MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2343648481 · doi:10.1002/ieam.1788

Proposal of a framework for scale-up life cycle inventory: A case of nanofibers for lithium iron phosphate cathode applications

2016· article· en· W2343648481 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIntegrated Environmental Assessment and Management · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRecycling and Waste Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLife-cycle assessmentElectrospinningSupply chainComputer scienceProcess (computing)Scale (ratio)Product life-cycle managementAutomotive industryProcess engineeringSystems engineeringManufacturing engineeringBiochemical engineeringEngineeringMaterials scienceProduction (economics)BusinessMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Environmental assessments are crucial for the management of the environmental impacts of a product in a rapidly developing world. The design phase creates opportunities for acting on the environmental issues of products using life cycle assessment (LCA). However, the LCA is hampered by a lack of information originating from distinct scales along the product or technology value chain. Many studies have been undertaken to handle similar problems, but these studies are case-specific and do not analyze the development options in the initial design phase. Thus, systematic studies are needed to determine the possible scaling. Knowledge from such screening studies would open the door for developing new methods that can tackle a given scaling problem. The present article proposes a scale-up procedure that aims to generate a new life cycle inventory (LCI) on a theoretical industrial scale, based on information from laboratory experiments. Three techniques are described to obtain the new LCI. Investigation of a laboratory-scale procedure is discussed to find similar industrial processes as a benchmark for describing a theoretical large-scale production process. Furthermore, LCA was performed on a model system of nanofiber electrospinning for Li-ion battery cathode applications. The LCA results support material developers in identifying promising development pathways. For example, the present study pointed out the significant impacts of dimethylformamide on suspension preparation and the power requirements of distinct electrospinning subprocesses. Nanofiber-containing battery cells had greater environmental impacts than did the reference cell, although they had better electrochemical performance, such as better wettability of the electrode, improving the electrode's electrosorption capacity, and longer expected lifetime. Furthermore, material and energy recovery throughout the production chain could decrease the environmental impacts by 40% to 70%, making the nanofiber a promising battery cathode. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2016;12:465–477. © 2016 SETAC Key Points Scale-up procedure in life cycle assessment (LCA) is extremely important in the rapid developing technological environment in order to manage the growing environmental problems through environmentally conscious design of new materials. Recent publications and studies offer some promising techniques to handle the problem of different scales in LCA, even though they are not always feasible in low technology readiness levels (TRL 1–3). We propose a general process-scaling framework in order to gain information on theoretical large-scale production in the early development phase. We describe an example of the application of the proposed framework to scale-up the inventory of nanofiber production for a lithium iron phosphate battery cathode.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score0.792

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.267 · 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