Study and Demonstration of a Process to Extract Bitumen from Utah Tar Sand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The successful implementation of a demonstration scale, continuous flow, modified hot water process to extract bitumen from Utah tar sands has potentially significant economic implications to the future of mineable hydrocarbon production in the United States. In 1999 and 2000 a 20-ton per hour demonstration facility was operated to definitively test all aspects of a proposed hot water extraction process to extract bitumen from the Asphalt Ridge tar sand deposit near Vernal, Utah. Detailed analysis was performed on oil-water emulsions, solvent losses to rejected solids, recycle water quality and bitumen extraction efficiency. Although the process concept is similar to Canadian oil sand operations, a fundamental difference between the Asphalt Ridge demonstration process and commercial Canadian operations is the production of dry tailings. This area of the process also required detailed investigation and optimization. The demonstration facility was operated as three processes: extraction, froth treatment and refining. Although these areas were not operated in concert due to available equipment sizes, each area was operated successfully to equilibrium and for significant time thereafter to prove steady state operation. The demonstration facility operation culminated in a 12 day, uninterrupted operation of the extraction process in September 2000. The results of the study have concluded the demonstration process was operated long enough to achieve steady state conditions with an economic quantity of solvent losses and high bitumen extraction efficiency. Significant amounts of data were collected with which to design a full-scale extraction and froth treatment operation.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".