MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7096734698

Idle Oil Wells: Half Empty or Half Full?

2009· article· en· W7096734698 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProduction (economics)Fossil fuelPetroleumOil productionState (computer science)Energy conservationOil wellCrude oil
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are hundreds of thousands of oil and gas wells across North America that are cur-rently not producing oil or gas. Many of these wells have not been permanently decommis-sioned to meet environmental standards for permanent closure, but are in an inactive state that enables the well to be more easily reactivated. Some of these wells have been in this inactive state for more than sixty years which begs the question of whether the inactive wells can contribute significantly to our energy supply, or whether they are the result of operators avoiding their environmental obligations. By estimating a dynamic discrete choice model of operating state with data of production decisions from 84 thousand wells and estimates of expected recoverable reserves from 47 thousand pools this paper shows that a drastic increase in prices and production technology are necessary to see a notable increase in the number of inactive wells reactivated. Jel–Classification: C61, Q32, Q41 Keywords:dynamic structural estimation; environmental remediation; oil and gas ∗I thank my advisors John Rust and Marc Nerlove. I also thank the Alberta Energy and Resources Conservation Board for access to the data, and the Chicago-Argonne Institute on Computational Economics for the optimization

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.272 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research→French-language works237,207→