Pathways for the Formation of Products of the Oxidative Degradation of CO<sub>2</sub>-Loaded Concentrated Aqueous Monoethanolamine Solutions during CO<sub>2</sub> Absorption from Flue Gases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oxidative degradation experiments involving CO 2 -loaded monoethanolamine (MEA) were performed in a stainless steel rotary-type autoclave with MEA concentrations of 5 and 7 mol/L, O 2 pressures of 250 and 350 kPa, and a CO 2 loading ranging from 0 to 0.44 mol of CO 2 /mol of MEA at temperatures of 55−120 °C in order to elucidate the pathways for the formation of degradation products under typical absorber and stripper conditions and to evaluate the effects of temperature, O 2 pressure, MEA concentration, and CO 2 loading on MEA degradation. The results showed that an increase in the temperature or O 2 pressure resulted in an increase in degradation for both the MEA−H 2 O−O 2 and MEA−H 2 O−O 2 −CO 2 systems. However, an increase in the MEA concentration gave the opposite effect for all of the systems. The number of products and the extent of degradation decreased in the following order: MEA−H 2 O−O 2 > MEA−H 2 O−O 2 −CO 2 > MEA−H 2 O−CO 2 . The gas chromatograph/mass spectrometer method was used to identify the degradation products, which were then used to propose pathways for their formation that are consistent with the products and the operating conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".