MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2012307662 · doi:10.2118/08-04-29

Experimental Investigation of CO-Based VAPEX for Recovery of Heavy Oils and Bitumen

2008· article· en· W2012307662 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.
aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Canadian Petroleum Technology · 2008
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Établissements canadiensHusky Energy (Canada)University of Calgary
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPropaneMethaneAsphaltSolventHydrocarbonViscosityPetroleum engineeringWork (physics)Extraction (chemistry)Waste managementChemical engineeringMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceChemistryPulp and paper industryOrganic chemistryThermodynamicsGeologyComposite materialEngineering

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Vapour extraction (VAPEX) has recently emerged as an attractive alternative to thermal recovery techniques for the huge resources of heavy oils and bitumen available in Canada, the USA and Venezuela. The current version of VAPEX relies on the injection of light hydrocarbon gases for reducing the oil viscosity. The economic viability of this process is very sensitive to the cost of injected gases in relation to the selling price of the produced oil. One attractive option for reducing the cost of injected gases appears to be the use of CO2 as a major component of the injected solvent. This modification will utilize mixtures of CO2 and propane as the solvent instead of the currently popular mixtures of methane and propane. Since CO2 is significantly more soluble in heavy oils than methane, it is likely that such mixtures will provide greater reduction in viscosity compared to equivalent mixtures of methane and propane. In this work, methane-propane and CO2-propane were investigated as solvents for the VAPEX process for in situ recovery of heavy oil and bitumen. Twelve laboratory experiments were performed with two types of oil [4,500 mPas and 18,600 mPas at 294.15 K (21 ºC)]. These tests were performed in a partially-scaled physical model at different operating pressures ranging from 1,469.3 kPa (200 psig) to 4,227.2 kPa (600 psig) and were designed to compare the performance of methane-based solvents with that of CO2-based solvents. The main conclusion from this study is that the CO2-based VAPEX process can be more cost effective and environmentally friendly than the conventional VAPEX process. Introduction With the decline of conventional oil reserves, a major thrust of oil producers throughout the world is on the exploitation of heavy oil and bitumen reserves. The magnitude of these resources worldwide is about six trillion barrels of oil-in-place; six times total conventional reserves(1), and is likely to be the future source of energy. The majority of these resources are located in Venezuela, Canada and the United States(2). In most cases, conventional recovery methods cannot be implemented in heavy oil and bitumen reservoirs due to the high viscosity(3) of the oil. The high viscosity rules out primary production in many reservoirs, and even in lower viscosity reservoirs, the primary recovery is less than 10% of the original oil-in-place (OOIP)(4, 5). The Steam-Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD)(6, 7) process has gained tremendous popularity in the industry for its usefulness in producing high viscosity heavy oil and bitumen. In this process, the heat is injected into the reservoir by injecting steam through a horizontal well; steam condenses at the boundary of a growing steam saturated zone and heats the oil. Consequently, the viscosity is lowered and the hot oil drains down under the influence of gravity into another horizontal well located near the bottom of the formation. Even though thermal methods are successful in exploiting these resources, they often suffer from low energy efficiency due partly to heat losses to the cap and base rock.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,542
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,345

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0020,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,019
Tête enseignante GPT0,246
Écart entre enseignants0,227 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle