MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974846817 · doi:10.2118/165545-ms

Surfactant-Steam Process: An Innovative Enhanced Heavy Oil Recovery Method for Thermal Applications

2013· article· en· W1974846817 on OpenAlexafffundabout
K. Zeidani, Suraj Gupta

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Heavy Oil Conference-Canada · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsCenovus Energy (Canada)
FundersCenovus Energy
KeywordsPulmonary surfactantPetroleum engineeringEnhanced oil recoverySteam injectionSurface tensionSteam-assisted gravity drainageProcess (computing)WettingProcess engineeringCapillary actionMaterials scienceChemical engineeringThermalEnvironmental scienceChemistryPulp and paper industryOil sandsComputer scienceEngineeringThermodynamicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Surfactant-steam process (SSP) is a novel and potentially cost-effective process that utilizes a small amount of surfactant co- injected with steam to enhance the oil recovery of steam assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) well pairs. The mechanism of this process involves interfacial tension (IFT) reduction, reservoir rock wettability alteration, oil relative permeability enhancement, and in-situ emulsification. SSP is expected to result in oil rate acceleration, steam-to-oil ratio (SOR) reduction and enhanced ultimate oil recovery factor. Analogous enhancement is expected if the SSP is combined with other steam-based or steam-solvent processes. This paper provides an introduction to this concept and presents a unique protocol that has been developed for screening surfactants for co-injection with steam in SAGD process. In particular, the paper presents a scientific approach to surfactant selection for SSP applications, describes the conditions in which the surfactants needs to be deployed within the reservoir, and also predicts the potential synergies if use of different classes of surfactants is made. Novel experimental design on different aspects of surfactant-steam phase behavior indicates the optimum surfactant concentrations for field trial applications. Lab testing of selected surfactants on typical Canadian oilsands sand packs shows an improved incremental oil recovery factor (RF) in the range of 6 to 16% (for different tested surfactants) compared to a SAGD base case. SSP simulations were conducted for one of the surfactants that were tested in the lab. The simulation results indicate that this particular surfactant on average accelerated the oil rate by 15% in the first 30 months of SSP operation, increased the ultimate oil RF by 10%, and reduced the cumulative steam-to-oil ratio (CSOR) by almost 11% relative to a SAGD base case. In addition, a sensitivity analysis was conducted to investigate the effect of surfactant concentration co-injected with steam. The simulation results suggest that there is an optimum concentration for a given surfactant that needs to be explored through lab investigations and field trials. It is evident that once the SSP is successfully developed, the use of surfactant promises to improve environmental performance and project economics of the in-situ oilsands recovery.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.244 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations44
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Heavy Oil Conference-CanadaSame topicEnhanced Oil Recovery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207