MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399655331 · doi:10.1016/j.petlm.2024.06.002

Nanoparticle-stabilized CO2 foam flooding for enhanced heavy oil recovery: A micro-optical analysis

2024· article· en· W4399655331 on OpenAlex
Arifur Rahman, Ezeddin Shirif, Farshid Torabi

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePetroleum · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersMitacsPetroleum Technology Research CentreFaculty of Graduate Studies and Research, University of ReginaUniversity of Regina
KeywordsEnhanced oil recoveryMaterials scienceNanoparticleFlooding (psychology)Water floodingPetroleum engineeringChemical engineeringNanotechnologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surfactant flooding is a well-known chemical approach for enhancing oil recovery. Surfactant flooding has the disadvantage that it cannot withstand the hard reservoir conditions. Improvements in oil recovery and release are made possible by the use of nanoparticles and surfactants and CO2 co-injection because they generate stable foam, reduce the interfacial tension (IFT) between water and oil, cause emulsions to spontaneously form, change the wettability of porous media, and change the characteristics of flow. In the current work, the simultaneous injection of SiO2, Al2O3 nanoparticles, anionic surfactant SDS, and CO2 in various scenarios were evaluated to determine the microscopic and macroscopic efficacy of heavy oil recovery. IFT (interfacial tension) was reduced by 44% when the nanoparticles and SDS (2000 ppm) were added, compared to a reduction of roughly 57% with SDS only. SDS-stabilized CO2 foam flooding, however, is unstable due to the adsorption of SDS in the rock surfaces as well as in heavy oil. To assess foam's potential to shift CO2 from the high permeability zone (the thief zone) into the low permeability zone, directly visualizing micromodel flooding was successfully executed (upswept oil-rich zone). Based on typical reservoir permeability fluctuations, the permeability contrast (defined as the ratio of high permeability to low permeability) for the micromodel flooding was selected. However, the results of the experiment demonstrated that by utilizing SDS and nanoparticles, minimal IFT was reached. The addition of nanoparticles to surfactant solutions, however, greatly boosted oil recovery, according to the findings of flooding studies. The ultimate oil recovery was generally improved more by the anionic surfactant (SDS) solution including nanoparticles than by the anionic surfactant (SDS) alone.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.169
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.236 · 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