Model for CO<sub>2</sub> Leakage Including Multiple Geological Layers and Multiple Leaky Wells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Geological storage of carbon dioxide (CO2) is likely to be an integral component of any realistic plan to reduce anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. In conjunction with large-scale deployment of carbon storage as a technology, there is an urgent need for tools which provide reliable and quick assessments of aquifer storage performance. Previously, abandoned wells from over a century of oil and gas exploration and production have been identified as critical potential leakage paths. The practical importance of abandoned wells is emphasized by the correlation of heavy CO2 emitters (typically associated with industrialized areas) to oil and gas producing regions in North America. Herein, we describe a novel framework for predicting the leakage from large numbers of abandoned wells, forming leakage paths connecting multiple subsurface permeable formations. The framework is designed to exploit analytical solutions to various components of the problem and, ultimately, leads to a grid-free approximation to CO2 and brine leakage rates, as well as fluid distributions. We apply our model in a comparison to an established numerical solverforthe underlying governing equations. Thereafter, we demonstrate the capabilities of the model on typical field data taken from the vicinity of Edmonton, Alberta. This data set consists of over 500 wells and 7 permeable formations. Results show the flexibility and utility of the solution methods, and highlight the role that analytical and semianalytical solutions can play in this important problem.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".