MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013401540 · doi:10.1002/cjce.21908

Petroleum coke gasification: A review

2013· review· en· W2013401540 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetroleum cokeProcess engineeringOil refineryCokeRefining (metallurgy)PetroleumWaste managementWood gas generatorCoke strength after reactionEnvironmental scienceEngineeringChemistryMaterials scienceCoalOrganic chemistryMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The production of petroleum coke (petcoke) in the refineries is progressively peaking up because of the trend of processing heavy crudes and in turn, a renewed interest in delayed coking process. Therefore, an efficient, economical, and environmentally safe utilisation of petcoke has become imperative in the current petroleum refining scenario. Gasification of petcoke has emerged as one of the attractive options and is gaining increasing attention to convert the petcoke to value‐added products. The process offers the refiners a variety of product slates mainly via synthesis gas route. The products include steam, hydrogen, electricity, chemicals (viz. methanol, ammonia, etc.), liquid fuels via Fischer–Tropsch (F‐T) synthesis and so on. Petcoke has been identified as a potential feedstock for about 15% of the total planned gasification capacity worldwide. In the present communication, the published literature pertaining to petcoke gasification has been extensively analysed and a state‐of‐the‐art review has been written that includes: (1) the importance of petcoke gasification in the present petroleum refining scenario; (2) petcoke gasification reaction mechanism, kinetics, and typical product profile; (3) parametric sensitivity of the operating variables such as temperature and pressure; (4) various gasifiers for petcoke gasification; (5) modelling efforts on different types of gasifiers and (6) future prospects of petcoke gasification. An attempt has been made to get the afore‐mentioned aspects together in a thematic framework so that the information is available at a glance and is expected to be useful as a single point source to the researchers and practicing refiners.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.884
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.203 · 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