Surfactant Flooding Performance for a Canadian Bitumen Recovery: Effect of Polarity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The objective of this study is to examine the impact of polarity on surfactant-steam flooding performance in the recovery of a Canadian bitumen sample. 10 laboratory-scale core flood experiments were used to investigate the interaction between the polar head of surfactants and polar fractions of the bitumen sample (resins and asphaltenes) in the presence of steam. A Canadian bitumen from Alberta with high polar fraction content; resins (17 wt%) and asphaltenes (29 wt%), was selected. The bitumen sample was first characterized in terms of viscosity at reservoir temperature (10,000 cP) and API Gravity (12°). Then, coreflood tests were conducted by coinjecting steam with an anionic, a cationic, or a nonionic surfactant. The performance of three anionic, three cationic, and three nonionic surfactants was tested. Each core flood result was evaluated in terms of the cumulative oil recovery, the residual oil content, the produced oil quality, and the asphaltenes content of produced and residual oil samples. Then, bitumen's polar fractions (resins and asphaltenes) and bitumen itself were subjected to each surfactant solution under steam and liquid water conditions, and simultaneously their interactions were captured by an optical microscope. Analysis of microscopic images was used to explain the performance differences in each flooding test. Every surfactant-steam flooding process resulted in higher recovery than steam flooding alone. The greatest oil recovery was observed with the longest tail length anionic surfactant. It has been observed that the presence of asphaltenes in displaced oil inhibits the formation of microemulsions and consequently reduces the amount of produced oil. Further, we observed that the microemulsions are successfully formed between the resins fraction of bitumen sample and surfactant solution under steam condition. Hence, to maximize the effectiveness of surfactant processes in high asphaltenes content reservoirs, we highly recommend the use of asphaltenes precipitants prior to injection of any surfactant solutions.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".