SW are
clearly not problematic with respect to precipitation. If the data are plotted according to their C7-asphaltene content,
instead of their location, it becomes apparent that the asphaltene stability decreases with increasing concentration. In
summary, fluids from the NE with higher asphaltene concentration are more prone to asphaltene flocculation.

SPE 138275

Figure 5. SARA stability screen. The left panel shows the datapoints split by location in the field, NE
() and SW (). The black squares represent the samples from wells with confirmed asphaltene
deposition in the well. The dotted circles point at the samples from wells where deposition does not
occur (yet) but would be more prone to asphaltene precipitation according to the SARA screen. The
right panel shows the data split by C7-asphaltene concentration.

On a selection of samples a P-value test was carried out. The P-value is a titration with hexadecane, and is recorded
as 1+(volume of C16 in ml/gr oil). A low P-value means that flocculation occurs at low amounts of added C16,
indicating low asphaltene stability. A P-value of 1 means that asphaltene flocks are present prior to adding any C16
solvent. Figure 6 shows that the precipitation tendency increases with asphaltene content. Please note that this is not
a general feature of asphaltenes, but specific for fluids from this field. But it clearly indicates that fluids in the NE
where asphaltene concentrations are higher, they have a higher risk for precipitation than fluids in the SW with much
lower concentrations. This is agreement with the SARA stability plot.
2.50

asphalteneconcentration[wt%]

field1,North
2.00

field1,SW

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00
0

Pvaluetitration
Figure 6. P-value data plotted against C7-asphaltene
concentration for fluids from the NE () and SW () part of
the field. The P-value is a titration with hexadecane, and is an
indicator of precipitation tendency. The lower the value the
more unstable the asphaltenes in the crude oil are.

SPE 138275

Basic fluid property correlations for prediction of asphaltene deposition potential

The SARA screen in Figure 5 is not entirely consistent with the samples from wells that actually suffer from deposition
in the well. From the 6 wells with confirmed asphaltene deposition we carried out SARA analysis on samples from 4 of
these wells. Two of these samples from wells with deposition problems plot in the stable area of the screen. This is
no surprise, as the SARA screen is indicative for precipitation only. Precipitation is the formation of a solid phase out
of a liquid phase, which is a function of pressure, temperature, and fluid composition. Deposition, however, is the
formation of a solid layer on a surface, which is a function of shear, particle growth, particle/particle interaction, and
particle/surface interaction. Understanding deposition requires a detailed review of operational conditions like the
configuration of the production system, production profiles, stimulation practices, etc. Although the SARA screen is not
the right tool to assess the risk for deposition, it shows that potentially more wells are at risk for deposition. The
datapoints marked with the dotted circles are unstable and have high asphaltene concentration according to the SARA
screen and, therefore, high precipitation tendency according to the P-value screen. The fact that deposition has not
yet occurred in fluids from these wells may be because the production conditions at the moment do not favour
deposition. But deposition may occur in these wells once the production scenario changes, for example decline in
production rates, installation of gas lift, or gas re-injection in the field in the future.
An additional approach to assess the risk for asphaltene deposition in the Abu Dhabi oilfield is the correlation between
API gravity and C7-asphaltenes (Figure 7). A relation was found for these fluids between the API gravity, asphaltene
content of the fluid and the deposition tendency. Below ~0.8 wt% there is a low risk for deposition problems,
applicable to all fluids form the SW part of the field. This can be explained by the adapted critical range theory as
explained in the introduction: instability of the asphaltenes with subsequent wellbore deposition is related to the mixing
of high and low maturity oils in the geological past. The asphaltene content in the SW is lower due to a higher degree
of mixing with oil derived from the source generating low asphaltene content fluids. These fluids are, therefore, outside
the critical range of fluids where precipitation and deposition issues are expected. Wells producing fluids with
asphaltene contents between approximately 1.3 and 0.8 wt% - applicable to the NE of the field - have a high risk for
asphaltene deposition problems. It is plausible that above ~1.3 wt% the risk for asphaltene deposition is also low as
these fluids may be outside the critical range for deposition again; however this needs further confirmation for this
particular field.
2.0

