MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1521754108 · doi:10.18331/brj2015.1.4.4

Process analysis of superheated steam pre-treatment of wheat straw and its relative effect on ethanol selling price

2014· article· en· W1521754108 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Dave Barchyn, Stefan Cenkowski

Bibliographic record

VenueBiofuel Research Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiofuel production and bioconversion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCellulosic ethanolBiofuelSteam explosionPulp and paper industryStrawEthanol fuelSuperheated steamEnzymatic hydrolysisStarchWaste managementChemistryEnvironmental scienceHydrolysisCelluloseFood scienceEngineeringOrganic chemistryBoiler (water heating)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Existing bioethanol operations rely on starch-based substrates, which have been criticized for their need to displace food crops in order to be produced. As an alternative to these first generation biofuels, the use of agricultural residues is being considered to create more environmentally-benign second generation, or cellulosic biofuels. Recalcitrance of these substrates to fermentation requires extensive pre-treatment processes, which often consume more energy than can be extracted from the ethanol that they produce, so one of the priorities in developing cellulosic ethanol is an effective and efficient pre-treatment method. This study examines the use of superheated steam (SS) as a process medium by which wheat straw lignocellulosic material is pre-treated. Following enzymatic hydrolysis, it was found that 47% of the total glucose could be liberated from the substrate, and the optimal conditions for pre-treatment were 15 min in hot water (193 kPa, 119˚C) followed by 2 min in SS. Furthermore, a preliminary relative economic analysis showed that the minimum ethanol selling price (MESP) was comparable to that obtained from steam explosion, a similar process, while energy consumption was 22% less. The conclusion of the study is that SS treatment stands to be a competitive pre-treatment technology to steam explosion.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations17
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiofuel Research JournalSame topicBiofuel production and bioconversionFrench-language works237,207