MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Natural Soils-based Oxidation Mitigates Methane Leakage from Integrity Compromised Legacy Wells

2024· preprint· en· W4404317856 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aaron G. Cahill, James McClure, Iain de Jonge‐Anderson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoil waterMethaneEnvironmental scienceWellheadCarbon dioxideAnaerobic oxidation of methaneNatural gasSoil gasFugitive emissionsEnvironmental chemistryEarth scienceEnvironmental engineeringMining engineeringGeologySoil scienceGreenhouse gasPetroleum engineeringWaste managementEcologyChemistryOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An increasing number of legacy petroleum wells are reported to suffer integrity failure, releasing methane (CH4) into the subsurface and atmosphere. Subsurface released methane is reactively transported towards ground surface with a portion converted to carbon dioxide by soil microbes. Currently, the extent to which fugitive CH4 oxidation occurs, including microbial taxa responsible and controlling parameters are poorly understood. Here, we examined fugitive CH4 leakage at a legacy well in the Montney region of British Columbia, Canada and find up to 90% is oxidised at rates as high as 230 g of CH4 /m2 of soils/day during summer. Meanwhile, a profound difference in microbiome between soils at the wellhead and background was observed, while modelling suggests that prevailing seasonal temperature will moderate CH4 oxidation extent. Overall, we find that filtration of fugitive CH4 through natural soils can significantly reduce emissions of CH4 and mitigate climate impacts from such sources

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.252
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena→French-language works237,207→