MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108955118 · doi:10.2118/90255-pa

Secondary Porosity and Permeability of Coal vs. Gas Composition and Pressure

2006· article· en· W2108955118 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCoal Properties and Utilization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPorosityCoalbed methaneCoalMethanePermeability (electromagnetism)Natural gasShrinkagePetroleum engineeringGas compositionEnhanced coal bed methane recoveryHydraulic fracturingEnvironmental scienceCoal miningMineralogyGeologySoil scienceGeotechnical engineeringChemistryMaterials scienceWaste managementComposite materialEngineeringThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary We have been investigating the sequestration of atmospheric pollutants by injection into coal seams while at the same time enhancing hydrocarbon productivity by displacement of methane with pollutants. Our effort is one of several field-based research efforts into CO2 storage in coal seams that are currently operating in Canada (Mavor et al. 2004), China (Robinson et al. 2004), Japan (Nago and Komaki 2004), and Poland (Van Bergen et al. 2004). During the course of our field measurements, we have been using single-well injection, soak, and production tests to collect data required to understand and predict enhanced coalbed methane (ECBM) recovery potential and sequestration capacity. We found that changing the composition of the gas sorbed into the coal changes the porosity and permeability of the coal natural-fracture system owing to gas-content changes, which cause matrix swelling or shrinkage due to relative adsorption of different gases. We collected sufficient information to develop a method for predicting the permeability and porosity of a coalbed as a function of the secondary porosity system (SPS) pressure and the gas content and composition of the primary porosity system (PPS). The method uses data from injection/falloff tests with water and/or a weaker adsorbing gas (WAG) than CH4 and a stronger adsorbing gas (SAG) than CH4. Estimates of effective permeability to gas and water obtained from these tests are used with an iterative computation procedure subject to constraints to solve for equivalent SPS porosity and absolute permeability at atmospheric pressure. Once calibrated, the model can be used to predict a coalbed's permeability and porosity as a function of injection pressure and injected-fluid composition, which in turn are used to predict injection performance. The model is applicable to production forecasts to account for SPS permeability and porosity changes as reservoir pressure declines with changes in gas composition. This paper describes the new model and discusses well-test procedures to obtain the data required for model calibration. Also included are coal property estimates resulting from Alberta Medicine River (Manville) coal core and test data and an example model calibration.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.495

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.208 · 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