MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010288730 · doi:10.2118/1109-0024-jpt

Comparing Friction Reducers' Performance in Produced Water from Tight Gas Shales

2009· article· en· W2010288730 on OpenAlexaff
Marcelle L. Ferguson, Michael Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Petroleum Technology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOil and Gas Production Techniques
Canadian institutionsNalco (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydraulic fracturingReducerFracturing fluidPetroleum engineeringOil shaleTight gasProduced waterNatural gasShale gasTight oilDirectional drillingFossil fuelWastewaterGeologyEnvironmental scienceWaste managementEnvironmental engineeringMaterials scienceDrillingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technology Update Natural gas plays a key role in meeting the energy demands of the United States, and the production of natural gas from tight shale formations is expanding rapidly as the demand for clean and efficient energy rises. Slickwater fracturing, a hydraulic fracturing technique whereby a water-based fluid is injected into a well at intense pressures—causing the formation rock to crack, or fracture—is the most commonly used stimulation technique in tight gas reservoirs. Slickwater fracturing treatments involve combining a base fluid with a friction reducer, a polymer that enables faster pumping of the fluid into the formation, and a propping agent, or proppant—a granular substance, such as sand, that is carried into the formation by the fluid and holds the fractures open once the treatment is complete. Each stage of a slickwater-fracturing treatment requires tens of thousands of barrels of fracturing fluid. Furthermore, each slickwater treatment generates a great deal of wastewater, as most of the fracturing fluid will flow back out of the well, and production brines, or produced water, will flow back over the long term. Programs for managing produced water are on the rise, as technology for convenient and economical treatment of wastewater improves. However, often the most cost-effective and convenient use of produced water is to reuse it in subsequent fracturing treatments. Evaluation of friction-reducer performance in the reused water is crucial because produced water from most of the US tight shale formations contains elevated levels of dissolved solids, compared with fresh or tap water. Reusing waters with high levels of total dissolved solids (TDS) can lead to adverse interactions between the friction reducer and the base fluid. The adverse interactions result in elevated treating pressures, and this is often overcome by introducing more of the friction reducer into the mixture, which leads to higher chemical costs for the treatment.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Petroleum TechnologySame topicOil and Gas Production TechniquesFrench-language works237,207