MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335225667 · doi:10.1021/ie1016046

Oil Recovery and Permeability Reduction of a Tight Sandstone Reservoir in Immiscible and Miscible CO<sub>2</sub> Flooding Processes

2011· article· en· W2335225667 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsPetroleum Technology Research CentreUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaPetroleum Technology Research CentreUniversity of Regina
KeywordsAsphalteneMiscibilityEnhanced oil recoveryPetroleum engineeringPermeability (electromagnetism)Saturation (graph theory)Light crude oilCrude oilRelative permeabilityChemistryGeologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, oil recovery and permeability reduction of a tight sandstone reservoir in immiscible and miscible CO 2 flooding processes are experimentally studied. First, a series of saturation tests are conducted to determine the onset pressure of asphaltene precipitation from a light crude oil−CO 2 system. Second, the vanishing interfacial tension (VIT) technique is applied to determine the minimum miscibility pressure (MMP) between the light crude oil and CO 2 . Third, a total of nine CO 2 coreflood tests under immiscible and miscible conditions are performed through the so-called dry, secondary, and tertiary oil recovery processes, respectively. It is found that the onset pressure of asphaltene precipitation is much lower than the MMP. In the CO 2 secondary oil recovery process, the coreflood test data show that, when the injection pressure is between the onset pressure of asphaltene precipitation and the MMP, the oil recovery factor is higher but the oil effective permeability reduction is larger at a higher injection pressure in the immiscible CO 2 flooding. They both reach almost constant maximum values in the miscible CO 2 flooding ( P ≥ MMP). It is also found that, in three different miscible CO 2 oil recovery processes, the CO 2 tertiary flooding process gives the lowest oil recovery factor but the largest oil effective permeability reduction. This is attributed to the most severe codeposition of asphaltenes and metal carbonates. However, the CO 2 dry or secondary flooding process has a significantly higher oil recovery factor but a much smaller oil effective permeability reduction due to asphaltene deposition alone in the former process or codeposition of asphaltenes and metal carbonates in the latter process.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.221 · 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