MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789293575 · doi:10.2118/189760-ms

Screening Surfactants for Application in SAGD – Including a Steam-phase Coreflood Test

2018· article· en· W2789293575 on OpenAlex
Ralph G. Jonasson, Muhammad Imran, Kelvin D. Knorr

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Canada Heavy Oil Technical Conference · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsSaskatchewan Research Council (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPulmonary surfactantSurface tensionChemistryEnhanced oil recoverySolubilitySteam injectionChromatographyChemical engineeringThermal stabilityPetroleum engineeringOrganic chemistryThermodynamicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This research sought to determine whether surfactants and other steam additives can further improve oil recoveries in steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD), and to identify plausible mechanisms. It involved extensive experimental study and method development to screen the surfactants suitable for high temperature application and to evaluate incremental improvements in bitumen recovery using surfactants in the gas phase. Formulations of several surfactants were prepared to optimize their properties (e.g., cost, performance, partitioning, water solubility). The types of surfactants selected for this study were sulfonates and pyrrolidones. These surfactants were pre-screened according to thermal stability in water, interfacial tension (IFT), contact angle, and formation water compatibility. The selected surfactants were tested using the specially designed steam soak apparatus to evaluate the transport of surfactants in the steam phase to the gas/bitumen interface. Linear hot water and steam corefloods in different configurations were also performed to investigate the oil recovery mechanism associated with the use of high temperature surfactants. High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) was used to measure surfactant concentrations for thermal stability and coreflood testing. The steam-soak tests did reveal that combining N-octyl-2-pyrrolidone (NOP) with a sulfonate surfactant, alkyldiphenylethersulfonate (ADPES), could substantially improve oil recovery. This was dispite the fact that sulfonates are not volatile in steam. The hot-water corefloods showed an upward trend in oil recovery with an increase in the N-alkyl-2-pyrrolidone molecular weight and boiling point. The steam corefloods showed the highest recovery for surfactant mixture with 1000 mg/kg NOP and 500 mg/kg ADPES. The post-run core images showed cleaner sand indicating the incremental recovery from the use of surfactant mixture was being achieved by producing the residual oil from the steam chamber. NOP is miscible with bitumen, and is capable of dissolving asphaltenes. However, the viscosity data of oil treated with NOP suggests that viscosity reduction due to surfactant/additive addition is probably not the primary mechanism responsible for improved recoveries. Rather, it can be attributed more towards the IFT reduction, wettability alteration or surfactant dispersion of bitumen in water. No tight bitumen-in-water emulsions were produced in any of the tests.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.684
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.265 · 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