Life cycle analyses of bulk‐scale solid oxide fuel cell power plants and comparisons to the natural gas combined cycle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this work, detailed cradle‐to‐grave life cycle analyses are performed for a current state‐of‐the art natural gas combined cycle and a bulk‐scale solid fuel cell power plant fuelled by natural gas. Life cycle inventories are performed for multiple configurations of each plant, including designs with carbon capture capability. Consistent boundaries (including all supply chain and upstream processes) and unit bases for each process are defined for each process. The ReCiPe 2008 life cycle assessment method is used to quantify the impacts of each plant at both mid‐ and end‐point levels. Three impact assessment perspectives (individualist, hierarchist, and egalitarian) are considered. The results of these life cycle analyses are compared in order to determine the environmental trade‐offs between potential power generation pathways. Results indicate that power generation using solid oxide fuel cells has a smaller life cycle impact than the natural gas combined cycle when the entire life cycle of each option is considered.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".