INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 99
Analysis of Carbon Footprint from a Drilling Project in Niger
Delta, Nigeria
Chukwu Emeke
1
, Ayanfeoluwa Obe
2
, Olugbenga Olamigoke
2
1
Emerald Energy Institute, University of Port Harcourt, Nigeria
2
Department of Petroleum and Gas Engineering, University of Lagos, Nigeria
DOI : https://doi.org/10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2024.131013
Received: 17 October 2024; Accepted: 28 October 2024; Published: 08 November 2024
Abstract: The oil and gas industry plays a significant role in the release of carbon emissions into the atmosphere. Therefore, it is
crucial to accurately gauge and minimize its carbon footprint which requires the thorough measurement of emissions and the
identification of the primary sources of carbon emissions. By doing so, we can then determine the most effective methods for
reducing these emissions.
This study aims to precisely quantify and decrease the carbon footprint associated with drilling operations. To achieve this, we
evaluated the diesel and petrol consumption from an onshore drilling project in the Niger Delta and used an emissions model to
assess carbon dioxide (CO
2
) emissions from a drilling rig, thus gaining a comprehensive understanding of current emission levels
and the potential for reduction. The data collected included the daily fuel consumption for power generation, transportation, and
handling vehicles. The CO
2
emissions resulting from fuel consumption were calculated and measured to be 103.5 metric tonnes.
Our analysis determined that the primary contributor to the emissions was the energy generation on the site, primarily from the
generators. Additionally, it was found that the circulating system on the rig was the main source of CO
2
emissions. The study
underscores the necessity for long-term impact assessments of drilling fluids and new technologies, emphasizing the need for
innovative solutions to further decrease emissions.
Keywords: carbon footprint, carbon dioxide emissions, drilling project, fuel consumption, Niger Delta
I. Introduction
The petroleum industry in Nigeria, particularly in the Niger Delta, plays a crucial role in the country's economy, generating
significant revenue and employment. It is also the primary source of energy and a driver of development on a global scale. In
Nigeria, the crude oil industry has played a vital role in shaping the country's economy. This sector has been a major source of
wealth for the country, contributing 80% to government revenues and accounting for 90%-95% of foreign exchange earnings
(Aaron, 2005). However, it also poses environmental challenges, including carbon emissions from drilling activities. The carbon
footprint entails all forms of emissions, from burning to transportation to electricity generation. Besides just carbon dioxide, there
are also other greenhouse gases, such as methane or chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). It is usually calculated as a measure of the mass
of CO
2
or similar gases produced in a region or a particular industry (Abeydeera & Wadu, 2019; Huang et al., 2021).
Understanding and addressing the carbon footprint in drilling projects is essential for environmental sustainability and the long-
term viability of the petroleum and gas industry. Embracing global initiatives and trends for carbon footprint reduction is not only
a responsible business practice but also a strategic move for staying competitive in a rapidly evolving energy landscape. The first
step to reducing the carbon footprint of any process is a good estimation of the present carbon footprint (Al-Kuwari et al., 2021).
Andrews (2009) defined carbon footprint in the context of an organization as the total amount of greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions for which an organization is responsible. They explained that these greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, methane,
nitrous oxide, and halocarbons, absorb and radiate the heat from the sun. This is called the greenhouse effect. This effect is
responsible for an increase in global temperature by 33
O
C. However, an uncontrolled increase in the concentration of these gases
increases the warming effect. This is called global warming.
Johnson et al. (2022) emphasized the importance of reducing carbon dioxide emissions in well-construction operations. To
achieve this, it is necessary to measure the current emissions and identify the main drivers of the footprint. Analyzing the data
available from two modern land rigs, they found that the mud pumps are the biggest culprit for the CO
2
release. The top drive and
draw works have a much less significant footprint comparatively. They built and verified an emissions model to ensure that their
work is relevant to more than just a few high-end modern rigs. This model was created to calculate the amount of CO
2
released
from drilling parameters and generate a real-time carbon emissions log from the contributions of the major systems on any rig for
which fuel consumption data is available.
