MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043011730 · doi:10.1021/ef901076g

Emissions of SO<sub>2</sub> and NO<sub><i>x</i></sub> during Oxy−Fuel CFB Combustion Tests in a Mini-Circulating Fluidized Bed Combustion Reactor

2009· article· en· W2043011730 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

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlue gasCombustionFlue-gas emissions from fossil-fuel combustionFluidized bed combustionChemical looping combustionNOxWaste managementOxy-fuelFossil fuelEnvironmental scienceCoalFuel gasPulverized coal-fired boilerChemistryNuclear engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anthropogenic CO 2 production is primarily driven by fossil fuel combustion, and the current energy demand situation gives no indication that this will change in the near future. In consequence, it is increasingly necessary to find ways to reduce these emissions when fossil fuel is used. CO 2 capture and storage (CCS) appears to be among the most promising approaches. All of the CCS technologies involve producing a nearly pure stream of CO 2, either by concentrating it in some manner from the flue gases or by using pure oxygen as the combustion gas. The latter option, oxy−fuel combustion, has now been well studied for pulverized coal combustion, but to date has received relatively little attention in the case of oxy−fuel circulating fluidized bed combustion (CFBC). Recently, oxy−fuel FBC has been examined in a 100 kW pilot plant operating with flue gas recycle at CanmetEnergy. The results strongly support the view that this technology offers all of the advantages of air-fired FBC, with one possible exception. Emissions such as CO or NO x are lower or comparable to those of air firing. It is possible to switch from air firing to oxy firing easily, with oxygen concentrations as high as 60−70%, and flue gas recycle levels of 50−60%. Only sulfation is poorer, which is not in good agreement with other studies, and the reasons for this discrepancy need further exploration. However, longer tests have confirmed these findings with two coals and a petroleum coke. It also appears that changing from direct to indirect sulfation with the petroleum coke improves the sulfation, although a similar effect could not be confirmed with coal from these results.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.191 · 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