Case Study of Viability of Bioenergy Production from Landfill Gas (LFG)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The landfill gas (LFG) produced from the existing landfill site in Heraklion city, Crete island, Greece, is not currently exploited to its full potential. It could however be exploited for power generation and/or combined heat and power (CHP) production in near future by fully unlocking its energy production potential of the gas generated from the landfill site. This gas (LFG) could feed a 1.6 MWel power plant corresponding to the 0.42% of the annually consumed electricity in Crete. The LFG utilization for power generation and CHP production has been studied, and the economics of three energy production scenarios have been calculated. An initial capital investment of 2.4 to 3.2 M €, with payback times (PBT) of approximately 3.5 to 6 years and Net Present Values (NPV) ranging between 2 to 6 M € have been calculated. These values prove the profitability of the attempt of bioenergy production from the biogas produced from the existing landfill site in Heraklion city, Crete. Based on the current economic situation of the country, any similar initiative could positively contribute to strengthening the economy of local community and as a result the country, offering several other socioeconomic benefits like e.g. waste minimization, creation of new job positions etc. by increasing, at the same time, the Renewable Energy Sources (RES) share in energy production sector etc. Apart from the favorable economics of the proposed waste to energy production scheme, all the additional environmental and social benefits make the attempt of a near future exploitation of the landfill gas produced in Heraklion, an attractive short term alternative for waste to bio-energy production.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".