MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2317081853 · doi:10.2118/175945-ms

Evaluation of Chlorine Dioxide as an Oxidative Biocide for Hydraulic Fracturing in Western Canada

2015· article· en· W2317081853 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A.C. Malcolm, S. Dempster, Brett Chandler, Stephanie Setiawan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacillus and Francisella bacterial research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiocideHydraulic fracturingChlorine dioxideEnvironmental scienceOxidizing agentProduced waterWaste managementPulp and paper industryEnvironmental chemistryChemistryEnvironmental engineeringPetroleum engineeringGeologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Effective microbiological control is a vital component of a successful fracturing stimulation. As the development of tight gas, shale and other unconventional resources increased, innovative hydraulic-fracture designs including linear gel, slickwater and hybrid treatments have grown in popularity. These designs often require significant volumes of water that originate from rivers, lakes and ponds as well as produced and flowback water. Frequently, these sources are infested with aerobic and anaerobic bacteria that can lead to degradation of fracturing chemicals, microbially influenced corrosion, hydrogen sulfide generation and other production problems. Control of bacterial growth may be accomplished through the use of biocides. Glutaraldehyde and quaternary ammonium-based surfactants are two of the most prevalent chemistries used in Canadian fracture fluids. Because of the inherent toxicity of biocide additives, the primary goal is to design a program that minimizes chemical usage while matching the total demand necessary to control and manage bacteria. Controlling bacteria means not only an effective kill at the surface before use, but also maintaining this control long term while the fracturing fluids are in contact with the reservoir. Oxidative biocides are an attractive treatment option because of the rapid kinetics of disinfection, the ability to provide excellent control of bacteria populations and the short residual lifetimes that do not persist in the flowback beyond a few days or hours. In addition, oxidizing biocides enable a concomitant reduction in the quantity of preservative biocides required to achieve long-term control. This paper reviews the efficacy of a chlorine dioxide-based biocide program used in hydraulic fracturing in central Alberta, Canada. The results of the bacteria enumerated from job site samples are presented, along with application methodologies and program design. It was observed that chlorine dioxide combined with a low concentration of preservative biocide can provide enhanced efficacy and reduce total chemical demand compared to conventional biocide treatments. Chlorine dioxide is approved for use as a biocide for hydraulic fracturing by the Canadian Pest Management Regulatory Authority (PMRA). Chlorine dioxide provides new opportunities to build more efficient hydraulic fracturing biocide programs.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.123

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 studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 topicBacillus and Francisella bacterial researchFrench-language works237,207