Integration of Calcium and Chemical Looping Combustion using Composite CaO/CuO-Based Materials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Calcium looping cycles (CaL) and chemical looping combustion (CLC) are two new, developing technologies for reduction of CO(2) emissions from plants using fossil fuels for energy production, which are being intensively examined. Calcium looping is a two-stage process, which includes oxy-fuel combustion for sorbent regeneration, i.e., generation of a concentrated CO(2) stream. This paper discuss the development of composite materials which can use copper(II)-oxide (CuO) as an oxygen carrier to provide oxygen for the sorbent regeneration stage of calcium looping. In other words, the work presented here involves integration of calcium looping and chemical looping into a new class of postcombustion CO(2) capture processes designated as integrated CaL and CLC (CaL-CLC or Ca-Cu looping cycles) using composite pellets containing lime (CaO) and CuO together with the addition of calcium aluminate cement as a binder. Their activity was tested in a thermogravimetric analyzer (TGA) during calcination/reduction/oxidation/carbonation cycles. The calcination/reduction typically was performed in methane (CH(4)), and the oxidation/carbonation stage was carried out using a gas mixture containing both CO(2) and O(2). It was confirmed that the material synthesized is suitable for the proposed cycles; with the very favorable finding that reduction/oxidation of the oxygen carrier is complete. Various schemes for the Ca-Cu looping process have been explored here that would be compatible with these new composite materials, along with some different possibilities for flow directions among carbonator, calciner, and air reactor.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".