MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010156195 · doi:10.2118/01-01-das

Some Recent Developments in SAGD

2001· article· en· W2010156195 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Petroleum Technology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSteam-assisted gravity drainagePetroleum engineeringOil sandsSteam injectionWaste managementAsphaltEnvironmental scienceEngineeringEnvironmental engineeringMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD) is being used increasingly for the recovery of bitumen and heavy oil in Canada. Four large SAGD projects are under construction in Athabasca and two others have been announced. These projects are expected to produce bitumen economically and with a recovery greater than 50%. Productivity will be close to 1000 B/d per well pair. There are also many successful smaller, and growing, projects and pilots in Athabasca, Cold Lake and Lloydminster. Because of the rising costs of fuel it is desirable to reduce steam requirements for SAGD. Means for doing this include cogeneration of steam and power, alternate fuels, choosing better reservoirs, improved heat recovery, and the newer related processes, SAGP and Vapex. In Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD)(1), Steam and Gas Push (SAGP)(2), and Vapour Extraction (Vapex)(3) the oil isduced in viscosity and produced by gravity drainage to horizontalells placed low in the reservoir. As the oil drains, the vacatedreservoir pores are filled largely with gas/steam in SAGD, steam lus non-condensible gas in SAGP and solvent vapour plus noncondensible gas in Vapex. A common feature of the three processes is that the use of long horizontal wells combined with the reduced viscosity of the produced oil allows the production of oil with essentially no by-pass of free gas. In suitable reservoirs economic rates are achieved whereas with conventional wells or without adequate viscosity reduction there would be intolerable gas coning. High recoveries are obtained because of the systematic nature of the drainage. Since the author's earlier paper in this series(4) there has been a great increase in the interest in this subject and there are now many substantial field projects in various stages of planning and construction. Advanced Commercial SAGD Projects In Athabasca SAGD is at the stage where several major field projects to recover bitumen from Athabasca are either under construction or about to be. In most cases, the reservoirs are thicker than those that have been exploited previously and superior results are anticipated. The initial investment for large SAGD projects is of the order of $10,000 Canadian per B/d of capacity and the Steam Oil Ratio (SOR) is about 1.9 to 2.5. The supply costs for bitumen will probably be less than $10 Canadian per barrel, including return but excluding the fuel cost. This important cost is discussed later. Generally product lifting from the reservoir is by natural flow, a technique first demonstrated by Sceptre Resources and now used in several of the pilots. Four large commercial SAGD projects are described below. A recovery of over 50﹪ of the oil in place is expected in each. Figure 1 shows the approximate locations of the projects discussed below. Alberta Energy Company (AEC) Foster Creek (T70 R4 W4M)(5) This is a commercial expansion of AEC's pilot project, which produces 2,000 B/d from three SAGD well pairs.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.945

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.215 · 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