MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024260470 · doi:10.1021/ie070335q

Investigation of Attempts to Improve Cyclic CO<sub>2</sub> Capture by Sorbent Hydration and Modification

2008· article· en· W2024260470 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

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicChemical Looping and Thermochemical Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbonationSorbentCalcinationDolomiteChemical engineeringLimeCarbonatationMolar ratioCarbonateMaterials scienceChemistryAdsorptionMineralogyOrganic chemistryCatalysisMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A three-part experimental program was carried out to investigate possible methods to improve sorbent reversibility during cyclic calcination/carbonation using one limestone and one dolomite. In the first part, the different roles of steam and water are discussed and investigated. Steam addition during carbonation and calcination did not help to significantly achieve good reversibility. Hydration, especially with low-temperature steam and liquid water, is promising to help improve sorbent reversibility by regenerating favorable pore size distributions; however, a carbonate layer inhibited hydration. Preliminary tests were also conducted on possible agents that might improve CO 2 capture efficiency and sorbent cyclic performance. An ∼1:1 molar ratio of CaO to Al 2 O 3 showed promising results on a free-lime basis. A series of other tests did not give promising results, but provided information relevant to developing synthetic CO 2 sorbents. It was also found that CO can regenerate CaO from CaSO 4 formed during co-capture of SO 2 and CO 2, but the rate of reduction is too slow to be of practical interest.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.789

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.217 · 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