Solution Gas Flaring and Venting at Alberta Primary Crude Bitumen Operations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In August 2005, the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (EUB) published ST60B-2005: Upstream Petroleum Industry Flaring and Venting Report, which summarizes annual flaring and venting performance from all upstream sources. The report indicated that total solution gas flaring plus venting in Alberta from crude oil and crude bitumen batteries had been reduced to 729 106m3 in 2004 from the 1996 combined flare plus vent baseline volume of 1,808 106m3, a reduction of 59.7%. Of the 729 106m3 flared and vented solution gas, 248 106m3 (34.0%) was attributed to crude bitumen operations, and of this volume, 219 106m3 (88.2%) was the result of venting, with the remaining 29 106m3 (11.8%) being flared. In September 2000, the EUB, as a member of the Flaring and Venting Project Team of the Clean Air Strategic Alliance (CASA), made a commitment to develop a venting management framework that would promote the reduction of venting from crude bitumen operations. In 2002, the resultant framework was included in EUB Draft Guide 60: Upstream Petroleum Industry Flaring, Incinerating, and Venting. Since then, encouraging reductions in venting at primary crude operations have been realized. The EUB is planning to release an updated version of Guide 60 in 2005 that will contain several enhancements designed to further promote reductions of solution gas flaring and venting. This paper discusses the following items as they pertain to crude bitumen operations and primary crude operations in particular: Solution gas flaring and venting performance in Alberta to calendar year-end 2004Best practices respecting solution gas conservationCASA recommended enhancements to Guide 60
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".