Produced Water Treatment Patents: Top Companies & Trends 2026
- Concentrated but not locked up. the top 5 assignees hold 26.4% of all 519 records in scope, and the top 10 hold 39.3% — a leader plus a long tail, not a monopoly.
- Filing has cooled since 2024. activity peaked at 48 records that year and the 2022 midpoint (41) already sat above the 2017 start (19), so the field grew and then flattened.
- Separation dominates the claim map. 80.7% of records sit in water/wastewater treatment (C02F) and 25.6% in separation processes (B01D), leaving drilling-adjacent and materials classes comparatively thin.
What this landscape covers
Produced water — the water lifted alongside oil and gas — carries dispersed oil, solids, dissolved salts and bacteria that must be removed before the water can be discharged or reinjected. This landscape tracks 519 published records filed between 2015 and mid-2026 that claim treatment methods, separation apparatus, or reinjection systems addressing that stream. The scope spans compact separation hardware, chemical and biological treatment steps, and the wellbore-side handling that determines whether reinjection stays economical as injectivity declines over time.
Reading the data as patent families rather than raw filings matters here because several of the leading assignees are large national oil companies that file continuations and parallel jurisdictions aggressively; families strip that duplication out and show where genuinely distinct inventive claims sit.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 519-record dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
Filings rose then flattened
Records climbed from 19 in 2017 to a peak of 48 in 2024, with the 2022 midpoint at 41 already above the 2017 starting point. The most recent year (2026) shows only 4 records, but publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so recent-year counts always understate real activity — treat 2026 as incomplete rather than as a genuine drop.
Separation and treatment lead by a wide margin
C02F (water and wastewater treatment) appears in 80.7% of the 519 records and B01D (separation processes) in 25.6%, confirming that most claims sit on the treatment and separation steps rather than upstream well hardware. E21B (earth and rock drilling) at 10.8% marks the wellbore-side minority, while B01J, C10G, B01F, C09K and B04C each sit under 3% — thinner ground where fewer claims compete for the same space.
Shares are the percentage of the 519 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Produced Water Treatment and Reinjection with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about produced water treatment and reinjection and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited prior art in this space
CA2917959A1 — Settling oil removal tank, system and method for produced water treatment
A settling oil removal tank with a central tubular column, water distribution chamber, oil collecting groove and bottom sludge discharge device. The central column seals at its lower end, connects to a water outlet pipe at the top, and feeds a set of water collecting pipelines with inlets along their length, with the water distribution chamber connected to route flow through the tank body.Filed by a Xinjiang oilfield engineering entity in 2017; representative of the tank-and-internals design claims common among Chinese national-oil-company filers in this dataset.
View full filing| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20080156709A1 | Produced water treatment method and apparatus | 102 |
| 2 | US20110089013A1 | Apparatus of produced water treatment, system and method of using the apparatus, and method of water reuse by… | 75 |
| 3 | US5350527A | Oily water separation and water reclamation system | 75 |
| 4 | US4139463A | Method of and means for oily water separation | 60 |
| 5 | US20100264068A1 | Method of produced water treatment, method of water reuse, and systems for these methods | 56 |
| 6 | US20120037568A1 | Controlled method of minimizing radioactive sludge generation in post stimulation flowback and/or produced wa… | 45 |
| 7 | US20140151296A1 | Produced water treatment to remove organic compounds | 36 |
| 8 | WO2013129159A1 | 随伴水の処理方法及び処理装置 | 25 |
| 9 | CN106621484A | 沉降除油罐、采出水处理系统及处理方法 | 24 |
| 10 | JP2005288373A | Oily water separation system | 24 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations — read them as a signal of influence on later filers, not as a measure of current commercial importance.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Eureka on the web
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →MCP server & REST API
When it has to run inside your own pipeline.
Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.
Browse MCP servers →What the data means for filing and freedom-to-operate
Three findings that shape where a new filing is likely to clear and where it will run into dense prior art.
A leader plus a long tail, not a single gatekeeper
The leading assignee holds 36 records against a fifth-place figure of 20 and a tenth-place figure of 9 — a steep drop-off rather than a plateau. That shape means freedom-to-operate work has to clear one dominant filer's claims specifically, but beyond the top 10 the field opens into single- and double-digit filers where negotiated licensing or design-around is more realistic.
Growth has flattened, not accelerated
The field grew from 19 records in 2017 to a peak of 48 in 2024, but the flat comparison between the 2022 midpoint and the peak shows the growth curve levelling rather than compounding. Several of the largest assignees show 0 filings in the latest tracked year, consistent with a maturing rather than an expanding filing wave.
