MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2312519829 · doi:10.2118/175926-ms

Effect of Electrostatic Interactions on Water Uptake of Gas Shales: The Interplay of Solution Ionic Strength, Electrostatic Double Layer, and Shale Zeta Potential

2015· article· en· W2312519829 on OpenAlexaff
Mojtaba Binazadeh, Mingxiang Xu, Kaiyan Jiang, Ashkan Zolfaghari, Hassan Dehghanpour

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater flow and contamination studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOil shaleZeta potentialIonic strengthImbibitionChemistryBrineIonic bondingChemical engineeringInorganic chemistryMineralogyIonAqueous solutionGeologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The uptake of water by rock matrix in a hydrocarbon producing well brings in both economic justification and environmental concerns. A detailed understanding of the water-rock interactions is essential for design and implication of hydrocarbon recovery techniques and environmental impact analysis. In this study, the water imbibition results are described by the electrostatic interactions between the water and shale samples. The effect of leachable ions in the shale, imbibed fluid ionic strength, electrostatic double layer, and zeta potential of shale are studied. The shale powders are washed with DI (deionized water) sequentially. Individual ion concentrations are obtained by ICP-MS analysis. The ionic strength and Debye length of the brine obtained from each step of the washing experiment are calculated. Zeta potential of the fresh and washed powders are measured in DI water and 10-times concentrated brines from first washing stage (CN brines). A set-up is designed to perform the imbibition experiments on the intact and washed shale powders. DI water and CN brines are used as the imbibing fluids. Washing with DI water leached ions out of the shale powders. After a maximum of 7 washing steps, the ionic strength of the resulting brine solution reached to a constant value which cannot be further reduced by washing. Zeta potential of shale powders in CN brines are substantially lower than the zeta potential of shale powders in DI water. This reduction in the zeta potential value to higher ionic strength of CN brines as compared with DI water. Imbibition experiments reveal that the CN brine solutions imbibe slower into the shale powders as compared with DI water. DI water imbibes faster in washed powders as compared with fresh powders. Debye length is correlated with imbibition rate, as higher Debye length of the solution results in faster imbibition. A reduction in the solution ionic strength increases the thickness of electrostatic double layer and zeta potential value. The thickness of electrostatic double layer in contact with the shale surface, which is modulated by the ionic strength of the in-situ brine solution, is an important factor that influence the particle zeta potential of shale as well as the imbibition rate of aqueous solution into shales.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGroundwater flow and contamination studiesFrench-language works237,207