MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4220724519 · doi:10.2118/208966-ms

Steam-Solvent Process: A Gamechanger in Cutting Emissions in In-Situ Recovery of Oil Sands

2022· article· en· W4220724519 on OpenAlexaffabout
M. A. K. Chowdhuri, Alex Filstein, Haibo Huang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsConocoPhillips (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPropaneGreenhouse gasButaneEnvironmental scienceWaste managementPetroleum engineeringVolume (thermodynamics)Oil sandsSteam injectionSolventHydrocarbonCoalEnhanced oil recoveryProcess (computing)Fossil fuelProcess engineeringMaterials scienceAsphaltChemistryEngineeringOrganic chemistryCatalysisGeologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Due to extensive energy requirements and the volume of emitted greenhouse gases associated with burning natural gas to generate steam in the SAGD process, there has been always a strong motivation to develop oil recovery processes for bitumen reservoirs with lower energy and emissions intensities. A hybrid steam-solvent co-injection process, which is to synergize the advantages of both SAGD and VAPEX processes and minimize their drawbacks is the subject of ongoing research and field piloting since early 2000. Most of the past efforts of the steam-solvent process were primarily focused on improving the oil rate or improving the process's economic benefits. However, due to Canada's ambitious greenhouse emission reduction target (net zero emission by 2050) along with the significant increase of carbon tax ($170 by 2030), the primary focus of the oil industry is shifting towards reducing steam injection and cutting the GHG emission drastically. This study revisited the steam-solvent process to find a suitable combination of solvent type and operating strategies that can reduce the steam injection and GHG emission significantly, and without significantly compromising the oil production. Two hydrocarbon pure solvents, propane and butane were recommended in this project to cut the steam injection drastically and without having a significant negative impact on the oil production. Among the two solvents, butane may be preferred. However, to reduce the cost further and cut energy input, propane may be a better choice than butane. Propane is cheaper than butane and it requires less energy to vaporize propane. The process should start with steam-only injection (as SAGD) and next inject solvent after the chamber is somewhat developed. The solvent may not be effective if the oil production is already in the natural decline stage. At later stages, the solvent retention in the reservoir could also be high. During the solvent injection period, a small amount of steam could be continuously injected with the solvent or steam could be intermittently injected as needed to keep enough energy in the reservoir. This will help to vaporize the solvent and prevent the chamber from being cooled down significantly.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques→French-language works237,207→