Recovery of Bitumen in Heterogeneous Carbonate through Application of Warm Solvent
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Alberta contains significant bitumen resource volumes in heterogeneous carbonate formations. Recovery of this bitumen requires reduction of oil viscosity, coupled with drainage of low viscosity oil to high permeability production pathways. Oil viscosity reduction is most commonly accomplished through heat, via steam injection into the reservoir. While steam leads to fast drainage of oil from high permeable secondary porosity, access to the matrix is more difficult. Imbibition of water (steam condensate) can potentially lead to some access to the rock matrix, but wettability is still not well-defined in these systems. This work considers the results of several core flooding studies whereby solvent is used to recover bypassed oil in the carbonate pore matrix. Solvent soaking tests are presented, validating the potential for solvent processes to mobilize bitumen at low and intermediate temperatures. Subsequently the results are provided for full diameter carbonate cores, which were first exposed to steam, and then were circulated in steam/solvent and solvent with varying temperatures. A process is described, whereby a heated reservoir is contacted by solvent while it cools. The combination of initial heat (elevated mass transfer) and subsequent cooling (elevated solvent solubility) leads to significant incremental oil production beyond that of steam alone. The application of solvent as a post-steam recovery process has considerable potential for increasing oil recovery by accessing previous bypassed oil within the carbonate matrix.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".