Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 344

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Process Modeling of CO2 Injection into Natural Gas Reservoirs for Carbon Sequestration and Enhanced Gas Recovery

Oldenburg, C. M., Pruess, K., Benson, S. M.·2001·Energy & Fuels

Abstract

Injection of CO 2 into depleted natural gas reservoirs offers the potential to sequester carbon while simultaneously enhancing CH 4 recovery. Enhanced CH 4 recovery can partially offset the costs of CO 2 injection. With the goal of analyzing the feasibility of carbon sequestration with enhanced gas recovery (CSEGR), we are investigating the physical processes associated with injecting CO 2 into natural gas reservoirs. The properties of natural gas reservoirs and CO 2 and CH 4 appear to favor CSEGR. To simulate the processes of CSEGR, a module for the TOUGH2 reservoir simulator that includes water, brine, CO 2, tracer, and CH 4 in nonisothermal conditions has been developed. Simulations based on the Rio Vista Gas Field in the Central Valley of California are used to test the feasibility of CSEGR using CO 2 separated from flue gas generated by the 680 MW Antioch gas-fired power plant. Model results show that CO 2 injection allows additional CH 4 to be produced during and after CO 2 injection.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/ef000247h

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Oldenburg, C. M., Pruess, K., & Benson, S. M.
Venue
Energy & Fuels
Published
2001-02-14
Volume
15
Issue
2
Pages
293-298
ISSN
  • 0887-0624 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5029
OpenAlex
W1976542716
Cited by
344
References
2
FWCI
10.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.