Aaron (2005) pointed out the paradox of the Niger Delta. This region is home to approximately 30% of the oil reserves in Africa
and over 3 trillion cubic meters of gas reserves, which contribute to more than 85% of the nation's gross domestic product (GDP),
over 95% of the national budget, and over 80% of the country's wealth. However, the Niger Delta remains one of the poorest
regions in the country plagued with oil theft and Oil spills, primarily due to the environmentally harmful exploitation of oil and
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 100
gas (Emeke & Maduewesi, 2022). The ecological implications of these activities have rendered farming and fishing useless,
which were once the primary occupations of the rural people residing in the area. The ecologically unfriendly activities of oil
Transnational Corporations (TNCs) and the state's petroleum development policies led to poverty in the Niger Delta. This, in turn,
leads to environmental degradation. The oil TNCs are more concerned with maximizing their profits and often engage in
activities that are detrimental to the environment. Emeke (2023) posited that the state's petroleum development policies are
focused on the exploitation of oil and gas resources without considering the negative environmental impact of these activities.
The lack of concern for the environment and the people living in the region has led to a vicious cycle of poverty and
environmental degradation in the Niger Delta.
Kingston and Iragunima (2020) conducted research on the regulatory frameworks governing offshore drilling of oil and gas in
Nigeria, focusing on the challenges related to enforcing regulations and ensuring accountability in the petroleum sector of the
country. The study emphasized the complex nature of implementing regulatory instruments and ensuring that the offshore
production activities of crude oil companies are held accountable. By drawing comparisons with global practices, the research
highlighted the need for structured measures to monitor compliance and enforce laws effectively while balancing crude oil
production with considerations for safety, environmental responsibilities, economic equilibrium, fiscal stability, and adherence to
customary international laws. The article aimed to devise strategies for improving oversight and addressing omissions and lapses
in laws, regulations, and institutional management of offshore facilities by identifying fundamental defects in the existing legal
and regulatory framework governing offshore oil drilling in Nigeria. Ultimately, the research aimed to contribute to the discourse
on enhancing regulatory effectiveness and promoting sustainable practices in Nigeria's onshore oil and gas industry to ensure
greater accountability and environmental stewardship in petroleum operations. The window to transit to cleaner energy sources
holds great future for our developing economy (Oyegbile et al., 2024).
This study aims to carry out an analysis of the carbon footprint from a drilling project in the Niger Delta, Nigeria. By analyzing
the carbon footprint across various stages of drilling operations, the research can provide valuable insights into the environmental
impact of petroleum and gas extraction activities. This knowledge can inform the development of more sustainable drilling
practices and technologies within the field of petroleum and gas engineering.
II. Methodology
This section provides a description of the methods used to carry out this study, a description of the drilling location and the tools
used.
Methods
A combination of quantitative evaluation and qualitative assessments have been used. As the major sources of carbon emissions
during drilling come from fuel consumption from the major equipment on location, the daily diesel and petrol consumption was
monitored daily and aggregated over the drilling project duration of about seven months. Subsequently, an emission model
(Poroma et al. (2013); Ferrari et al. (2021); Johnson, et al. (2022)) for quantifying carbon emissions based on energy consumption
was used as shown in Section 2.3. The emission model was implemented in MS Excel using Visual Basic coding.
Qualitative assessments, on the other hand, involved gathering subjective insights through secondary data from published surveys
and reviews. This approach facilitates a deeper understanding of the socio-economic and environmental dynamics surrounding
the drilling project. It allows for the exploration of community perceptions, stakeholder perspectives, and potential mitigation
strategies.
Description of the Drilling Location
The drilling rig considered for this study is a 1,300 HP workover land rig used for well re-entry and drilling shallow wells
operated in the Niger Delta. Some key specifications about the well of interest and equipment used on the drilling location are
outlined below:
Well Total Vertical Depth (TVD): 10,400 ft
Completion status: 3-1/2" string selective dual injector
Vehicles and personnel transport: 4 Hilux vehicles
Material transport and handling vehicles: Crane, Forklift
Power ratings of the major equipment on the drilling location have been obtained as shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Power Rating of the drilling rig systems
System
Power Rating (HP)
Hoisting system
600
Rotary system
200
Well Control system
50
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 101
Power system (4 diesel generators)
1600
Circulating system
Mud pumps (2)
600
Shale shakers
70
Basis for calculation of CO
2
emissions
The calculation of carbon emissions during drilling is based on the fuel burned to generate energy. For every liter of fuel used,
there is an equivalent mass of CO
2
produced. The calculation is preceded by stating the applicable chemical reaction which
relates fuel consumption to CO
2
production. The reactions are different for diesel and gasoline.
For Gasoline:
1 liter of petrol is 0.74 kg on average. Therefore, using one mole of petrol as a basis:
(1)
This yield atomic numbers of 96 and 18 for carbon and hydrogen respectively.
