MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2248951080 · doi:10.2118/174411-ms

Feasibility of Wider Well Spacing With Solvent Aided Process: A Field Test Based Investigation

2015· article· en· W2248951080 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Canada Heavy Oil Technical Conference · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsCenovus Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSteam injectionInjectorPetroleum engineeringSolventThermalWork (physics)Field (mathematics)AsphaltProcess (computing)Process engineeringPlane (geometry)Capital costEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceMaterials scienceGeologyEngineeringMechanical engineeringChemistryGeometryMathematicsElectrical engineeringPhysicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The objective of the investigation was to establish from a field trial feasibility of employing fewer wells for SAGD projects using solvent co-injection. An implicit issue in in situ recovery process of bitumen or extra-heavy is the requirement of heat which in the case of SAGD translates into the use of expensive steam. Gupta and Gittins (2006) have previously described a solvent co-injection based improvement to SAGD called Solvent Aided Process (SAP) which combines the benefit of using steam with solvents. As Edmunds et al. (2010) describe, over the years, significant work has been done to show the effectiveness of SAP in improving the energy efficiency of SAGD. SAGD is carried out in repeated patterns of side-by-side horizontal well-pairs, injector and producer lying approximately in a vertical plane, with these planes spaced from each other at a distance known as well-spacing. An optimal well spacing balances well capital cost against steam related capital and operating costs. SAP, as previously postulated (Gupta et al., 2006), allows this spacing to be larger (as much as by 100%, depending on reservoir conditions) requiring fewer well pairs to drain a given reservoir pool. To test the hypothesis Cenovus Energy conducted a field test at its Christina Lake thermal project, starting in 2009. The test location was specifically chosen to be in an isolated region which allowed for a larger lateral development of the vapor chamber without being intersected by any of the neighboring SAGD patterns. Presented in this paper are the results of this field test showing the expected production enhancement and reduction of steam to oil ratio. Furthermore, the results are interpreted in light of the allowance of a larger well spacing. The field results presented in this work confirm the feasibility of employing wider well spacing with SAP compared with steam-alone process or SAGD. This finding will be of interest to the wider industrial community as it holds the promise to improve the economics of the oil sands and similar projects. The findings of this investigation add to the knowledge base information related to well-spacing that has a significant impact on the economics of SAGD/SAP based projects.

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)0.001
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 score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.229 · 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