MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969665509 · doi:10.1021/es070099a

Cost Structure of a Postcombustion CO<sub>2</sub> Capture System Using CaO

2007· article· en· W1969665509 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicChemical Looping and Thermochemical Processes
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsFlue gasPower stationWaste managementCoalScope (computer science)CombustionEngineeringProcess engineeringFlueFluidized bedEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceChemistryElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the basic economics of an emerging concept for CO2 capture from flue gases in power plants. The complete system includes three key cost components: a full combustion power plant, a second power plant working as an oxy-fired fluidized bed calciner, and a fluidized bed carbonator interconnected with the calciner and capturing CO2 from the combustion power plant. The simplicity in the economic analysis is possible because the key cost data for the two major first components are well established in the open literature. It is shown that there is clear scope for a breakthrough in capture cost to around 15 $/t of CO2 avoided with this system. This is mainly because the capture system is generating additional power (from the additional coal fed to the calciner) and because the avoided CO2 comes from the capture of the CO2 generated by the coal fed to the calciner and the CO2 captured (as CaCO3) from the flue gases of the existing power plant, that is also released in the calciner.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.201 · 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