Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25899050›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2015

The effect of ionic strength on oil adhesion in sandstone--the search for the low salinity mechanism.

E Hilner, M P Andersson, T Hassenkam, J Matthiesen, P A Salino, S L S Stipp

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
25.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 141 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

E HilnerNano-Science Center, Department of Chemistry, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
M P AnderssonNano-Science Center, Department of Chemistry, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
T HassenkamNano-Science Center, Department of Chemistry, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
J MatthiesenNano-Science Center, Department of Chemistry, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
P A SalinoBP Exploration, Sunbury, U.K.
S L S StippNano-Science Center, Department of Chemistry, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
University of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Core flood and field tests have demonstrated that decreasing injection water salinity increases oil recovery from sandstone reservoirs. However, the microscopic mechanism behind the effect is still under debate. One hypothesis is that as salinity decreases, expansion of the electrical double layer decreases attraction between organic molecules and pore surfaces. We have developed a method that uses atomic force microscopy (AFM) in chemical force mapping (CFM) mode to explore the relationship between wettability and salinity. We functionalised AFM tips with alkanes and used them to represent tiny nonpolar oil droplets. In repeated measurements, we brought our "oil" close to the surface of sand grains taken from core plugs and we measured the adhesion between the tip and sample. Adhesion was constant in high salinity solutions but below a threshold of 5,000 to 8,000 ppm, adhesion decreased as salinity decreased, rendering the surface less oil wet. The effect was consistent, reproducible and reversible. The threshold for the onset of low salinity response fits remarkably well with observations from core plug experiments and field tests. The results demonstrate that the electric double layer force always contributes at least in part to the low salinity effect, decreasing oil wettability when salinity is low.

Identifiers

PMID25899050
PMCPMC4405700
OpenAlexW2038159501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.