MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415649789 · doi:10.3997/2214-4609.2025644041

Geomechanical Charaterization of Montney Turbidites for Secondary Carbon Storage in the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin

2025· article· W4415649789 on OpenAlexaffabout
A. Mascarenhas, Omid H. Ardakani, Giovanni Grasselli, E. Muniz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbiditeSedimentary rockCaprockSiltstoneOil shaleLithologyStructural basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary To meet global net-zero emission goals by 2050, Canada must make substantial contributions to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and identifying carbon dioxide (CO2) storage reservoirs. In the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin (WSCB), the Lower Triassic Montney Formation contains extensive turbidites that are promising reservoirs yet remain under-characterized geomechanically, especially under Supercritical (Sc-CO2) exposure. This study assesses the integrity of Montney turbidites which primarily consist of siltstones and sandstones using laboratory testing and log integration. Core plugs were conditioned to represent dry, brine-saturated, and Sc-CO2 environments and were evaluated by Micro-CT, Ultrasonic velocities, Brazilian tensile strength, Uniaxial compressive strength, and Multistage triaxial tests. Findings highlighted lithologic controls on stiffness and strength, and a consistent separation between dynamic and static moduli. Siltstones tend to be stronger yet more chemically responsive while sandstones displayed steadier behaviour across fluids. Exposure to Sc-CO2 and brine alters elastic response and failure behaviour in ways predictable from texture enabling calibration between core measurements and logs. The research concludes that the Montney turbidites are mechanically competent for storage, with sandstone-rich intervals offering greater resilience during injection. The research provides parameters to assess containment risk and model reservoir as a potential for carbon capture and underground storage in WCSB.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.181
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.238
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic InteractionsFrench-language works237,207