Acceleration of Deep Subsurface Fluid Fluxes in the Anthropocene
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Anthropocene has been framed around humanity's impact on atmospheric, biologic, and near‐surface processes, such as land use and vegetation change, greenhouse gas emissions, and the above‐ground hydrologic cycle. Groundwater extraction has lowered water tables in many key aquifers but comparatively little attention has been given to the impacts in the deeper subsurface. Here, we show that fluid fluxes from the extraction and injection of fluids associated with oil and gas production and inflow of water into mines likely exceed background flow rates in deep (>500 m) groundwater systems at a global scale. Projected carbon capture and sequestration (CCS), geothermal energy production, and lithium extraction to facilitate the energy transition will require fluid production rates exceeding current oil and co‐produced water extraction. Natural analogs and geochemical modeling indicate that subsurface fluid manipulation in the Anthropocene will likely appear in the rock record. The magnitude and importance of these changes are unclear, due to a lack of understanding of how deep subsurface hydrologic and geochemical cycles and associated microbial life interact with the rest of the Earth system.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".