MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4240681973 · doi:10.2118/156676-pa

Water Use in Canada's Oil-Sands Industry: The Facts

2013· article· en· W4240681973 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Economics & Management · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsImperial Oil (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOil sandsEnvironmental scienceAsphaltPetroleum industrySteam-assisted gravity drainageProductivityUnconventional oilGroundwaterHydrology (agriculture)GeologyFossil fuelEnvironmental engineeringWaste managementGeographyArchaeologyEngineeringGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Canada's oil-sands industry is often perceived as having poor environmental performance. One focus area is the use of water for oilsands production. Bitumen from oil sands is produced by surface mining or by in-situ thermal extraction. Both technologies are water-based. The oil-sands deposits are situated in northern Alberta, where the river basins have 87% of the provincial average annual water supply but only have 13% of the demand. Oil-sands operators have made significant progress in improving freshwater use productivity (intensity), and water use represents a small percentage of natural supply. For in-situ production, the 2010 freshwater use productivity for the industry was 0.43 units of freshwater per unit of bitumen produced. As an example of continuous improvement, the Imperial Oil Cold Lake in-situ oil-sands operation has improved freshwater use productivity by 90% since 1985 through produced-water recycling and the use of deep saline groundwater. The in-situ oil-sands industry will remain a relatively small water user into the future (2030) using an estimated 0.04 to 0.09% of available supply from the three river basins where it is situated. For oil-sands mining, most of the source water comes from the Athabasca River. The average water-use productivity for oil-sands production between 2006 and 2011 was 2.5 units of Athabasca River water per unit of bitumen and synthetic crude oil produced (3.6 for all freshwater sources). In 2011, the oil-sands mining industry used 0.54% of the annual Athabasca River flow and 3% of the lowest 2011–2012 winter weekly flow. For growth forecasts to 2030, it is estimated that the oil-sands mining industry will require 1.4% of the average annual flow of the Athabasca River. Overall, by 2030, it is projected that the entire oil-sands industry will use less than 0.4% of Alberta's average annual water supply to produce 80% of Canada's total oil production.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.174 · 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