MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2336113684 · doi:10.2118/179893-ms

Modelling CaCO3 Scale in CO2 Water Alternating Gas CO2-WAG Processes

2016· article· en· W2336113684 on OpenAlexfundno aff
D.. Silva, K. S. Sorbie, Eric Mackay

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCMG Reservoir Simulation Foundation
KeywordsBrineSolubilityEnhanced oil recoveryCalcium carbonateCarbonatePrecipitationCarbon dioxideChemistryGeochemical modelingAqueous solutionPetroleum engineeringEnvironmental scienceGeologyMeteorologyDissolution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract CO2 Water Alternating Gas (CO2-WAG) is one of the main Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) techniques which is currently being implemented in the emerging pre-salt projects offshore Brazil. CO2-WAG consists of the alternated injection of CO2 and water in the reservoir for tertiary oil recovery. However, this process may lead to the enhanced deposition of CaCO3 in production wells. This may occur since, in a CO2-WAG scheme, CO2 dissolves in the water slug causing a decrease in the pH. At lower pH levels, carbonate rock is dissolved causing an increase in the carbon and calcium content in the water slug. As fluids are later produced, the operating pressure is reduced and dissolved CO2 is evolved from solution, causing an increase in the pH. At these less acidic pH levels, CaCO3 may become oversaturated and precipitate. In order to address each process involved in CaCO3 formation, an integrated modelling approach between aqueous scale prediction modelling, Vapour-Liquid Equilibria (VLE) modelling and reservoir modelling is proposed. In particular, acid equilibria and precipitation reactions coupled with the Pitzer equations are used to build the scale prediction model. The facility to calculate CaCO3 co-precipitation with other minerals, such as BaSO4, FeCO3, FeS, etc., is also introduced. Five different equations of state (namely SRK, PR, PRSV, PT and VPT) are used in VLE calculations to model the solubility of CO2 (or a mixture of CO2, H2S and CH4) in brine. To model the reactive flows in the reservoir, the advection-diffusion equation is coupled with the scale precipitation equations. The reactive transport model addresses carbonate rock-brine interactions and fluid flow through a porous medium. Once integrated in one single model, these equations have been shown to address all steps in CaCO3 formation relevant for CO2-WAG, i.e., the geochemical processes taking place in the reservoir and at the production wells, thus capturing the full dimension of the scaling problem. In addition, the proposed model has been successfully validated with experimental data on the injection of seawater adjusted to various pH levels into a CaCO3 packed column. The measured effluent pH levels and calcium concentrations were used to validate the model.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic InteractionsFrench-language works237,207