MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999338910 · doi:10.2118/162549-ms

Optimization of CO2 Flooding Schemes for Unlocking Resources from Tight Oil Formations

2012· article· en· W1999338910 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Canadian Unconventional Resources Conference · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaPetroleum Technology Research Centre
KeywordsFlooding (psychology)Petroleum engineeringWater floodingPermeability (electromagnetism)Enhanced oil recoveryEnvironmental scienceDrop (telecommunication)GeologyChemistryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper, techniques have been developed to experimentally and numerically evaluate performance of waterflooding and CO2 flooding for unlocking oil resources from tight formations. Experimentally, core samples collected from a tight formation with a permeability range of 0.081–0.790 mD are used to conduct a series of coreflooding experiments. The performance of four flooding schemes, i.e., waterflooding, near-miscible CO2 flooding, miscible CO2 flooding, and water-alterneating-CO2 flooding, are evaluated by the coreflooding experiments. The continuous CO2 flooding processes under either miscible or near-miscible condition lead to a superior oil recovery performance in comparison with the waterflooding process. Furthermore, the miscible water-alternating-CO2 flooding in tight cores leads to a higher recovery efficiency with less CO2 consumption compared to the continuous CO2 flooding processes. Most importantly, in the miscible water-alternating-CO2 flooding process, it is found that the pressure drop increases rapidly when water is injected, but decreases dramatically when CO2 is injected. This indicates that CO2 injection is able to significantly improve the fluid injectivity in tight formations. In general, the miscible water-alterneating-CO2 flooding process is found to be the most favorable flooding scheme for tight formations in terms of both recovery efficiency and fluid injectivity. Theoretically, numerical simulation is performed to match the experimental measurements obtained in the different flooding schemes. There exists a generally good agreement between the experimental measurements and simulated results for all the flooding schemes examined. The tuned numerical model is then employed to optimize the production pressure in the continuous CO2 flooding process and the water-alternating-gas (WAG) ratios in the miscible water-alternating-CO2 (CO2-WAG) flooding process, respectively. It is found that the optimum producing pressure in the continuous CO2 flooding process can be set as the minimum miscibility pressure (MMP) of the tight oil sample, while the optimum WAG ratio falls in the range of 4:1 to 8:1.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.529
Threshold uncertainty score0.840

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.204 · 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