CO<sub>2</sub> and CH<sub>4</sub> Wettabilities of Organic-Rich Shale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CO 2 and CH 4 wettabilities of organic-rich shale are important physicochemical parameters that significantly influence CO 2 sequestration and CH 4 production. However, there is a serious lack of understanding of these aspects because the data available are scarce. Thus, we evaluated organic-rich shale CO 2 and CH 4 wettabilities (i.e., brine/shale/gas systems) through advancing and receding brine contact angle measurements as a function of pressure, temperature, salinity, and ion type (as these can vary significantly in underground formations). The results indicated that the brine contact angles for both CO 2 /CH 4 –brine–shale systems increased with pressure and salinity, but decreased with temperature. However, these effects were much less significant for CH 4 . Furthermore, the brine contact angles for the CO 2 –brine–shale system reached 180° (i.e., the shale was completely wetted by CO 2 ) when the pressure reached 30 MPa at 343 K and ∼9 MPa at 298 K. The brine contact angles for the analogue CH 4 systems was much lower (50°–90°), only indicating weakly water-wet to intermediate-wet conditions. Finally, the brine contact angles for CO 2 –brine–shale system were also larger for divalent ions (Ca 2+, Mg 2+ ) than for monovalent ions (Na +, K + ), while ion type had no significant influence on CH 4 wettability. However, a similar CO 2 /CH 4 density resulted in a similar wettability. Consequently CH 4 could not be used as a proxy for predicting CO 2 storage capacities, unless they have similar densities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".