MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086121976 · doi:10.2118/0808-0087-jpt

Tar-Sands Drilling-Waste Management: A Clean Solution

2008· article· en· W2086121976 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Karen Bybee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Petroleum Technology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOil sandsAsphaltDrillingSteam-assisted gravity drainageDrilling fluidGeologytar (computing)Waste managementEnvironmental sciencePetroleum engineeringMaterials scienceEngineeringMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article, written by Assistant Technology Editor Karen Bybee, contains highlights of paper SPE 112368, "Tar Sands Drilling Waste Management: A Clean Solution," by C. Nilsen, SPE, K. McCosh, SPE, and M. Kapila, SPE, M-I SWACO, originally prepared for the 2008 IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Orlando, Florida, 4-6 March. The paper has not been peer reviewed. The full-length paper presents novel technology for treatment of tar-sands drilling waste generated from steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) and other tar-sands drilling operations. The continuous treatment process is based on hot-water addition, mixing, and separation techniques to reduce the viscosity and specific gravity of the bitumen to separate it from the sand. Treatment of cuttings with light to heavy bitumen contamination has shown this treatment method to be a simple and effective means of producing clean sand and recovering the bitumen component. Introduction Tar sands are sandstone formations saturated with bitumen or heavy oil. The sandstone is thought to remain water-wet in the formation and can be unconsolidated, with the sand grains held together mainly by the bitumen. Alternatively, the sandstone can be consolidated, with silica or carbonate cement holding the sand together and bitumen filling the remaining voids. The bitumen deposits were formed in the geological past from crude oil that migrated to the surface of the Earth. Weathering and chemical and biological processes resulted in loss of the light fractions, leaving behind the very-viscous, solid or semisolid heavy fractions. Typically, bitumen has a density greater than 960 kg/m3. Over the millennia, weather and geologic action covered the semisolid bitumen with layers of soil, and today, most bitumen and heavy-oil production comes from deposits buried more than 400 m below the surface of the Earth. Bitumen deposits are found in more than 70 countries worldwide, but 75% occur in Canada and Venezuela. In Canada, most of the oil sands are located in three major areas in northern Alberta, which hold at least 175 billion bbl of recoverable bitumen. Where the heavy oil is thin it can be pumped out of the sands with progressing-cavity pumps (PCPs). To increase recovery, cold heavy-oil production with sand also is used in which sand is encouraged to enter the well by aggressive perforation and swabbing strategies. Removal of the sand with the heavy oil increases the formation permeability, expands the high-permeability zone as sand is produced, and prevents plugging of the near-wellbore region by asphaltenes or fines.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.381
Threshold uncertainty score0.621

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Petroleum TechnologySame topicDrilling and Well EngineeringFrench-language works237,207