MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973383671 · doi:10.2118/120174-ms

The Future of California's Oil Supply

2009· article· en· W1973383671 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Gregory D. Croft, Tadeusz W. Patzek

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Western Regional Meeting · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Geological SurveyCanadian Association of Petroleum Producers
KeywordsOil refineryPetroleumRefineryPetroleum industryEnvironmental scienceCrude oilMiddle EastFossil fuelWaste managementEnvironmental engineeringGeologyEngineeringGeographyArchaeologyPetroleum engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Once an oil exporter, California now depends on imports for more than 60% of its oil supply. This paper examines the oil production outlook for each of California's major oil sources, including California itself. Oil production trends, published geological and engineering reports, and proposed developments in California's supply area are reviewed to define supply trends, especially for the medium-to-heavy, sour crudes that are processed in California's refineries. Refinery upgrading capacity is already highly developed in California, thus it is assumed that a competitive advantage in heavy, sour crudes will continue, although refining heavy oil releases more carbon dioxide. About a quarter of California's imports are from Alaska, the rest from foreign sources including Saudi Arabia, Ecuador and Iraq. Before foreign sources became so important, California's refining industry processed California's own crudes and Alaska's North Slope crude. Like those crudes, oil from northern Saudi Arabia, southeast Iraq, and Ecuador is also sour and medium to heavy, ranging from 16 to 35° API and from 2 to more than 3% sulfur by weight. By far the most important sour crude development in California's supply area is Saudi Arabia's 900,000 BOPD Manifa project, originally slated for completion in 2011 but now facing delays. Manifa contains oil that ranges from 26 to 31° API and from 2.8 to 3.7% sulfur. Over the longer term, Alaska will continue to play an important supply role if the Chuckchi and Beaufort Seas live up to expectations. Middle East production is not increasing, yet oil cargoes from the Middle East have to pass growing Asian markets to reach California. Alaska and Mexico also supply oil to the Pacific Basin, but are facing production declines. The effect of rising Asian demand on Pacific Basin oil markets is already visible, with significant amounts of oil coming to California from Atlantic Basin sources such as Angola, Brazil, and Argentina. The US West Coast pipeline system is separate from the integrated East Coast, Gulf Coast and Midwest system, so energy security issues for the West Coast may differ from those of the country as a whole. There are policy options that could affect California's oil supply security, including increased oil development in Alaska or offshore California, development of additional oil pipeline outlets on Canada's Pacific Coast or substituting natural gas for oil if possible. All of these policy options are currently the subject of political debate.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Western Regional MeetingSame topicGlobal Energy and Sustainability ResearchFrench-language works237,207