MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2296956841

CO₂-EOR: Security of Storage

2015· article· en· W2296956841 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter Olden, Eric Mackay, Gillian Elizabeth Pickup, Robert Stewart, Gareth Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueERA · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolubilityPetroleum engineeringEnhanced oil recoveryHydrocarbonPhase (matter)Geochemical modelingEnvironmental scienceGeologyChemistryGeotechnical engineeringGroundwaterOrganic chemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preliminary studies from CO2-EOR in Canada have suggested that, in CO2-EOR settings, solubility trapping takes place within both aqueous and hydrocarbon phases. As such it is postulated that CO2-EOR may provide a greater quantity of securely stored CO2 than a purely non-EOR storage operation. This study's principal objective was to quantify how much solubility trapping takes place within both aqueous and hydrocarbon phases in CO2-EOR settings. The Pembina Cardium CO2 Monitoring Pilot Project was used as a test site to determine the relative roles of solubility trapping. Firstly two geochemical approaches using empirical data from the site (gas geochemistry, production volumes and water isotope geochemistry) were used to determine the phase distribution of CO2 (dissolved or free phase) at a number of production wells that were sampled monthly during a two-year CO2 injection pilot. In addition a simplified reservoir simulation was performed to use it as a test-bed to investigate various CO2 injection scenarios with a model having some of the salient features of the pilot project. In particular this model was used to test the observations of the role of solubility trapping versus free-phase CO2 trapping.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueERASame topicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic InteractionsFrench-language works237,207