MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066116000 · doi:10.1021/es204411c

Analysis of Energy Use and CO<sub>2</sub> Emissions in the U.S. Refining Sector, With Projections for 2025

2012· article· en· W2066116000 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David S. Hirshfeld, J. Kolb

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Impact and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefining (metallurgy)Environmental scienceGreenhouse gasEnergy (signal processing)Energy sectorWaste managementProcess engineeringChemistryNatural resource economicsEconomicsEngineeringMathematicsStatisticsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This analysis uses linear programming modeling of the U.S. refining sector to estimate total annual energy consumption and CO(2) emissions in 2025, for four projected U.S. crude oil slates. The baseline is similar to the current U.S. crude slate; the other three contain larger proportions of higher density, higher sulfur crudes than the current or any previous U.S. crude slates. The latter cases reflect aggressive assumptions regarding the volumes of Canadian crudes in the U.S. crude slate in 2025. The analysis projects U.S. refinery energy use 3.7%-6.3% (≈ 0.13-0.22 quads/year) higher and refinery CO(2) emissions 5.4%-9.3% (≈ 0.014-0.024 gigatons/year) higher in the study cases than in the baseline. Refining heavier crude slates would require significant investments in new refinery processing capability, especially coking and hydrotreating units. These findings differ substantially from a recent estimate asserting that processing heavy oil or bitumen blends could increase industry CO(2) emissions by 1.6-3.7 gigatons/year.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicEnvironmental Impact and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207