MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802010527 · doi:10.2118/190082-ms

Comparative Simulation Study and Economic Analysis of Thermal Recovery Processes in Athabasca Reservoirs

2018· article· en· W2802010527 on OpenAlexaff
C. O. Iyogun, Zhangxin Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Western Regional Meeting · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSteam-assisted gravity drainageOil sandsPetroleum engineeringHomogeneousSolventEnvironmental scienceEnhanced oil recoveryPentaneThermalProcess (computing)Pulp and paper industryChemistryGeologyMaterials scienceEngineeringThermodynamicsComputer sciencePhysicsAsphalt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Simulation studies of three thermal recovery processes used in Athabasca reservoirs have been carried out for a 10-year production period. The recovery processes studied are Steam-Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD), Fast-SAGD, and Expanding Solvent-SAGD (ES-SAGD). Normal pentane (n-C5) was the solvent of choice used in ES-SAGD simulations with its molar concentration varied from 2% to 5.9%. The main objective of this study is to conduct an economic analysis of the three recovery processes with the goal of determining the most economically viable process. The economic indicator that will be assessed to ascertain the most viable recovery process is their Net Present Value (NPV.) 2D simulation studies based on homogeneous Athabasca reservoirs have been performed. Results obtained show that of the three recovery processes, Fast-SAGD had the lowest cumulative oil produced, followed by SAGD and ES-SAGD, the highest. The cumulative oil produced also increased with increasing molar concentration of n-C5. Furthermore, it was shown that as expected, the CSOR of ES-SAGD was the lowest of them while that of Fast-SAGD was the highest. The CSOR of the ES-SAGD processes reduced as the concentration of the n-C5 increased. The economic analysis showed that of the three recovery processes, ES-SAGD is the most economically viable process. Furthermore, the effect of solvent on the viability of ES-SAGD over the other recovery processes is dependent on the price regime of pentane. In this analysis, two extreme price regimes were chosen and the result showed that for a low price regime, varying the molar ratios of n-C5 had a significant effect on the NPV up to a point before its effect diminishes. In fact, increasing the molar concentration of n-C5 from 2% to 3.76% significantly increased the NPV while further increasing it from 3.76% to 4% and thereafter to 5.9% had no noticeable effect. However, it seems that increasing it from 3.76% to 5.9% had a diminishing effect especially after the 3-year period. Nevertheless, the significant NPV improvement ES-SAGD has over SAGD and Fast-SAGD diminishes once the price regime of pentane is more than 3 times that of oil. In fact, this high price regime showed that 5.9% molar concentration of n-C5 is no longer more viable than the SAGD counterpart. There is still some benefit up till about 4% molar concentration of n-C5 but this benefit is greatly diminished. In conclusion, ES-SAGD has been shown to be the best recovery process for Athabasca reservoirs based on economics but further research is needed to evaluate the molar concentration that will provide the most economic benefit for a real Athabasca reservoir.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.296
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

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 head0.304
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Western Regional MeetingSame topicEnhanced Oil Recovery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207