MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2528285034 · doi:10.1109/sege.2016.7589528

Economic and environmental impact of using hydrogen enriched natural gas and renewable natural gas for residential heating

2016· article· en· W2528285034 on OpenAlexaff
Sean Walker, Daniel van Lanen, Michael Fowler

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicCatalysts for Methane Reforming
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNatural gasRenewable natural gasRenewable energyGreenhouse gasBiogasPower to gasElectricityMethaneCoalEnvironmental scienceHydrogenWaste managementProcess engineeringComputer scienceChemistryFuel gasEngineeringElectrical engineeringOrganic chemistryElectrolysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Natural gas, a fuel source that provides power generation and heating application, offers significant emissions and efficiency improvements over coal. The majority of natural gas is obtained through non-renewable deposits; however, it is possible to generate methane through the creation of Renewable Natural Gas (RNG). RNG is generated when biogas composed of CO <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">2</sub> and CH <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">4</sub> is methanated through the addition of hydrogen. An alternative sustainable pathway, however, is the creation of Hydrogen Enriched Natural Gas (HENG). HENG is created from the addition of hydrogen, in low volume percentages, to create a blend that emits less greenhouse gasses per unit of energy. The hydrogen used to create RNG and HENG can be generated from electrolysis using surplus electricity. Using surplus electricity, during off-peak hours, helps a jurisdiction effectively manage the power grid. As demonstrated through this case study the use of RNG and HENG to be utilized within the natural gas network can create an overall positive impact in any jurisdiction.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCatalysts for Methane ReformingFrench-language works237,207