Application of a Reverse-Emulsion-Breaker at a SAGD Pilot Plant in Northern Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract For an extended period of time water-quality problem was experienced from the water leg of the primary treater, so-called high-temperature separator (HTS), which resulted in limited water-disposal in a SAGD facility near Fort McMurray, Alberta. A reverse emulsion breaker was recommended based on bottle testing data and a chemical application program was developed to clarify the produced water and to remove this major bottleneck of the system operation. Bottle testing a wide range of reverse emulsion breakers with the fresh reverse emulsion from this SAGD facility resulted in two products that were plant tested at various locations in the plant and correlated with the chemical performance. During lab testing the quality of the water resolved from the reverse emulsion was determined both qualitatively (visual observation with a ranking card) and quantitatively (with a turbidity meter) for a range of chemicals, chemical dosages and agitation levels. The method of chemical application has also proven to be as important as chemical itself. Chemical injection directly upstream of the HTS did not perform well, but moving it farther upstream from the HTS produced clean water within several hours from the commencement of the plant test. The percentage of water recycled from the produced water tank into steam generation was increased from 20% to 80%, thus not only removing the bottleneck but also presenting huge savings to the facility. It was demonstrated that working together with the SAGD operation staff to modify the chemical program would give mutual benefits to both parties involved.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".