Prospects for underground coal gasification in carbon-constrained world
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Underground coal gasification (UCG) has re-emerged as an energy technology for coal conversion and utilization given its attractive economics, ability to access inaccessible coals, and versatility of use. Based on published and new cost estimates, engineering analyses, and new commercial pilots it appears that UCG can produce syngas for 1/2 to 1/4 of the cost compared to surface gasifiers. New pilots announced in India, Canada, New Zealand, Wyoming, Alberta, China, and Australia to commence in 2009-2010 are preludes to commercial projects to produce hydrogen, power, liquid fuels, and chemicals. Importantly, UCG may have special promise in combination with carbon capture and sequestration (CCS). First, there is a high degree of coincidence between coal resources and potential sequestration sites. Second, preliminary engineering and economic assessments suggest that it would be possible to fully or partially decarbonize many UCG product streams with CCS at costs at or below their surface equivalents without CCS. At present, all projects proposed for North America have CCS as a component to their carbon management strategy.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it