MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125370249 · doi:10.15376/biores.1.1.93-115

An overview of the Australian biomass resources and utilization technologies

2006· article· en· W2125370249 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Behdad Moghtaderi, Changdong Sheng, Terry Wall

Bibliographic record

VenueBioResources · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMacquarie UniversityUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsCofiringBagasseBiomass (ecology)Waste managementEnvironmental scienceBiofuelRenewable energyBioenergyPulp and paper industryBiogasStrawCombustionEthanol fuelRenewable resourceHeat of combustionCoalAgronomyEngineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information on Australian biomass resources including bagasse, black liquor from paper pulp production, wood waste and forestry residues, energy crops, crop wastes, food and agricultural wet waste, and municipal solid wastes is provided in the review. The characteristics of the Australian biomass are typical of those of other countries, i.e. high moisture and volatile matter, low heating value and density, and low sulfur and nitrogen content, but high Ca and Mg for woody biomass. The characteristics influence biomass utilization. Biomass is used extensively at present within Australia , primarily for domestic heating, as bagasse in the sugar industry, and for electricity generation. Biomass usage for electricity generation is increasing and is expected to reach 5.2 Mt/year by 2019-20. Exports, as wood chips, are approximately 10 Mt/year in 2000-01. Forestry residues have been estimated to be 23 Mt/year. Current technologies that utilize biomass in Australia include those for electricity and heat by direct combustion, cofiring with coal and fluidized bed combustion), for biogas generation (from landfills, and aerobic digestion, and as bio-liquids. Related to bio-liquid fuels, ethanol production from molasses and wheat is making progress. The resultant ethanol is used as a petrol extender, and a bio-diesel process is under development.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.248
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations33
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioResourcesSame topicThermochemical Biomass Conversion ProcessesFrench-language works237,207