MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791135712 · doi:10.1080/10962247.2018.1436096

Characterization of methane emissions from five cold heavy oil production with sands (CHOPS) facilities

2018· article· en· W2791135712 on OpenAlex
Joseph Roscioli, Scott C. Herndon, Tara I. Yacovitch, W. B. Knighton, Daniel Zavala‐Araiza, Matthew R. Johnson, David R. Tyner

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

VenueJournal of the Air & Waste Management Association · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersSmall Business Innovative Research and Small Business Technology TransferRobertson Foundation
KeywordsOil sandsEnvironmental scienceMethaneWaste managementFugitive emissionsMethane emissionsEnvironmental engineeringEnvironmental chemistryGreenhouse gasChemistryAsphaltEngineeringGeologyGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cold heavy oil production with sands (CHOPS) is a common oil extraction method in the Canadian provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan that can result in significant methane emissions due to annular venting. Little is known about the magnitude of these emissions, nor their contributions to the regional methane budget. Here the authors present the results of field measurements of methane emissions from CHOPS wells and compare them with self-reported venting rates. The tracer ratio method was used not only to analyze total site emissions but at one site it was also used to locate primary emission sources and quantify their contributions to the facility-wide emission rate, revealing the annular vent to be a dominant source. Emissions measured from five different CHOPS sites in Alberta showed large discrepancies between the measured and reported rates, with emissions being mainly underreported. These methane emission rates are placed in the context of current reporting procedures and the role that gas-oil ratio (GOR) measurements play in vented volume estimates. In addition to methane, emissions of higher hydrocarbons were also measured; a chemical "fingerprint" associated with CHOPS wells in this region reveals very low emission ratios of ethane, propane, and aromatics versus methane. The results of this study may inform future studies of CHOPS sites and aid in developing policy to mitigate regional methane emissions. IMPLICATIONS: Methane measurements from cold heavy oil production with sand (CHOPS) sites identify annular venting to be a potentially major source of emissions at these facilities. The measured emission rates are generally larger than reported by operators, with uncertainty in the gas-oil ratio (GOR) possibly playing a large role in this discrepancy. These results have potential policy implications for reducing methane emissions in Alberta in order to achieve the Canadian government's goal of reducing methane emissions by 40-45% below 2012 levels within 8 yr.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.300
Threshold uncertainty score0.291

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.175 · 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