MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048403548 · doi:10.2118/113283-ms

A Critical Review of the Status of SAGD: Where Are We and What Is Next?

2008· review· en· W2048403548 on OpenAlex
Al Muatasim M. Al-Bahlani, Tayfun Babadagli

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetroleum engineeringProcess (computing)Residual oilScale (ratio)AsphaltOil sandsSteam-assisted gravity drainageFossil fuelLead (geology)Process engineeringEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceBiochemical engineeringEngineeringGeologyWaste managementMaterials sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract With around 7 trillion barrels reserves and recent increase in oil demand, there is no doubt that there would be tremendous effort on the development of heavy-oil/bitumen (HO-B) reservoirs in the next decades. Yet the in-situ recovery of HO-B is still not a simple process and there are many technical challenges accompanied with it. Two major techniques, namely thermal and miscible, have been considered in the HO-B development, along with several other auxiliary methods (chemical, gas, electromagnetic heating etc.) for different well configurations, steam assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) being the most popular among others. Miscible techniques did not yet go to a high commercial level, while thermal techniques have by far a stable foundation in the industry. Despite remarkable amount of laboratory experiments and computational studies on the thermal techniques for HO-B, especially SAGD, there was no extensive and critical literature review of the knowledge gained over almost three decades. We believe that a critical review of the status of the SAGD process will fill the gap by shedding light on the deficiencies and limitations of the process, further development areas, and new research topics. Specific attention, in this paper, was given to (a) the effect of geological environment on the physics of the process, (b) evaluation of the laboratory scale procedure and results (reasons of residual oil saturation, is it well configuration or pore scale dynamics?) and the reasons of the inconsistency between the lab and field scale performances, (c) problems faced in numerical modelling (capturing the physics of the process, relative permeability curves, dynamics of gravity controlled counter-current flow), (d) evaluation of the pilot and commercial level field applications, and (e) operational and technical challenges. It is believed that a good compilation of the records produced over three decades will constitute a useful reference for the industry and academic people.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.679
Threshold uncertainty score0.800

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Quick stats

Citations97
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnhanced Oil Recovery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207