MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028277555 · doi:10.2118/0910-0024-jpt

ESPs Successfully Meet Challenges of CO2 Use in Tertiary Oil Recovery

2010· article· en· W2028277555 on OpenAlex
Lawrence H. Burleigh

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Petroleum Technology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOil and Gas Production Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial liftPetroleum engineeringWater injection (oil production)Steam injectionEnhanced oil recoveryOil fieldEnvironmental scienceSubmersible pumpFossil fuelNatural gasGeologyEngineeringWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technology Update Numerous operators are using CO2 injection as a means of significantly extending the oil life of a reservoir. Most oil fields initially produce without artificial lift (AL). Then as the reservoir pressure depletes some form of AL is employed. In many cases, secondary-recovery techniques, such as drilling horizontal producers or initiating water injection, are employed. Tertiary-recovery methods, which include thermal recovery and gas injection, can further expand recoverable reserves and extend field life. Each of these new tactics has presented learning curves for the operator and electrical submersible pump (ESP) provider. The CO2 learning curves are shrinking as the knowledge base grows. Success stories are growing as well. A major producer in Saskatchewan, Canada, has applied and refined miscible CO2 injection within a program of water-alternating-gas (WAG) injection that has added 155 million bbl of oil reserves and 25 years of life to the field. This operator has also implemented a program of CO2 sequestration. At the Rangely field in northwestern Colorado, CO2 injection has been incorporated into the WAG process. The injection program has added 114 million bbl of oil to recoverable reserves. Because of the high produced-fluid volumes resulting from enhanced-recovery methods involving water and gas injection, AL by means of electrical submersible pumps (ESPs) is often applied. ESP-System Challenges Posed By CO2 Injection Several potential problems affecting pump run life and performance can occur when an ESP is installed in a producing well where CO2 is present (Fig. 1). Carbonic acid attacks Asphaltene buildup Aromatic attacks on elastomers Gas impedance of pump performance Carbonate scaling Carbonic acid. The injected CO2 when mixed with water can form carbonic acid. This acid will attack the iron present in carbon-steel materials in the pump, tubing, and casing. If the fluid speed is low enough, the newly formed iron carbonate (siderite) will remain, creating a protective layer. The mechanical integrity of the component will not be degraded. If the fluid speed is great enough, the iron carbonate layer will be removed. This uncovers a new layer containing iron for the carbonic acid to attack. This mechanism will degrade the mechanical integrity of a carbon-steel component. CO2 corrosion exhibits itself uniquely from H2S, dissolved oxygen, chloride, or galvanic corrosion. Aggressive CO2 corrosion will create deep pits. These pits generally have sharp edges and rounded bottoms. As these pits deepen they will expose internal components to the well fluid. The corrosion pits commonly occur on the outside diameter of the housing material, but occasionally occur on the inside diameter of the pump housings (Fig. 2).

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.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.401
Threshold uncertainty score0.498

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.204 · 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