Kinetic Behavior of Solid K<sub>2</sub>CO<sub>3</sub> under Postcombustion CO<sub>2</sub> Capture Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trends in CO 2 and H 2 O uptakes by solid K 2 CO 3 were studied at different carbonation temperatures and flue gas compositions over 50 consecutive regeneration–carbonation cycles. Differences in carbonation behavior between the initial and final cycles evidence changes in the phase composition of K 2 CO 3 during cycling, which stabilize in accordance with the operating conditions. Rates of carbonation and hydration were observed to decrease at higher temperatures, indicating that the forward reactions are limited by adsorption, not chemical reaction. Multiple regression analysis of the uptake data yielded negative apparent activation energies for both forward reactions modeled as simple chemical reactions, thus proving the assumption invalid. A proposed Langmuir–Hinshelwood model yielded consistent apparent activation energies for the forward reactions, showing that adsorption limitations are significant in this chemisorption process. Important process design considerations, for realizing high carbonation rates and selecting promising support materials to enhance the CO 2 capture capacity of K 2 CO 3, are also discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".