MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Overview of Process Modeling Software: Utilizing Alternative Fuels in Cement Plant for Air Pollution Reduction

2012· article· en· W1748444995 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Emad Benhelal, Alireza Rafiei

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy science and technology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicChemical and Environmental Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoalWaste managementNatural gasEnvironmental scienceCementFossil fuelProcess simulationEngineeringProcess (computing)PollutionProcess engineeringComputer scienceMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of process systems engineering tools, such as process modeling software enable the alternative generation of more efficient and sustainable processes. This paper presents the simulation of cement process using alternative fuels to replace coal.  The process modeling is performed using Aspen HYSYS. Simulation results revealed that the substitution of fuel oil, natural gas and palm kernel shell for coal had a significant contribution for emission reduction in cement industry. The emissions for the base case scenario found to be 40,317 kg/h CO 2 , 806 kg/h NO 2 and 146.8 kg/h SO 2 . Utilizing fuel oil mitigated 22% of CO 2 and 92% of NO 2 but increased 232% of SO 2 emissions. Altering coal to palm kernel shell resulted in 46.16% of CO 2 , 73% of NO 2 and 68% of SO 2 emission reduction. In the best case 45.64 % reduction of CO 2 emissions was achieved by replacing coal to natural gas and neither NO 2 nor SO 2 was generated. Key words : Cement plant; Process simulation; Aspen HYSYS; Alternative fuels; Air pollution reduction

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy science and technologySame topicChemical and Environmental Engineering ResearchFrench-language works237,207