25

1.8
20

nodeposition

1.4
1.2

15

1.0
0.8

nodeposition

10

deposition

0.6
0.4

deposition

0.2
0.0

nodeposition?
15

20

nodeposition
25

30

35

40

45

API
Figure 7. Asphaltene content versus API. Black solids (y) represent the fluids
described in this paper, open diamonds () represents fluids from Venezuela for
which the deposition tendency based on maturity/mixing of various charges was
first observed (Stankiewicz, 2001).

Asphaltene Venezuela[wt%]

AsphalteneMiddleEast[wt%]

1.6

SPE 138275

The correlation between C7-asphaltenes and Nickel (Figure 4) serves as an additional screen to help predicting
deposition problems. The good correlation between these two parameters shows that there is an effective maturity
trend preserved in the heavy fraction of the oil, caused by the mixing of high and low maturity fluid end-members. The
samples from wells with recorded and confirmed asphaltene deposition problems fall in the middle-range of the plot in
Figure 4. The samples on the left and on the right may represent oils that are either too low or too high in maturity for
deposition problems to occur, i.e. outside the critical range. Since the measurement of metals in crude oil is rapid,
cheap and very accurate (ppb to ppm level) the Nickel content may be suitable parameter for a surveillance program in
this particular case. If a Nickel value taken from any new well in the field would be in the same range as values from
wells with deposition problems this could serve as a first warning. Moreover, the high accuracy of the metal analysis
may make this suitable for early detection of deposition in producing wells, the Nickel content in produced fluids may
change when deposition occurs, assuming it ends up in the asphaltene fraction that forms a deposit.
Conclusions
Operational issues in the field are often based on scarce and anecdotal information. Different disciplines usually work
in isolation and field development teams rarely get feedback from operations to validate their design. An
interdisciplinary study, combining subsurface (geochemistry, reservoir- and well engineering) with surface (flow
assurance, production chemistry) skills is very powerful to investigate these operational issues and provide operations
with recommendations for field performance improvement.
In the case described in this paper some depositional problems reported in the field were confirmed to be related to
asphaltene deposition. The deposition was caused by primary depletion of the reservoir and no evidence was found
for asphaltene deposition as the result of secondary recovery mechanisms like gas injection. A very confined area
where deposition is occurring has been defined, and some wells were identified that currently do not suffer from
wellbore obstructions but may do when production scenarios change. It was concluded that deposition is not likely to
occur in the SW area of the field.
A set of follow up studies has been suggested, including single-phase sampling of selected wells followed by PVT and
live-oil asphaltene studies to determine the onset pressure of asphaltene precipitation. This will allow for field-wide
thermodynamic modelling and defining a choke management strategy. In addition, a surveillance plan was developed
for this field, to monitor wells with confirmed asphaltene deposition problems and to monitor selected well with potential
deposition problems in the future. The surveillance plan includes frequent recording of production rates, temperatures,
and pressure drops across the wells. Wellhead samples will have to be collected periodically and checked for API,
Sulphur, C7-asphaltenes, and metals (Ni/V). The bulk properties like API, Sulphur and C7-asphaltenes can be plotted
in the established predictive screens shown in Figure 4, Figure 5, and Figure 7. The metal content can be useful since
that is a very rapid and cheap measurement on low sample content with high enough accuracy that it may show
changing concentrations when deposition in the wellbore starts to occur. This surveillance plan together with further
understanding of live-oil asphaltene behaviour and thermodynamic modeling allows for anticipating problems ahead of
actual deposition, and adjusting reservoir management for optimum production rates, thereby enhancing the overall
profitability from the field.
References
Abdallah, D., Al-Basry, A., Zwolle, S., Grutters, M., Huo, Z., Stankiewicz, A., Asphaltene Studies in on-shore Abu
Dhabi Oil fields, PART II: Investigation and mitigation of asphaltene deposition - a case study. SPE-138039-PP,
submitted.
Abdallah, D., Bazuhair, M., Zwolle, S., Grutters, M., Ramanathan, K., Stankiewicz, A., Asphaltene Studies in on-shore
Abu Dhabi Oil fields, PART III: Optimization of Field Chemicals for Remediation and Inhibition of Asphaltene
Deposition., SPE-138040-PP, submitted
Daaou, M., Bendedouch, D., Bouhadda, Y., Vernex-Loset, L., Modaressi, A., Rogalski, M., Explaining the flocculation
of Hassi-Massaoud asphaltenes in terms of structural characteristics of monomers and aggregates. Energy & Fuels,
2009, 23, 5556-5563.
Gonzalez, G., Neves, G.B.M., Saraiva, S.M., Lucas, E.F., Dos Anjos de Sousa, M. Electrokinetic characterization of
asphaltenes and the asphaltenes-resins interaction., Energy & Fuels, 2003, 17, 879-886.

