MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791170778 · doi:10.2118/0817-0032-jpt

Renewable Opportunities: The Growing Range of Renewable Options for Oil and Gas

2017· article· en· W2791170778 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stephen Rassenfoss, Trent Jacobs

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Petroleum Technology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMarine and Offshore Engineering Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOffshore wind powerRenewable energyPetroleum industrySubmarine pipelineFossil fuelEngineeringWork (physics)BusinessNatural resource economicsPetroleum engineeringWind powerEconomicsWaste managementEnvironmental engineeringMechanical engineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Growing Range of Renewable Options for Oil and Gas Stephen Rassenfoss, JPT Emerging Technology Senior Editor Trent Jacobs, JPT Digital Editor The offshore renewable energy business shares a lot of similarities with offshore oil and gas development. The designs of the structures are similar, as are the work vessels needed to build and maintain them. Corroding steel is a shared obsession, as is the soil analysis needed to be sure a structure is on sound footing. All of which could create opportunities for idle experts in offshore oil and gas construction and services. “With the expertise of the oil and gas industry, we can tackle a lot of challenges,” said Alana Duerr, offshore wind lead for the US Department of Energy, during a speech at the 2017 Offshore Technology Conference where she asked for technical assistance to spark US offshore wind development. The speech promoted the US offshore wind sector, which shares an unfortunate similarity to offshore exploration and production: it is not cost-competitive with onshore producers, whether it is wind, solar, or unconventional oil and gas. That is the problem in most parts of the world with the exception of the North Sea, where there has been aggressive development with support from governments concerned about carbon emissions. “The offshore wind sector has overtaken North Sea oil and gas,” said Lee Grace, senior naval architect at Vard Marine, during a presentation at OTC about a workboat the company developed for that market, which looks similar to those used in oil and gas (OTC 27772). But given the deep slump in the offshore oil sector, there is reason for oil and gas contractors to consider their options. Off the US east coast there is a large opportunity, with strong, steady winds near some of the biggest energy markets in the country. But the price is more than double the cost of onshore wind generation or gas-powered plants. Waves are Full of Energy, Sometimes Destructively So Stephen Rassenfoss, JPT Emerging Technology Senior Editor Ocean waves are potential sources of energy that are powerful, often more readily available than wind and solar, and closer to population centers along coastlines. But so far it is mostly just potential. Using the unpredictable changes of the ocean to drive the turbines of a largescale floating generator is a problem, but hardly the only one that has yet to be solved. “Wave energy current devices you put in the ocean need to be cost-effective and need to compete with what the other options are,” said Donald Gehring, president of Marine Energy Co. The structural engineer, who has long made his living advising companies active in offshore oil and gas development, has developed a fascination with the challenges posed by wave power and has a design he thinks can reach the break-even level. Heavy-Oil Technology May Be a Perfect Fit for Geothermal Power Trent Jacobs, JPT Digital Editor While the economic future of greenfield heavy-oil projects is in serious doubt these days, one prominent applied research group in Canada said that some of the technologies involved with heavy oil have the potential to be used around the world. The catch is that the technologies— specifically those involved in steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD)— would be primarily used not to produce oil, but geothermal power. “We believe that Alberta has been doing geothermal backwards for 30 years,” said Brian Wagg, director of business development at Edmonton-based C-FER Technologies, who explained how SAGD centers on pushing large volumes of steam into the ground via injection well where it heats viscous oil to a point at which it flows freely into a producing well. The concept that C-FER is promoting is termed an enhanced geothermal system and involves sending cool water down an injector well to become heated by moving through a nonhydrocarbon-bearing rock formation. Solar EOR Firm Looks To Heat Up the Competition Trent Jacobs, JPT Digital Editor German startup Solarlite is trying to do two things for oil companies: make steam, and make it cheap. Founded in 2004, the firm specializes in manufacturing concentrated solar power (CSP) systems that have mainly been used for small-scale electricity generation. But that application is being squeezed by another solar energy technology, photovoltaics (PVs), and so the company is now looking at enhanced oil recovery (EOR) for its future business. “The price of PVs has declined so dramatically that, at least for power generation, people question if CSP can actually survive,” said Steven Geiger, director of business development for Solarlite. “Our idea is to basically use the sun to produce heat, or steam in this case, and escape the competition from PVs.”

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.827
Threshold uncertainty score0.319

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Petroleum TechnologySame topicMarine and Offshore Engineering StudiesFrench-language works237,207