English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

CO 2  enhanced oil recovery (EOR) processes provide the perfect balance to sequester anthropogenic CO 2  emissions in the subsurface while continuing to produce crude oil, which due to the lack of suitable alternatives, continues to be the most economically viable fuel for the developing world. Unlike, other eco-sustainable energy sources, oil produced from projects undergoing CO 2 -EOR emit large volumes of CO 2  on combustion. However, this volume of CO 2  is certainly lower than oil produced from other projects, yielding a net-zero emission scenario where the amount of CO 2  emitted is equal to or lesser than CO 2  sequestered in the subsurface. Thus, in this study, various means of CO 2 -EOR like gas injection, water-alternating gas (WAG), carbonated water injection (CWI) and foam flooding were performed in a fabricated porous media and the resultant oil recovery was compared with the amount of CO 2  injected to establish the carbon footprint of each method. From the presented results, the application of foam flooding is recommended to achieve near net-zero carbon emissions from produced crude oil.

Comparative analysis of carbon footprint of various CO 2 -enhanced oil recovery methods: A short experimental study