MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2565025435 · doi:10.1021/acs.est.6b04606

Techno–Economic Evaluation of Technologies to Mitigate Greenhouse Gas Emissions at North American Refineries

2016· article· en· W2565025435 on OpenAlexafffund
Kavan Motazedi, Jessica P. Abella, Joule Bergerson

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCarbon Dioxide Capture Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCarbon Management Canada
KeywordsGreenhouse gasOil refineryEnvironmental scienceWaste managementRefineryNatural resource economicsEnvironmental protectionEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A petroleum refinery model, Petroleum Refinery Life-cycle Inventory Model (PRELIM), that estimates energy use and CO 2 emissions was modified to evaluate the environmental and economic performance of a set of technologies to reduce CO 2 emissions at refineries. Cogeneration of heat and power (CHP), carbon capture at fluid catalytic cracker (FCC) and steam methane reformer (SMR) units, and alternative hydrogen production technologies were considered in the analysis. The results indicate that a 3–44% reduction in total annual refinery CO 2 emissions (2–24% reductions in the CO 2 emissions on a per barrel of crude oil processed) can be achieved in a medium conversion refinery that processes a typical U.S. crude slate obtained by using the technologies considered. A sensitivity analysis of the quality of input crude to a refinery, refinery configuration, and prices of natural gas and electricity revealed how the magnitude of possible CO 2 emissions reductions and the economic performance of the mitigation technologies can vary under different conditions. The analysis can help inform decision making related to investment decisions and CO 2 emissions policy in the refining sector.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.214
Teacher spread0.206 · 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.

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

Citations27
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicCarbon Dioxide Capture TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207