Treatment and separation are the crowded ground
Four in five records touch water/wastewater treatment claims and a quarter touch separation-process claims, so incremental improvements to standard treatment trains face the densest prior art. Classes tied to catalysis, mixing, and cyclone separation each sit under 3% of records, marking comparatively open claim space around those mechanisms.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to produced water treatment and reinjection, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gaps sit
Filing activity clusters around national oil companies and their engineering subsidiaries, with co-assignee pairs showing internal group-level collaboration rather than cross-company partnerships.
The leading assignee files well ahead of the field
The top-ranked assignee's 36 records sit nearly double the fifth-place figure of 20, reflecting a large integrated filer with treatment claims spanning multiple subsidiaries and business units rather than a single R&D group.
Collaboration is mostly intra-group
The strongest co-assignee pairs link a parent oil company to its own oilfield branch or research institute, each pairing appearing on 6 shared records. This points to internal technology transfer between exploration divisions and engineering design arms rather than cross-company joint filings.
Several top filers show no recent-year activity
Multiple assignees at or near the top of the ranking, including the leading filer, show zero records in the most recent tracked year. Given the roughly 18-month publication lag, this understates true recent activity, but the pattern still marks a pause worth watching against the field's overall 2024 peak.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| China Petroleum & Chemical Corp (Sinopec) | 0 | -100% |
| PetroChina Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| HYDROZONIX LLC | 0 | — |
| Changqing Engineering Design Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Senuo Technology Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) | 0 | — |
| Saudi Arabian Oil Co. (Saudi Aramco) | 0 | -100% |
| General Electric Company | 0 | — |
Where to take this next
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, licensing, or identifying open claim space.
Map freedom-to-operate against the top 10
With 39.3% of all 519 records held by the top 10 assignees, a working FTO review should start there before scanning the long tail of single- and double-digit filers.
Explore assignee claims in EurekaWatch the 2024 peak against 2026's partial count
Filing activity peaked at 48 records in 2024; whether 2026 confirms a real slowdown or simply reflects publication lag will not be clear for another 12-18 months.
Track filing trends in EurekaTest claim scope in the under-3% classes
Cyclone separation, mixing, and catalytic classes each sit under 3% of records, making them worth a closer novelty search before committing to the crowded C02F/B01D core.
Run a novelty search in EurekaCommon questions on produced water treatment patents
The dataset's leading assignee holds 36 of the 519 records in scope, well ahead of the fifth-place figure of 20 and the tenth-place figure of 9. The ranking is dominated by large national oil companies and their oilfield engineering subsidiaries, several of which file jointly with their own research institutes rather than with outside partners. Because the top 5 assignees together account for 26.4% of all records and the top 10 for 39.3%, the field is concentrated at the top but still leaves the majority of filings spread across a long tail of smaller entrants.
Filing volume rose from 19 records in 2017 to a peak of 48 in 2024, but the 2022 midpoint of 41 was already close to that peak, indicating the growth curve has flattened rather than accelerated. Several of the largest assignees show zero filings in the most recent tracked year, which is consistent with a maturing filing wave. Recent-year counts are always understated because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the true 2025-2026 picture will not be clear until later data cuts.
Water and wastewater treatment claims (IPC class C02F) appear in 80.7% of the 519 records, and separation-process claims (B01D) appear in 25.6%, making these the two most heavily claimed areas. Earth and rock drilling claims (E21B), tied to wellbore-side reinjection equipment, appear in 10.8% of records. Smaller classes covering catalysis, hydrocarbon refining, mixing, specialty materials and cyclone separation each sit under 3%, marking comparatively open ground for new filings that avoid the core treatment-and-separation claim space.
CA2917959A1 describes a settling oil removal tank for produced water treatment, with a central tubular column, water distribution chamber, oil collecting groove and a bottom sludge discharge device. It was filed by a Xinjiang oilfield engineering entity in 2017 and is representative of tank-and-internals design claims common among Chinese national-oil-company filers in this dataset. Anyone designing gravity-settling or tank-based deoiling equipment for produced water should review its specific internals configuration — the sealed lower end of the central column and the water collecting pipeline arrangement — before finalizing a similar mechanical layout.
The classes furthest below the dominant C02F and B01D categories — cyclone separation (B04C) at 1.2%, mixing and stirring (B01F) at 1.5%, and specialty materials (C09K) at 1.5% — carry the least claim density in the dataset. Combined with the flat filing trend since 2022, this suggests mechanically distinct approaches like cyclone-based deoiling skids or biocide-dosing systems targeting bacteria control face less crowded prior art than another incremental treatment-train claim. A first filing in these areas should tie the mechanical or chemical novelty explicitly to injectivity decline or reinjection economics, since those problem statements appear in the search scope but are thin in the class breakdown.
Research Produced Water Treatment and Reinjection in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole produced water treatment and reinjection corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.
Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company’s registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.