The Effects of Thermal Treatment and Steam Addition on Integrated CuO/CaO Chemical Looping Combustion for CO2 Capture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The combination of Chemical Looping Combustion (CLC) with Calcium Looping (CaL) using integrated pellets is an alternative CO2 capture process to the current amine-based sorbent processes, but the pellets lose sorption capacity over time. In this paper, the deactivation behavior of CaO, CuO and CuO/CaO integrated pellets used for multiple (16–20) cycles in a thermogravimetric analyzer was studied. The impact of thermal treatment and the presence of steam on the deactivation were also investigated. Nitrogen physisorption and scanning electron microscopy/energy-dispersive X-ray analysis were used to characterize the pellets. The analysis revealed significant migration of the copper to the surface of the composite pellets, which likely suppressed carbonation capacity by reducing the accessibility of the CaO. While thermal pre-treatment and steam addition enhanced the performance of the base CaO pellets, the former led to cracks in the pellets. In contrast, thermal pretreatment of the CuO/CaO composite pellets resulted in worse CLC and CaL performance.
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) | 0.001 | 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".