MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809228422 · doi:10.2118/191179-ms

Increasing Production Flow Rate and Overall Recovery from Gas Hydrate Reservoirs Using a Combined Steam Flooding-Thermodynamic Inhibitor Technique

2018· article· en· W2809228422 on OpenAlex

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 Trinidad and Tobago Section Energy Resources Conference · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersMissouri University of Science and Technology
KeywordsHydratePetroleum engineeringSteam injectionCabin pressurizationBrineClathrate hydrateEnvironmental scienceChemistryGeologyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract When producing from gas hydrate reservoirs using steam flooding, since hydrate dissociation is an endothermic reaction, the heat is used up. This results in a decrease in reservoir temperature which causes the hydrate equilibrium conditions to be established again, thus causing hydrate reformation. This research studies the effect of injecting thermodynamic inhibitors during steam injection on overcoming the problem of hydrate reformation which in turn will increase hydrocarbon recovery significantly from hydrate reservoirs. The reservoir model was built based on data collected from previous models found in the literature. After specifying all parameters for the reservoir, and the hydrate layer, a systematic study was performed in order to assess the use of inhibitors with steam flooding. The production methods studied include depressurization, steam flooding, inhibitor injection including both brine and glycol, and finally the combined steam flooding inhibitor injection method. The conditions for the steam flooding were kept the same during all runs in order to be able to compare them. Results indicated that the use of the thermal stimulation alone without inhibitor managed to increase recovery, however, the problem of hydrate reformation occurred which caused a cessation of production. Using inhibitors alone managed to increase recovery as well, however the recovery increase was much less compared to thermal stimulation. The type of inhibitor also played a role in recovery with the glycol producing the most, followed by the brine. By combining both steam flooding and inhibitor injection, the recovery increased significantly more than what was observed when using each of the methods on its own. To the authors' knowledge, no extensive study has been performed by combining both steam flooding and inhibitor to increase hydrocarbon recovery from hydrate reservoirs. This research can help in improving real field gas hydrate projects by making the overall project much more economic by increasing hydrocarbon recovery.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.782
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.195 · 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