MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015538666 · doi:10.2118/152012-ms

Public Protection and Gas Monitoring; Its Impact on the Community, Environment and the Bottom Line

2012· article· en· W2015538666 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elie Daher

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOil and Gas Production Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelocationProduction (economics)BusinessEngineeringEnvironmental planningComputer scienceEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract During typical well operations, production activities or processing plants, especially in sour environments, a barrier between the site and populated areas such as towns and villages is often overlooked. Operators and contractors are focusing on protecting site personnel while relying on simple general public guidelines to alert the neighboring communities. While the industry is seeing great progress towards a digital oilfield concept where monitoring of production and optimization of flow rates and fluids are remotely actuated to reduce the burden of manning the various oilfields and maximizing production of the reservoir, these concepts did not filter to the safety management of sites and to the public protection procedures that would apply on these sites. A recent technology failure on March 6th 2011 at the Karachaganak Field resulted in a fatal outcome1. This incident occurred in March 2011, where one employee died and a second employee was found in a nearby hanger in a critical condition. Both employees were conducting cleaning works at the time of the incident. Individual protection gear, a gas indicator and special safety instructions all failed to save the life of the contractor's employee from Karachaganak's fatal atmosphere during the technology failure. Village resident and leader of the village campaign for relocation, stated: "In accordance with official documents, in the event of an emergency at a well site, a plume of hydrogen sulfide could reach the village within 10–30 minutes, depending on the direction of the wind. The contractor is only obliged to notify village residents via a signal from a special tower located in the village and it is local authorities who must ensure the evacuation of residents. How this is to be conducted in such a short period of time remains unclear. Moreover, Berezovka residents themselves do not know what to do in such a situation; and what if an emission occurs at night? It is disturbing to think of the consequences that may occur in the event of an H2S situation". Another technical failure in Canada in 2009 caused the release of 30,000 cubic meters of gas containing 6200ppm of H2S. The nearby community was not alerted until six hours after the release causing massive concern over procedures for public protection2. This paper discusses lessons learned from the digital oilfield concepts and its applicability to remote safety monitoring and safety processes. In addition, suggestions for improvements and coordination with local villages and their authorities are also discussed.

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 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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.920
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOil and Gas Production TechniquesFrench-language works237,207