MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017507824 · doi:10.2118/153906-pa

A Pilot Carbon Dioxide Test, Hall-Gurney Field, Kansas

2012· article· en· W2017507824 on OpenAlexaff
G.P. Willhite, Alan P. Byrnes, Martin Dubois, Richard Pancake, Jyun‐Syung Tsau, James Daniels, W. A. Flanders

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions
Canadian institutionsCarbon Engineering (Canada)
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsPilot testInjection wellCarbon dioxideFlood mythOil fieldHydrology (agriculture)Produced waterGeologyOil productionEnhanced oil recoveryPilot plantWell stimulationEnvironmental sciencePetroleum engineeringPetroleumReservoir engineeringWaste managementEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringArchaeologyGeographyChemistryPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary A pilot carbon dioxide (CO2) -miscible flood was initiated in the Lansing-Kansas City C formation in the Hall-Gurney Field, Russell County, Kansas. The reservoir zone is an oomoldic limestone located at a depth of approximately 2,900 ft. The pilot consisted of one CO2 injection well and three production wells. Continuous CO2 injection began in December 2003 and continued through June 2005, at which point 16.19 million lbm of CO2 had been injected into the pilot area. Injection was converted to water in June 2005 to reduce operating costs to a break-even level with the expectation that sufficient CO2 was injected to displace the oil bank to the production wells by water injection. By March 2010, 8,736 bbl of oil had been produced from the pilot. Production from wells to the northwest of the pilot region indicated that oil displaced by CO2 injection was produced from five wells outside of the pilot area, to the northwest. Approximately 19,166 bbl of incremental oil was estimated to have been produced from these wells as of March 2010. There was evidence of a directional permeability trend toward the northwest through the pilot region. The majority of the injected CO2 remained in the pilot region, which was maintained at or above the minimum miscibility pressure (MMP). Although the four-well pilot was uneconomical, the estimated oil recovery attributed to the CO2 flood is 27,902 bbl, which is equivalent to a gross CO2 usage of 4.8 Mcf/bbl.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0060.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.253 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations11
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Reservoir Evaluation & EngineeringSame topicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic InteractionsFrench-language works237,207