MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011162509 · doi:10.2118/0812-0050-jpt

Production Method for Methane Hydrate Sees Scientific Success

2012· article· en· W2011162509 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 Petroleum Technology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMethaneHydrateNatural gasPetroleum engineeringClathrate hydrateEnvironmental scienceFossil fuelEnergy sourceWaste managementGeologyEngineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The testing flare burns brightly during a methane hydrate production test of the Ignik Sikumi No. 1 well on the Alaskan North Slope. A production method that could unlock large reserves of methane hydrate in sand-dominated reservoirs was tested successfully from a scientific and operational standpoint in a recent research experiment on the Alaskan North Slope (ANS). The experiment was conducted by the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) of the United States Department of Energy (DOE) in partnership with ConocoPhillips and Japan Oil, Gas, and Metals National Corporation. A proof-of-concept test was conducted between 15 February and 10 April at the Ignik Sikumi No. 1 well in the Prudhoe Bay field operated by ConocoPhillips. The production technique featured the injection of carbon dioxide (CO2) to exchange and release methane (CH4) from the hydrate, a method developed through laboratory collaboration between the University of Bergen in Norway and ConocoPhillips. The released gas was then produced by means of reservoir depressurization. “The test objective was to perform injection and flow-back from a single well to validate that the CO2/CH4 exchange mechanism demonstrated in laboratory tests will occur in a reservoir of natural methane hydrates,” said Ray Boswell, technology manager for gas hydrates at the NETL. It was the first field-level trial of a production method involving the exchange of CO2 with the methane molecules contained in a methane hydrate structure. “The focus of the test, including the design of the well, was on the technical feasibility of this new technology, rather than an attempt to produce gas at commercial rates,” Boswell said. CO2 Mixture Injected in Reservoir The Ignik Sikumi well test was equipped with downhole fiber-optic distributed temperature and acoustic sensing, three downhole pressure gauges, and full surface instrumentation, including high-resolution in-line gas chromatography. Over a 13-day period, a carbon dioxide/nitrogen mixture was successfully injected into the 30-ft-thick reservoir interval, saturated with methane hydrate, without loss of injectivity. This was followed by a production stage in which the pressure was held above the stability pressure of the in-situ methane hydrate. CH4 was produced during this stage, and initial data analyses indicated that CO2 exchange was achieved. Ongoing analyses of the extensive datasets acquired at the field site are under way to determine the overall efficiency of simultaneous CO2 storage/CH4 production from the reservoir. As part of the demonstration, the depressurization phase of the test extended for 30 days. The longest previous field test of depressurization to extract gas from hydrate lasted 6 days as part of a Japanese-Canadian testing program at the Mallik well in Canada’s Northwest Territories during 2007 to 2008.

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)0.003
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.312
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.261 · 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