MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2334698594 · doi:10.7122/439489-ms

Quantifying Local Capillary Trapping Storage Capacity Using Geologic Criteria

2015· article· en· W2334698594 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

VenueCarbon Management Technology Conference · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceTrappingCapillary actionGeologyGeographyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The capillary pressure heterogeneity or local capillary trapping (LCT) determines the final distribution of CO2 in a saline aquifer during geological carbon sequestration. This locally trapped CO2 would not escape from the storage formation even if caprock integrity is compromised. It is, therefore, essential to predict the extent and storage capacity of LCT during the design of GCS projects. This work employs a fast method based on the geologic criteria to estimate the structures of local capillary traps. The method assumes a critical capillary entry pressure (CCEP) and a geostatistical realization of the reservoir entry pressure field as inputs. It then finds the capillary barriers inside the domain and identifies the grid blocks beneath clusters of barriers. These grid blocks are the local capillary traps. The criterion for choosing the CCEP is important, and we suggest a criterion in this work. We verify this algorithm by full-physics simulations in small 2D and 3D domains. We employ a large CO2 injection rate (Ngr~0.1) to fully sweep the storage domain, followed by a long period of buoyant flow to allow for complete charging of those local capillary traps. We test several CCEPs to determine the most physically representative value by comparing the LCT predicted from both methods. We find that a single value of CCEP enables the geologic algorithm to give a very good approximation of LCT distribution as well as LCT volume in uncorrelated and weakly correlated porous media. This means that the concept of CCEP is a reasonable approximation to the physical process by which traps are filled. LCT can be described in terms of percolation theory. The percolation threshold arises from the competition between connected clusters of barriers and connected clusters of local traps. We show that both the percolated CCEP (corresponding to the percolation of LCT) and optimal CCEP (corresponding to the best match between geologic criteria and full-physics simulation) change with each other in a predictable linear way for the uncorrelated capillary entry pressure field.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.754
Threshold uncertainty score0.805

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.175 · 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