Thermal Treatment of Drilling Waste Patents: Who Leads 2026
- Four ranked assignees account for all 13 records in scope, with the leader alone holding 10 — this is a field defined by a single dominant filer rather than a crowded competitive set.
- Filing peaked at 10 records in 2017, and has produced no new ranked filings since — a pattern more consistent with a settled claim position than an active filing race.
- Separation processes (B01D) and centrifuges (B04B) cover 69.2% and 38.5% of records respectively, while drying (F26B) and hydrocarbon refining (C10G) each sit at 7.7% — the mechanical separation side is far more claimed than the thermal/drying side.
What this landscape covers
Thermal treatment of drilling waste sits at the intersection of oilfield solids control and contaminated-land remediation: indirect thermal desorption units, kiln-based processing, and the vapour condensation and condensate recovery systems that recover hydrocarbons from treated cuttings. This dataset covers 13 published records matching thermal desorption, drilling waste treatment and related recovery-efficiency terms, filed between 2015 and the 2026 data cut-off.
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent years in the trend line are understated and should be read as a floor, not a ceiling, on actual filing activity.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
The two views below cover the same 13 records in scope: one shows when they were filed, the other shows what technical ground they claim.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings are concentrated in a single peak year of 2017, with 10 of the 13 records in scope published that year and no ranked filings recorded in the years since — consistent with an early wave of claims that has not been followed by a second one.
IPC subclass composition
Separation processes (B01D) and centrifuges (B04B) dominate the classification profile at 69.2% and 38.5% of the 13 records respectively. Soil and contaminated-land reclamation (B09C) reaches 23.1%, while drying (F26B), hydrocarbon refining (C10G), earth drilling (E21B) and water treatment (C02F) each sit at a single record, 7.7% of the total — narrow slices that point to specific process steps rather than broad platform claims.
Shares are the percentage of the 13 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Thermal Treatment of Drilling Waste with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about thermal treatment of drilling waste and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this dataset
Methods and systems for processing a vapor stream from a thermal desorption process
Describes routing an oil/water vapor stream containing fine solids to a condensing unit, combining it with a cooled emulsion to form a warmed emulsion, then splitting the warmed emulsion between a heat exchanger loop and an oil/water separation unit built from one or more disc stack centrifuges, in some cases preceded by decanting centrifuges.Filed by Calaeris Energy & Environment; published 2020-10-15.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US5200033A | Method for removing organic contaminants from soils | 68 |
| 2 | WO2017190227A1 | Methods and systems for processing a vapor stream from a thermal desorption process | 10 |
| 3 | US20200324221A1 | Methods and systems for processing a vapor stream from a thermal desorption process | 1 |
Citation counts favour older records simply because they have had longer to accumulate citations inside the searched corpus; treat them as a signal of influence within this dataset, not of current technical importance.
Publication numbers are shown where the record carries one (3 of 3 rows); 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 numbers mean for filing strategy
Three findings stand out once the ranking, trend and IPC composition are read together.
One filer, not a crowded field
The entire ranked assignee list of four companies accounts for all 13 records in scope, and the leader alone holds 10 of those. This is not a fragmented field with many small filers competing for space; it is a field where one entity built an early, dense claim position and the remaining three assignees hold the residual.
A single filing wave, no visible follow-on
Filing activity peaked sharply in 2017 and no ranked filings are recorded through to the 2026 cut-off. Given the roughly 18-month publication lag, recent years are understated, but the absence of any second wave since the peak still marks this as a settled rather than an active filing race.
Separation and centrifuging are dense; drying is thin
Separation processes (B01D) and centrifuges (B04B) between them touch the large majority of records, while drying (F26B) sits at a single record. That gap suggests the mechanical dewatering and separation steps downstream of thermal treatment are where prior claims are thickest, and the thermal/drying step itself is comparatively open.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to thermal treatment of drilling waste, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the claims
Four assignees make up the entire ranked list for this dataset, with filing activity concentrated in a single historical wave rather than spread evenly across the group.
The dominant filer
One assignee holds the large majority of records in this dataset, spanning the thermal desorption and vapour condensation claims that anchor the field. Its position was built in the 2017 filing wave and has not been contested by a comparable filing volume from any other party since.
Small residual filers
The other three ranked assignees each hold a small share of the remaining records, with no recent-year filing activity recorded for any of them. None shows the filing volume needed to challenge the leader's position within this dataset.
US and UK lead office of filing
The United States and United Kingdom are the leading receiving offices, followed by Australia and Canada with two each, and single filings routed through Norway and the WIPO PCT system. This spread points to a technology being protected primarily in major oilfield service markets rather than filed for broad global coverage.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Calaeris Energy & Environment Ltd. | 0 | — |
| TECECOR SAS | 0 | — |
| LWV ASSOCS | 0 | — |
| HELLENES HLDG AS | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a settled core and several thin branches. The next steps depend on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate or first-filer advantage.
Check freedom-to-operate against the leader's claims
With one assignee holding 10 of 13 records, any commercial thermal desorption or vapour condensation design should be checked claim-by-claim against that portfolio before scale-up, particularly around the OWS separation and centrifuge-train configurations described in its filings.
Run a claim comparison in EurekaTest the drying and kiln-residence-time white space
F26B drying and kiln residence-time control show minimal ranked filing activity in this dataset. A claim built around specific residence-time control or heat-integration methods may face a thinner prior art landscape than the separation-side alternatives.
Explore white space in EurekaWatch for a second filing wave
The single 2017 peak with no follow-on wave through the 2026 cut-off is worth monitoring given the publication lag; a new filer entering this space would show up first in recent, uncited applications rather than in the current citation leaders.
Set a monitoring alert in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
In this dataset of 13 records, one assignee holds 10 of them, with the remaining three records split across three other ranked assignees. That makes this a concentrated field with a single dominant filer rather than several competing portfolios of similar size. Anyone assessing freedom-to-operate should focus first on that leading assignee's claims before looking at the smaller filers.
Filing activity peaked in 2017, when 10 of the 13 records in scope were filed, and no ranked filings have been recorded in the years since through the 2026 data cut-off. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the most recent years understate true activity, but the gap since 2017 is large enough to suggest a genuine slowdown rather than just a reporting delay.
Separation processes classified under B01D appear in 69.2% of the 13 records, and centrifuge technology under B04B appears in 38.5%, making these the two most densely claimed technical areas. Soil and contaminated-land reclamation (B09C) follows at 23.1%. Drying (F26B), hydrocarbon refining (C10G), earth drilling (E21B) and water treatment (C02F) each appear in only a single record, indicating much lighter claim coverage on the thermal and drying side of the process.
The clearest gaps sit in the drying and thermal-process-control areas rather than in mechanical separation, since F26B drying and related kiln residence-time and condensate-recovery methods appear in only a small fraction of the 13 records. A first claim in these areas would need to specify a concrete residence-time control method, heat-integration scheme, or condensate-recovery configuration to differentiate from the existing separation-heavy prior art.
US20200324221A1 describes methods and systems for processing an oil/water vapor stream from a thermal desorption process, including routing the vapor stream through a condensing unit, an emulsion surge vessel, and an OWS separation unit built from disc stack and decanting centrifuges. It is one of the more recent filings from the leading assignee in this dataset and sits alongside an earlier WIPO filing with the same title, both of which anchor the vapour condensation and centrifuge-separation claim territory that dominates this landscape. Anyone designing a similar vapor-processing train should review its specific claim language on emulsion surge staging and centrifuge sequencing.
Research Thermal Treatment of Drilling Waste in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole thermal treatment of drilling waste 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.