SPE 138275

Goual, L., Firoozobadi, A., Measuring asphaltenes and resins, and dipole moment in petroleum fluids., AICHE
Journal, 2002, 48-11, 2646-2662.
Groenzin, H., Mullins, O.C., Molecular size and structure of asphaltenes from various sources., Energy & Fuels, 14,
677-684.
Lichaa, P.M., Herrera, L., Electrical and other effects related to the formation and prevention of asphaltene deposition
problems in Venezuelan crudes., SPE 5304, 107-114.
Mullins, O.C., Martinez-Haya, B., Marshall, A.G., Contrasting perspective on asphaltene molecular weight. This
comment vs. the overview of A. A. Herod, K. D. Bartle, and R. Kandiyoti., Energy & Fuels, 2008, 22, 1765-1773.
Purcell, J.M., Rodgers, R.P., Hendrickson, C.L., Marshall, A.G., Speciation of nitrogen containing aromatics by
atmospheric pressure photoionization or electrospray ionization Fourier Transform Ion Cyclotron Resonance Mass
Spectrometry., Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, 2007, 18,1265-1273.
Sheremata, J.M., Gray, M.R., Dettman, H.D., McCaffrey, W.C., Quantitative molecular representation and sequential
optimization of Athabasca asphaltenes., Energy & Fuels, 2004, 18, 1377-1384.
Smith, D., Klein, G., Yen, A., Squicciarini, M., Rodgers, R., Marshall, A., Crude oil polar composition derived from FTICR-MS accounts for asphaltene inhibitor specificity., Energy & Fuels, 2008, 22, 3112-3117.
Stankiewicz, B.A., McKinney, D., Gelin, F., Kleingeld, J., Iyer, S.D., Prato, C., Westrich, J., Relationship between oil
th
maturity and asphaltene stability in crude oils from the carbonate reservoir in Venezuela., 20 International Meeting
on Organic Geochemistry, France, 2001.
Stankiewicz, B.A., Flannery, M.D., Fuex, N.A., Broze, G.J., Couch, J.L., Dubey, S.T., Leitko, A.D., Nimmons, J.F., Iyer,
S.D., Ratulowski, J., Westrich, J., Prediction of asphaltene deposition risk in E&P operations. AICHE, 2002.
Stankiewicz, B.A., Prediction of Oil Asphaltene Behaviour based on Fluid Characterisation: Geochemistry meets
Engineering., Geological Society of London: Geochemistry of Reservoirs II, 2003.
Strausz, O.P, Mojelski, T.W., Lown, E.M., The molecular structure of asphaltenes: an unfolding story., Fuel, 1992, 71,
1355-1363.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC), Abu Dhabi Company for Onshore Oil
Operations (ADCO) and Shell Abu Dhabi BV for their support and permission to publish this work.