Bioreaction coupled flow simulations: Impacts of methanogenesis on seasonal underground hydrogen storage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assessing microbial risks is key to feasible hydrogen storage in geological formations. This work quantitatively analyses the impacts of bio-methanation on hydrogen storage performance. Fine-scale flow simulations, coupled with the bio-methanation reaction, are presented to analyse its impact on the storage performance. Based on the reported rates in literature, methanogenesis may slightly degrade the recovery performance of hydrogen but is considered minor compared with the issue of gas mixing. The impacts of methanogenesis on a time scale of months (330 days) becomes observable in the system configured here, when the methanation rate is above 1746 nano molality per hour. The assumed methanation rate is two times greater than the rate reported from the Olla filed. Validated scaling theory generalises findings for gravity-dominated scenarios. But viscous-dominated flows see complications from property variations due to pressure changes at high rates. This study provides definitions of “target properties” (e.g., acceptable methanogenesis rates) for screening hydrogen storage projects.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".