Kinetic Studies of a Novel CO<sub>2</sub> Gasification Method Using Coal from Deep Unmineable Seams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seven coal samples taken from cores drilled in the Cretaceous Mannville Group were used for investigation of coal properties and carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) gasification. The depths of the cores ranged between 700 and 800 m below the surface in the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin. A new method was developed with an average heating rate of 200 K/min using CO 2 as the gasifying agent from the experiment’s beginning until its end. The coal properties of the seven coals from these deep coal seams showed certain similarities and variations. There is an obvious relationship between the reactivity and the material properties determined in the study. In particular, the specific surface area calculated relative to the carbon content measured in the ultimate analysis showed a correlation with the reactivity. The ash content and composition also appeared to influence char reactivity. The gasification behaviors of the in situ coals were compared to those of two surface-mined coals. The new method of coal gasification showed a significant difference to those that were heated up in an inert gas, such as nitrogen, to the target temperature. A maximum rate of reaction did not exist when the new method was used, and the integrated core model gave better results than the commonly used random pore model in terms of kinetic modeling.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".