Carbon Efficiency Recovery Index (CERI): A New Dimensionless Metric Unifying Economics and Carbon Efficiency for CO2-EOR Screening

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:炭素効率と経済性を統合する指標設計の一事例として、CCUS評価指標の妥当性検証手法を参考にできる。

🏢実務担当者:公開データのみでExcel算出可能なため、CCUS/EOR候補案件の初期スクリーニングや投資説明資料に活用できる。

🏛政策担当者:CCS/EOR支援策の対象選定や、炭素効率を加味した案件評価基準の設計に示唆を与える。

Abstract The most enduring contributions to petroleum engineering did not originate in academic theory. They originated in the field — in the gap between how engineers work and the tools available to support that work. JJ Arps watched production curves behave the same way across different wells, different formations, different basins, and reduced that observation to a single portable equation. The present work follows the same process in a different domain. Engineers evaluating CO2-EOR opportunities already integrate economics and carbon performance intuitively — in spreadsheets, in benchmarks, in judgment calls made under time pressure with incomplete data. What has been missing is the formalized, computable expression of that integration. The Carbon Efficiency Recovery Index (CERI) is that expression. CERI is a dimensionless field-level metric defined as the ratio of incremental oil profit to total carbon-specific investment, adjusted by a carbon storage efficiency multiplier (ηCarbon). It requires seven parameters — all estimable from public regulatory filings or industry benchmarks without reservoir simulation software or proprietary datasets. It is designed to be computed in Excel by one engineer in an afternoon, embedded in commercial reservoir evaluation platforms with minimal implementation effort, and applied consistently across candidate portfolios of any scale. Validation backtested CERI against 12 documented Alberta and Saskatchewan CO2-EOR projects spanning 24 years of operational history. The framework's discriminatory power is anchored by two historically resolved cases: Weyburn-Midale (CERI = 2.87), operating profitably for 24 continuous years, and Clive Field (CERI = 0.53), commercially discontinued after six years — two geologically comparable Devonian carbonate reservoirs that classical Taber screening criteria cannot distinguish. Aggregate validation across all 12 fields demonstrates Pearson r = 0.74 (p < 0.01) between CERI scores and independently derived NPV estimates; classification accuracy of 83.3% against documented project outcomes versus 58.3% for classical geological screening; Spearman rank correlation ρ = 0.83 (p < 0.01) for portfolio ordering; and zero false negatives across all Marginal-tier fields. The 5.8× CERI discrimination ratio between the highest and lowest scoring fields provides sufficient dynamic range for meaningful portfolio prioritization. Validation is calibrated to 12 Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin fields under 2024 economic conditions; expanded international validation and ηCarbon refinement are identified as primary research priorities in the companion publication programme. Extensions to Arabian Gulf carbonate reservoirs and international carbon policy frameworks are discussed. Companion frameworks for portfolio sequencing (NAJAM) and stochastic financial optimization under carbon price uncertainty (SARMA) are subjects of forthcoming publications.

• openalex https://doi.org/10.2118/235381-msfirst seen 2026-11-03 04:57:30 · last seen 2026-11-06 04:57:12