MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2745615969 · doi:10.7122/485492-ms

Coalbed Methane Recovery By Injection of Hot Carbon Dioxide

2017· article· en· W2745615969 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCarbon Management Technology Conference · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoalbed methaneMethaneCoalPetroleum engineeringSupercritical fluidNatural gasCarbon dioxideCarbon sequestrationEnvironmental scienceEnhanced coal bed methane recoveryCoal rankCoal miningDesorptionEnhanced oil recoveryAdsorptionWaste managementGeologyChemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A new method of coalbed methane (CBM) recovery is proposed wherein hot carbon dioxide at or near supercritical condition is injected into a CBM reservoir to take advantage of enhanced desorption of methane at elevated temperatures and the preferential adsorption of CO2 on coal surfaces compared to methane. The feasibility of this concept was studied by reservoir simulations using one quarter of an inverted five spot pattern using CO2 and CH4 adsorption isotherms published in the literature. The study compared CBM recovery by pressure depletion, CO2 injection and injection of CO2 that is 10°C hotter than the reservoir temperature. Results show that hot CO2 injection can significantly increase the production rate and recovery factor over and above that achievable by reservoir heating or CO2 injection alone. This new method holds promise for enhanced CBM recovery and also CO2 sequestration, especially for high-rank coals where swelling of coal by CO2 injection is minimized. Preliminary considerations suggest that this method can be economic over a range of CO2 and natural gas price if the CO2 comes from natural sources and the CBM field is located near an existing CO2 pipeline. Alternatively, if the source of CO2 is industrial, this method can be profitable if the cost of CO2 capture is offset by the trading price of CO2 and if the CBM project is located near the CO2 source. Introduction Coalbed methane, also known as coal seam gas, is a significant source of natural gas worldwide, with sizable reserves in the United States, Australia, Russia, Canada and China. In 2015, CBM production in the US was 1.27 Tcf (35.97 Bcm), accounting for 3.9% of all US natural gas production (EIA, 2017). Commercial production of CBM occurs in ten US basins with major production coming from the San Juan, Black Warrior and the Central Appalachian. In 2015, CBM production in Australia was 270 Bcf (7.65 Bcm) accounting for 18% of Australia's total natural gas production (Australian Government, 2016).

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.290
Threshold uncertainty score0.884

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.215 · 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