MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2474239512 · doi:10.1002/cjce.22433

Micro‐syngas technology options for GtL

2016· article· en· W2474239512 on OpenAlex
Cristian Trevisanut, Seyed Mahdi Jazayeri, Said Bonkane, Cristian Neagoe, Ali Mohamadalizadeh, Daria C. Boffito, Claudia L. Bianchi‬, Carlo Pirola, Carlo Giorgio Visconti, Luca Lietti, Nicolas Abatzoglou, Lyman Frost, Jan Lerou, William H. Green, Gregory S. Patience

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicCatalysts for Methane Reforming
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookePolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNatural gasSyngasMethaneRefineryGas to liquidsChemistrySteam reformingHydrocarbonWaste managementLiquefied natural gasSyngas to gasoline plusRenewable natural gasEnvironmental scienceFuel gasOrganic chemistryEngineeringCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Natural gas emissions contribute to climate change, and equally importantly, affect the health of populations near gas fields. [1] At night, the flares from the Bakken fields in North Dakota burn as bright as the lights in cities as large as Minneapolis. Rather than flaring (or worse, venting), this associated natural gas represents a multi‐billion dollar opportunity. [2] Pipelines and liquefying natural gas are cost prohibitive in many cases. Converting methane to fuels is an attractive alternative. We examined three options to convert natural gas to syngas ( and CO), which is the first step to producing fuels: Steam Methane Reforming (SMR), Auto‐Thermal Reforming (ATR), and Catalytic Partial Oxidation (CPOX). Based on a multi‐objective optimization analysis, C hydrocarbon yields are highest with CPOX as the first step followed by Fischer‐Tropsch synthesis (FT). A micro‐refinery with the CPOX‐FT process treating (100 ) natural gas, produces 1300 (8.2 ) of C hydrocarbons. Maximum yields for the SMR‐FT and ATR‐FT processes are 938 and 1100 (5.9 , 7.0 ) of C , respectively. Large‐scale POX and ATR processes produce 1600 L per 2800 kL (10 bbl per 100 MCF) of natural gas.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.196 · 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