(2)
(3)
Based on 12 g/mole of Carbon and 44g/mole of Carbon dioxide,
(4)
For Diesel:
1 liter of petrol is 0.84 kg on average. Therefore, using one mole of diesel as a basis:
(5)
This yield atomic numbers of 144 and 23 for carbon and hydrogen respectively.
(6)
(7)
Based on 12 g/mole of Carbon and 44g/mole of Carbon dioxide,
(8)
The total CO
2
emissions were calculated over a seven-month period including rig move, drilling and completions. A daily fuel
consumption tracker built in MS Excel was used onsite from the following equipment:
● 4 Diesel generators for power generation
● 4 Hilux for personnel transport
● 2 Cranes and 1 Forklift for onsite material transport and handling vehicles.
By integrating quantitative data with qualitative insights, the research aims to uncover the underlying drivers of carbon emissions
and propose actionable recommendations for sustainable development.
III. Results and Discussion
After a compilation of the data and subsequent analysis, inferences have been drawn from the fuel consumption and rig energy
rating presented in this section.
The contribution of the diesel generators, cranes, forklift and the Hilux vehicles to the carbon footprint of the drilling project is
shown in Table 1. The total mass of CO
2
emissions (kg) calculated was 103533.4 kg. We can easily identify which equipment is
most responsible for emissions.
Table 1: Fuel Consumption
Contributors
Diesel Generators
Cranes
Forklift
Hilux
Mass of Emission (kg)
64445.6
19526.8
4017.4
15543.6
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 102
Percentage (%)
62.2
18.9
3.9
15.0
Figure 1 portrays the emission distribution onsite the drilling project.
Figure 1: Emission spread by equipment
The source of CO
2
emissions in the drilling project is the fuel consumption by various machines for:
1. Power Generation:
Description: Generators are used to provide electricity for various operations on the drilling site. They typically run on diesel
fuel and are often in continuous operation, leading to a significant amount of fuel consumption and, consequently, CO
2
emissions.
Emission Contribution: 64.4 metric tonnes of CO
2
, representing 62.2% of the total emissions.
Analysis: Diesel generators are the primary source of CO
2
emissions in the project. Their significant contribution is due to their
heavy reliance on diesel fuel for power generation and the fact that they were operational all through the duration of the project.
This high percentage suggests that improving the efficiency of power generation or switching to alternative energy sources could
substantially reduce overall emissions.
2. Handling Vehicles:
Description: These vehicles are used for transporting equipment and materials to, from, and on the drilling site. They are the
cranes and forklifts that operate on diesel fuel. The frequent movement and heavy loads contribute to high fuel consumption and
CO
2
emissions.
Emission Contribution: The cranes emitted 19.5 metric tonnes of CO
2
, representing 18.9% of the total emissions, while the
forklift emitted 4 metric tonnes of CO
2
, representing 3.9% of the total emissions.
Analysis: Cranes are the second-largest contributor to CO
2
emissions. Their operations involve lifting and moving heavy
equipment and materials, which requires considerable energy. The crane produced significantly high CO
2
but wasn’t used all
through the span of the project. Optimization of crane operations, such as reducing idle time, getting an efficient operator, and
ensuring proper maintenance, could help lower emissions.
Forklifts contribute a smaller but still notable portion of the emissions. These vehicles are used for handling and transporting
materials on-site. Considering their lower contribution, efforts to reduce emissions here include using more efficient forklifts or
optimizing their usage patterns.
3. Personnel Transport Vehicles:
Description: These vehicles are used for transporting people to and from the drilling site
Emission Contribution: 15.5 metric tonnes of CO
2
, representing 15.0% of the total emissions.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 103
Analysis: Hilux vehicles are used primarily for personnel transport. Their significant contribution is due to high usage. They were
used every day throughout the duration of the project. Strategies to reduce emissions could involve using more fuel-efficient
vehicles such as buses, which have a size advantage and can transport more people with less fuel consumption, optimizing
transport schedules, or carpooling to reduce the number of trips. There are also alternative choices of energy for personnel
transport, such as electric vehicles, even though this is not very cost-efficient as of today.
Given that diesel generators are the largest contributor to emissions, implementing energy efficiency measures here could have
the most significant impact. Options include upgrading to more efficient generators, using hybrid systems, or incorporating
renewable energy sources like solar panels.
The more energy produced by the generators, the higher the emissions. However, from the Figure 2, we see a difference from the
linear progression after a while. This is due to the increased workload on the generators during the drilling and completion phase.
The higher the workload on the generators, the more energy is generated per liter of diesel used. It is therefore a good idea to
carry out projects with high energy requirements using the generators in a hybrid system.
