In-Situ Electromagnetic Heating for Hydrocarbon Recovery and Environmental Remediation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Thermal recovery methods, as applied in heavy oil and oil sand deposits, and in environmental remediation, have the common objective of accelerating the hydrocarbon recovery process. Raising the temperature of the host formation reduces the oil and bitumen viscosity, and, in environmental remediation, increases vapor pressure. These effects assist in sweeping the substances to be recovered from the formation when driving agents are externally injected or when autogenously processes come into play. Transferring electromagnetic energy to the deposit is proving to be an effective means of supplying the necessary heat. In this electro-thermal process electromagnetic energy is converted to heat in situ using a system of wellbore electrodes from which currents flow through the formation. By proper choice of electrode location and spacing, considerable control can be exerted over the path taken by the currents and, hence, over the temperature profiles that will develop in the formation. Electro-thermal processes are mostly free of problems related to very low initial formation injectivity, poor heat transfer, and the difficulty of controlling the movement of injected fluids and gases, which have plagued other thermally stimulated recovery processes. Most electro-thermal processes are carried out at power frequencies where the formation acts as a resistive heating element between the various electrodes. At this low frequency, current flow in the formation is primarily via ionic conduction through the water-saturated portion of the interconnected pore spaces in the reservoir. Due to the inherent geometry of current flow emanating from an electrode, current densities and heating rates are highest near the electrodes. Care must be taken lest the water in the immediate vicinity of the electrodes vaporizes and the continuous water path between electrodes is broken. Hence, power frequency heating is generally appropriate when the desired temperatures to be achieved in the formation are lower than the in situ steam temperature. A variation of power frequency heating, termed inductive heating, is achieved by placing the primary winding of a current transformer inside the casing at the bottom of the wellbore. The section of casing adjacent to the transformer acts as a single turn secondary winding. Large induced currents resistively heat the steel of the casing, and heat is transferred to the formation by thermal conduction. By increasing the frequency to multiples of the power frequency, the rate of heating can be proportionately increased. At greater frequencies however, the electrical transmission losses and capital cost of equipment will also increase. In a further variation of power frequency heating, the casing, or a section thereof, is resistively heated by the flow of large currents in the casing itself. The adjacent formation is heated by thermal conduction from the casing. This approach shows promise in the heating of long horizontal wells, with applications, for instance, in processes related to steam assisted gravity drainage or in surface mining of tar sands. All formation heating at power frequency has the inherent advantage of the ready availability of 60 Hz power and the associated apparatus, such as transformers and measurement equipment.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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 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".