Reservoir Potential Unlocked: Synergies Between Low-Salinity Water Flooding, Nanoparticles and Surfactants in Enhanced Oil Recovery─A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review explores the synergistic application of low-salinity water flooding (LSWF), nanoparticles, and surfactants in enhanced oil recovery (EOR), emphasizing their combined potential to address modern oil production challenges. It highlights the ability of LSWF to alter reservoir wettability, improve sweep efficiency, nanoparticles to enhance fluid mobility, and reduce interfacial tension, and surfactants to lower the interfacial tension and promote emulsification. All of this aim to provide practical, easy-to-use, and sustainable solutions for oil recovery. The review discusses existing research gaps in the long-term stability of nanoparticle-surfactant complexes, site-specific differences in rock-fluid interactions, and economic viability across diverse reservoirs. The review summarizes experimental findings, demonstrating recovery rates of 45-55% for nanoparticles, 50-60% for surfactants, and 40-50% for LSWF with improvements of 75-82% through this integrated approach. Additionally, the review addresses technological advancements, environmental considerations, and economic feasibility, highlighting challenges such as nanoparticle agglomeration and surfactant adsorption. A bibliographic analysis of global research trends, mechanisms, and field applications underscores the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration in optimizing this strategy for sustainable and efficient EOR processes. The findings aim to guide researchers and industry professionals in leveraging the synergistic effects of these methods to maximize oil recovery and reduce environmental footprints with a proposition to develop advanced characterization techniques, and verifying practicality through field implementation studies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".