MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393854655 · doi:10.2118/215092-pa

New Insights on Catalysts-Supported In-Situ Upgrading of Heavy Oil and Hydrogen Generation during In-Situ Combustion Oil Recovery

2024· article· en· W4393854655 on OpenAlexaffabout
M. R. Fassihi, R.G. Moore, Pedro Pereira Almao, S. A. Mehta, M.G. Ursenbach, D. G. Mallory

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIn situCatalysisCombustionHydrogenWaste managementEnvironmental scienceBusinessMaterials scienceChemistryEngineeringOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary As part of greenhouse gas reduction initiatives, there have been many publications on carbon sequestration, reducing the carbon footprint of oil and gas operations, and generating carbonless fuel [e.g., hydrogen (H2)] by means of in-situ processes. In-situ upgrading (ISU) can help with these aspects by converting bitumen and heavy oil into low sulfur, low N2, and low asphaltene products, generating fewer emissions and producing hydrogen as a byproduct, thus helping with utilization of vast resources of energy that would otherwise be wasted due to extreme measures of no fossil fuel policies. In addition, such processes could produce more valuable products, enhanced shipping/pipelining, and less demanding downstream processing. In this paper, we provide new insights into the results of several combustion tube tests that were performed for Alberta Ingenuity Centre for In Situ Energy, using different heavy oils with fresh supported catalysts. The catalysts were placed in the production end of the combustion tube so oil would pass over the catalyst bed before being produced. In practice, solid catalyst particles could be placed into the oil-bearing formation adjacent to the producing wellbore, ensuring that crude oil will flow over the catalysts during oil production. In this paper, we use many laboratory results that have never been published before. The objective is to understand whether using catalysts has merit in our future oil production activities under the current environmental restrictions. A commercial Ni/Mo catalyst was used in these tests. The results of these tests indicated at least temporary significant occurrence of reactions such as hydroprocessing (HP) and hydrotreating reactions, such as hydrocracking, hydrodesulfurization (HDS), hydrodenitrogenation (HDN), and hydrodeoxygenation. They also generated a significant volume of hydrogen in situ. We will discuss the impact of pressure, temperature, water injection, and dispersed vs. supported catalysts on the degree of oil upgrading. Also, the key parameters that could impact in-situ hydrogen generation will be presented. Specifically, the role of reactions such as aquathermolysis, thermal cracking, water-gas shift (WGS, defined later) reaction, and coke gasification will willbe discussed. Note that the products of these reactions could undergo additional methanation (ME) reactions, which could reduce the H2 concentration in the produced gas. Finally, methods of upscaling these results to the field conditions will be presented.

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 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 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 score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.702

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE JournalSame topicEnhanced Oil Recovery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207