MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605543324 · doi:10.3997/2214-4609.201700302

Scale Risk Management during CO2 WAG in Carbonate Formations

2017· article· en· W2605543324 on OpenAlexaff
Ayrton Ribeiro, Eric Mackay, Leonardo José do Nascimento Guimarães, M. M. Jordan, Susan Fellows

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCalcium Carbonate Crystallization and Inhibition
Canadian institutionsNalco (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalciteWater injection (oil production)CarbonatePetroleum engineeringInjectorDissolutionPrecipitationInjection wellWellboreDeposition (geology)GeologyEnvironmental scienceMineralogyChemistryChemical engineeringEngineeringMeteorologyGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary In this work we have used commercial software to perform reactive transport simulations of CO2 WAG injection in an oil reservoir, with the objective of assessing the scaling risk associated with CO2 EOR in carbonate formations. Higher WAG ratio promotes faster mineral reactions and severe scale deposition at earlier times. Injection of cooler fluids also enhances calcite and CO2 dissolution in water near the injector wellbore. Finally, the mass of calcite around the producer wellbore changes due to three different mechanisms: (a) brief dissolution caused by arrival of the CO2-rich front, (b) re-precipitation caused by mixing between high HCO3 injected water with high Ca formation water and (c) continuous precipitation caused by evolution of CO2 along the flow path, which occurs continuously after CO2 breakthrough. The results of these calculations allow the critical location where scale damage could occur within a production system to be identified, and a mitigation strategy developed to control its formation, for example via continual injection of scale inhibitor down to the production packer in early field life, reducing the need for batch inhibitor (squeeze) treatments into the reservoir in later field life, thereby significantly reducing OPEX.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedingsSame topicCalcium Carbonate Crystallization and InhibitionFrench-language works237,207