Direct utilization of ethanol on ceria‐based anodes for solid oxide fuel cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The direct utilization of ethanol was investigated in CuCeO2, CuZr0.35Ce0.65O2 (ZDC) and Cu/RuZr0.35Ce0.65O2 anodes for solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC). The anodes were prepared by impregnation with nitrate precursors on a porous layer of yttria‐stabilized zirconia (YSZ) obtained by tape casting, while (La0.8Sr0.2MnO3−δ) LSM cathodes were screen‐printed. The cells were tested in both hydrogen and ethanol. The outlet gas composition was monitored with a gas chromatograph, which showed that almost all the ethanol was decomposed, mainly to H2, CH4, CO, H2O and C2H4. The maximum power outputs obtained in ethanol were 0.075 and 0.400 W/cm2 on CuCeO2|YSZ|LSM and CuZDC|YSZ|LSM, respectively. All cells were more active in alcohol than in hydrogen with the peak performance occurring after approximately 4 h. That is, the power density initially increased, peaked and then decreased. This behavior was likely a consequence of carbon deposition that initially results in an improvement of the electronic conductivity in the anode but later results in the blocking of the active sites. Zirconia doping (in the ZDC anodes) resulted in better stability and, in addition, the initial activity of the ZDC anodes could be recovered after approximately 1 h of exposure to humidified hydrogen, whereas the initial activity of the ceria anodes could not be recovered. The addition of ruthenium (<0.5 wt%) further improved the stability by delaying the onset of carbon formation. Copyright © 2008 Curtin University of Technology and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".