Comparative Study of Loss Circulation Additives (Conventional and Local Materials) for Filtration Control

The success of a drilling operation hinges 30% on the quality of Drilling fluid used. Drilling fluids aids drilling process by possessing several characteristics based on the additives added during formulation, enabling the drilling fluid to perform its functions. Additives, such as Carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and Polyanionic cellulose (PAC) are added to aid the filtration property of the mud. Unfortunately, these additives are costly, imported, and may not be environmentally friendly. This study utilizes mixed research method of qualitative, quantitative, and descriptive approaches as well as secondary data collection to analyse the comparability and effects of replacing conventional materials (CMC/PAC) with locally sourced materials (agro waste). 12 locally sourced materials were compared with CMC/PAC at 5mL/30mins based on already published data. Results indicated that only 3 materials (Cassava starch, Detarium microcarpum (Achi) and Tigernut Fibre at 4ml, 5.2ml and 5.4ml /30mins each respectively), out of the 12 showed better filtration property compared to CMC/PAC. The remaining 9 either met API standards (i.e. Brachystegia eurycoma (Ofor), Corncob cellulose, Groundnut husk, Potato starch and Sawdust at 5.5ml, 5.8ml, 6.5ml, 7ml and 8.6ml /30mins each respectively), or were out of range (i.e. Walnut shells, Rice husk, Gum Arabic, and Corn starch at 11ml, 16ml, 17ml and 31ml /30mins each respectively), as a replacement for fluid loss control additives. It was also observed that the agro wastes showing better comparison to CMC/PAC depicts good mud filter cake of slippery, smooth and soft mud cakes characteristics to prevent differential pipe sticking, were materials that fall within the starch/cellulose, fibrous and hydrocolloid based materials. Conclusively, these materials can serve as suitable (100%) replacements, are economical, readily available, and environmentally friendly.