MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056808907 · doi:10.2523/iptc-10944-ms

Acid Gas Injection Facilities for Gas Disposal at the Shute Creek Treating Facility

2005· article· en· W2056808907 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert A. Wall, Daryl Kenefake

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Petroleum Technology Conference · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDispose patternWaste managementEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Acid Gas Injection (AGI) facilities have been constructed and are currently being commissioned at the ExxonMobil Shute Creek Treating Facility in Southwestern Wyoming, United States. The successful startup of the Shute Creek AGI facilities will demonstrate the feasibility of using AGI compression, liquefaction, and pumping technology on large scale projects to dispose of waste acid gases. Overview This paper discusses the purpose of AGI facilities at Shute Creek and provides an overview of the equipment and processes implemented in the Shute Creek facilities which include acid gas compression, water removal, liquefaction, and pumping. Commissioning of facilities on CO2 and safety considerations of the AGI facilities are also discussed. This paper has been prepared for presentation at the International Petroleum Technology Conference (IPTC) in Doha, Qatar scheduled for November 21–23, 2005. Background Purpose of AGI. The AGI facilities at Shute Creek Treating Facility are intended to replace aging Claus sulfur recovery units. Installation of the AGI facilities will eliminate bottlenecks and avoid downtime associated with the sulfur recovery units. In addition, the AGI facilities allow Shute Creek Treating Facility to exit a historically weak Sulfur market and reduce SO2 emissions. The AGI facilities at Shute Creek consist of centrifugal compressors, centrifugal pumps, coolers, separation equipment, pipelines and wells to dehydrate and inject acid gas generated in the gas sweetening process. An overall block flow diagram of the Shute Creek AGI facilities is shown in Figure 1. In conjunction with the installation of the AGI facilities, Cogeneration facilities were also installed to generate steam and power for plant consumption. Unique Characteristics of the Shute Creek AGI Facilities. There are currently about 80 AGI plants in operation throughout the world. Most of the operating facilities are located in Canada and the United States; however, about 10% of operating AGI facilities are located outside of North America. Most AGI facilities constructed to date consist of reciprocating compressors discharging directly into injection wells. AGI facilities in North America typically have design capacities of less than 5 MCFD. The Shute Creek AGI facilities are anticipated to be the largest in the United States with a design capacity of 65 MCFD of acid gas composed primarily of Hydrogen Sulfide, H2S and Carbon-Dioxide, CO2.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0390.004

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations10
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Petroleum Technology ConferenceSame topicReservoir Engineering and Simulation MethodsFrench-language works237,207