This analysis highlights the key contributors to CO
2
emissions in the drilling project. By focusing on the largest sources,
particularly diesel generators and cranes, and implementing targeted strategies to improve efficiency and reduce fuel
consumption, the project can significantly lower its overall carbon footprint.
Figure 2: Energy consumption versus emissions
Energy Consumption
The CO
2
emissions from the drilling project is due to the fuel consumption by various systems involved in the drilling operations.
These systems include hoisting, rotary, circulating, and well control. Table 2 summarizes the daily power consumption and the
percentage contribution of each system to the total power consumption.
Table 2: Power Consumption
Figure 3 shows the contribution of the main drilling systems to power consumption during the drilling operation. On drilling rigs
with three mud pumps due to the well depth, the power consumption is bound to increase.
System
Hoisting
Rotary
Circulating
Well control
Total power consumption (MJ)
14496.4
11811.89
39569.82
3221.42
Percentage (%)
20.98
17.09
57.26
4.66
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 104
Figure 3: The contribution of different drilling systems to total power consumption
Circulating System:
● Daily Power Consumption: 39,569.82 MJ, representing 57.26% of the total power consumption.
● Analysis: The circulating system is the most significant consumer of power in the drilling project. This also means that, with
regards to drilling, this system is most responsible for the carbon footprint and must be paid the most attention to when
considering methods of optimization of the drilling rig. This system is responsible for circulating drilling fluids to cool the
drill bit, remove cuttings, and maintain well pressure. The high energy consumption is primarily because it was operational for
almost 24 hours daily. To reduce the overall energy consumption, strategies could include optimizing fluid properties,
improving pump efficiency, and ensuring proper maintenance of the circulating system components.
Hoisting System:
● Total Power Consumption: 14,496.4 MJ, representing 20.98% of the total power consumption.
● Analysis: The hoisting system is the second-largest consumer of power. It is used for lifting and lowering the drill string,
casing, and other equipment in and out of the wellbore. This system is very power-dependent, as heavy objects are moved
through the wellbore. However, as it isn’t operated for extended periods of time, its impact is not as high as the circulating
system, even though the power rating for both the hoisting system and circulating system is close. The significant power
consumption by the hoisting system suggests that optimizing the hoisting operations, such as reducing unnecessary lifts, using
energy-efficient hoisting equipment, and implementing advanced control systems, could contribute to overall energy savings
and reduced CO
2
emissions.
Rotary System:
● Total Power Consumption: 11,811.89 MJ, representing 17.09% of the total power consumption.
● Analysis: The rotary system is responsible for rotating the drill bit to cut through the earth. Its power consumption is crucial
for the progress of the drilling operation. This is also operated for extended periods, sometimes up to 24 hours a day.
Enhancements in drill bit design, rotary drive systems, and operational practices can help reduce the power demand of the
rotary system and, by extension, the emission level.
Well Control System:
● Total Power Consumption: 3,221.42 MJ, representing 4.66% of the total power consumption.
● Analysis: The well control system has the lowest power consumption among the systems analyzed. Even though it is operated
24 hours per day all through the drilling process, the energy requirement is so low that the impact is so significant. It is
essential for maintaining well integrity and preventing blowouts. Although its power consumption is relatively low, ensuring
the efficiency and reliability of the well control system is critical for safe drilling operations. Regular maintenance and the use
of advanced well control technologies can help maintain its energy efficiency.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 105
Given that the circulating system is the largest power consumer, improving its efficiency should be a priority. This could involve
using more efficient pumps, optimizing fluid dynamics, and implementing real-time monitoring to adjust operations dynamically.
IV. Conclusion and Recommendations
The primary objective of this research was to quantify the CO
2
emissions associated with drilling operations, identify the major
sources of these emissions, and develop strategies to reduce them effectively. The key results of this project were as follows:
● The primary source of CO
2
emissions is power generation, and this is where most mitigation strategies are required.
● The total carbon produced through the course of this drilling project is 103.5 metric tons.
● The most significant emissions were traced to the operation of mud pumps, which are essential for the circulation of drilling
fluids.
Therefore, it was recommended as follows:
1. The use of Alternative Energy Sources. As previously concluded, energy generation is the primary source of CO
2
emissions.
A source of energy that doesn’t burn fossil fuels will make the process much cleaner. Kharwade et al. (2022) showed the
possibility of solar-powered drilling using solar panels and batteries. If this can be fully or partially utilized (hybrid power
generation), carbon emissions will be greatly mitigated.
