MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4242968051 · doi:10.2118/2002-299

Field Implementation of Solvent Aided Process

2002· article· en· W4242968051 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

VenueCanadian International Petroleum Conference · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProcess Optimization and Integration
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)Field (mathematics)Computer scienceProcess engineeringEngineeringProgramming languageMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The authors have previously described a Solvent Aided Process (SAP) that aims to combine the benefits of SAGD and VAPEX. In SAP, a small amount of hydrocarbon solvent is introduced as an additive to the injected steam during SAGD. While steam is intended to be the main heat-carrying agent, the solvent will dilute the oil to reduce its viscosity over and above what is accomplished by heating alone. The overall effect should be improved oil to steam ratio (or reduced energy intensity). Although promising based on the authors' calculations, the process has not been previously applied or tested on a field scale. This paper describes implementation of a SAP pilot at PanCanadian's Senlac Thermal Facility. In addition to dwelling on some of the important parameters of a SAP test, It discusses the design considerations for the field pilot and the necessary modifications to an existing SAGD plant, specifically in the area of boiler operations controls. Although, the design calls for an assessment of reservoir performance results on a longer-term basis, initial results from this pilot look very encouraging. The oil rates have shown a substantial increase and the steam oil ratio, a corresponding derease. This paper also discusses directional economics with SAP and its beneficial impact on the environment. Introduction Just as steam tackles the viscosity reduction of in situ oil in SAGD1,2 by heating it, solvents3,4,5,6,7 do this by dilution of the oil. Although employment of both steam and solvent together has also been discussed in the literature8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15, it has mostly focussed on enhancement of steam-flood or steam-stimulation. In their discussion on the subject Gupta et. Al16 described SAP as a process enhancement to SAGD where a small amount of a light alkane solvent VIZ propane, butane, pentane etc. or a mixture thereof is added to the injected steam. They also suggested with the help of lab experiments and numerical modeling that SAP has a potential to substantially improve the performance of SAGD. EXPECTED SAP ADVANTAGES Figure 1 shows a comparison, in a generic sense, of numerically obtained oil rate profile from a SAGD application vs. one obtained similarly with the application of SAP in the same reservoir. It is assumed that SAP would start after the expiry of a certain initial period in the life cycle of SAGD, to allow for the development of the chamber with steam. This comparison of the rate profiles suggests that the bulk of the oil that one would have produced in the later period with SAGD, can be produced sooner with SAP. The resulting acceleration of the production and the corresponding cash flow accelerations will lead to the improved economics of the project. Apart from the improved economics as a consequence of production rate acceleration, the other expected advantages of SAP include reduced environmental impact, possible down-hole upgrading of the heavy oil and small increase in the ultimate recovery. Since for given amount of recovered oil, expected steam to oil ratio in SAP is significantly lower than SAGD, corresponding reduction in the heat and fuel requirement lead to reduced impact on the environment.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.507
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

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)0.0070.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.234 · 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