Numerical investigation of natural gas-enhanced autothermic pyrolysis for optimizing in-situ conversion in oil shale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The autothermic pyrolysis in-situ conversion process for oil shale (ATS) offers the advantages of low development costs and the capability to exploit deep oil shale resources. However, oil shale formations with low oil content encounter the challenge of insufficient heat-generating donors in the thermal cracking residue, making it difficult to sustain the autogenous thermal reaction through oxidative exotherm. In this study, we propose a natural gas-assisted autogenous thermal in-situ conversion technology (H-ATS) designed to develop low oil content shale, and we analyze its mechanism through numerical simulation across oil shales with varying oil contents. The results show that introducing 2.0% natural gas into the injected air successfully triggers the autogenous thermal reaction in low-oil-content shale, achieving an energy efficiency of 3.70. For medium oil content shale, a 2.0% natural gas addition, and for high oil content shale, a 4.0% addition, significantly reduces the gas compression energy required, enhancing energy efficiency to 8.11 and 13.04, respectively—representing improvements of 29.47% and 19.19% over the ATS process alone. This study evaluates the applicability of H-ATS technology across various oil shale formations, providing a new approach for the commercialization of in-situ conversion technology.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".