MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223902148 · doi:10.2118/209411-ms

New Paradigm in the Understanding of <i>In Situ</i> Combustion: The Nature of the Fuel and the Important Role of Vapor Phase Combustion

2022· article· en· W4223902148 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 Improved Oil Recovery Conference · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombustionCokeCrackingResidual oilLight crude oilDistillationPyrolysisTube furnaceThermalFuel oilChemistryPetroleum engineeringWaste managementEnvironmental scienceOrganic chemistryThermodynamicsGeologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Historically, the air injection literature has stated that the main fuel for the in situ combustion (ISC) process is the carbon-rich, solid-like residue resulting from distillation, oxidation, and thermal cracking of the residual oil near the combustion front, commonly referred to as "coke". At first glance, that assumption may appear sound, since many combustion tube tests reveal a "coke bank" at the point of termination of the combustion front. However, when one examines both the laboratory results from tests conducted on various oils at reservoir conditions, and historical field data from different sources, the conclusion may be different than what has been assumed. For instance, combustion tube tests performed on light oils rarely display any significant sign of coke deposition, which would make them poor candidates for air injection; nevertheless, they have been some of the most successful ISC projects. It is proposed that the main fuel consumed by the ISC process may not be the solid-like residue, but light hydrocarbon fractions that experience combustion reactions in the gas phase. This vapor fuel forms as a result of oxidative and thermal cracking of the original and oxidized oil fractions. An analysis of different oxidation experiments performed on oil samples ranging from 6.5 to 38.8°API, at reservoir pressures, indicates that this behavior is consistent across this wide density spectrum, even in the absence of coke. While coke will form as a result of the low temperature oxidation of heavy oil fractions, and while thermal cracking of those fractions on the pathway to coke may produce vapor components which may themselves burn, the coke itself is not likely the main fuel for the process, particularly for lighter oils. This paper presents a new theory regarding the nature and formation of the main fuel utilized by the ISC process. It discusses the fundamental concepts associated with the proposed theory, and it summarizes the experimental laboratory evidence and the field evidence which support the concept. This new theory does still share much common ground with the current understanding of the ISC process, but with a twist. The new insights result from the analysis of laboratory tests performed on lighter oils at reservoir pressures; data which was not available at the time that the original ISC concepts were developed. This material suggests a complete change to one of the most important paradigms related to the ISC process, which is the nature and source of the fuel. This affects the way we understand the process, but provides a unified and consistent theory, which is important for the modelling efforts and overall development of a technology that has the potential to unlock many reserves from conventional and unconventional reservoirs.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.476
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.226 · 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