2. Upgrade mud pumps to more energy-efficient models, implementing variable frequency drives (VFDs) to optimize pump
speed and reduce energy consumption.
3. Develop and utilize drilling fluids that require less energy for circulation. Also, explore alternative fluids that have a lower
environmental impact.
4. Install advanced monitoring systems to track fuel consumption and CO
2
emissions in real time, using data analytics to identify
inefficiencies and areas for improvement.
5. Transportation also contributed significantly to CO
2
production. There are alternatives, such as the use of electric cars, even
though, right now, the cost implications are too high.
On the Operational side,
1. Implement best practices for drilling operations, such as optimizing the rate of penetration (ROP) and minimizing non-
productive time (NPT). Use automated drilling systems to enhance precision and reduce unnecessary energy use.
2. Conduct regular maintenance and inspections of all rig equipment to ensure optimal performance and fuel efficiency. Replace
outdated or inefficient equipment with modern, energy-efficient alternatives.
3. Optimize the use of generator sets to match power output with demand, reducing idle running time and fuel waste. Implement
load-sharing strategies to distribute power demand evenly across generators.
While on the policy side,
1. Advocate for stricter emission standards for drilling operations to ensure industry-wide adherence to best practices.
2. Promote policies that offer financial incentives for adopting energy-efficient technologies and renewable energy sources in
drilling operations.
3. Implement regulations that require companies to monitor and report their CO
2
emissions, fostering transparency and
accountability.
4. Encourage government and industry collaboration to fund research and development in low-emission drilling technologies and
practices.
5. Develop training programs and certification requirements for drilling personnel on emission reduction techniques and
sustainable practices.
References
1. Aaron, K. K. (2005). Perspective: Big oil, rural poverty, and environmental degradation in the Niger Delta region of
Nigeria. Agricultural Engineering International: CIGR Journal. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.18178
2. Abeydeera, L. H. U. W., & Wadu, J. (2019). Global Research on Carbon Emissions: A Scientometric Review.
Sustainability, 11(14), 3972. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU11143972
3. Huang, L., Liao, Q., Yan, J., Liang, Y., & Zhan, H. (2021). Carbon footprint of oil products pipeline transportation.
Science of The Total Environment, 791, 146906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146906
4. Al-Kuwari, O., Welsby, D., & Rodriguez, B. S. (2021). Carbon intensity of oil and gas production. Research Square.
https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-637584/v1
5. Andrews, S. D. (2009). A classification of carbon footprint methods used by companies.
6. Johnson, A., Mäkinen, A., Fahim, S., & Arevalo, Y. (2022). Quantification of Our Carbon Footprint While Drilling.
International Petroleum Technology Conference. https://doi.org/10.2118/208737-ms
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 106
7. Emeke, C. & Maduewesi, C. O. (2022). Economic and Environmental Impact of Pipeline Incidents: a case of Delta North
Pipeline Network in Niger Delta, Nigeria. IOSR Journal of Environmental Science, Toxicology and Food Technology
(IOSR-JESTFT), 08-17. https://doi.org/10.9790/2402-1603010817
8. Emeke, C. (2023, July 31). Sustainable Host Community Development – An Enabler for Energy security& Economic
development in Nigeria. Society of Petroleum Engineers. https://doi.org/10.2118/217142-MS
9. Kingston, K. G., & Iragunima, I. J. (2020). Offshore Oil and Gas Drilling Regulatory Regimes in Nigeria: Unfolding the
Setbacks. Prime Journal Of Advanced Legal Studies, 10(1), 1-10. Available at https://ssrn.com/abstract=3530422
10. Oyegbile, M., Emeke, C., & Ezeh M. C. (2024). Assessing the Economic Impacts of Renewable Energy in Sub-
SaharanAfrica: A GDP-Centric Approach. Society of Petroleum Engineers. https://doi.org/10.2118/221623-MS
11. Poroma, D., Cerda, R., Somarriba, E., Cifuentes, M., & Gue, L. (2013). Carbon Footprint: What is it and how to measure
it?
12. Ferrari, F., Naselli, R., Brunetti, P., Michelez, J., & Zini, E. (2021). Digitalization for Reducing Carbon Footprint in
Drilling Operations. SPE Journal. https://doi.org/10.2118/207407-ms
13. Kharwade, K. V., Kumbhare, G. T., Admane, D. S., Vibhute, S. S., & Chahande, N. (2022). Fabrication of Solar Operated
Drilling Machine. International Journal of Innovations in Engineering and Science, 7(6), 8-11.
https://doi.org/10.46335/ijies.2022.7.6.3
