MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2589799508 · doi:10.1002/bbb.1758

Techno‐economic assessment of biogas to liquid fuels conversion technology via Fischer‐Tropsch synthesis

2017· article· en· W2589799508 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiofuels Bioproducts and Biorefining · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicCatalysts for Methane Reforming
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Food and AgricultureMcMaster University
KeywordsBiogasDiesel fuelFischer–Tropsch processSyngasWaste managementEnvironmental scienceGasolineAnaerobic digestionBiofuelRenewable energyLiquid fuelPulp and paper industryEngineeringChemistryCombustionHydrogenMethane

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Biogas derived from anaerobic digestion of organic wastes, and lignocellulosic biomass can be used to produce drop‐in diesel fuel via Fischer‐Tropsch ( FT ) synthesis. In this study, we developed a process‐based simulation model for the biogas to liquid fuel ( BgTL ) plant to conduct mass and energy balances and to evaluate techno‐economic assessment of producing drop‐in FT fuels. The BgTL plant operations consisted of biogas cleaning, biomethane reforming, FT synthesis of syngas and hydrocracking and final distillation to produce drop‐in liquid fuels. The unconverted syngas and syncrude were utilized to generate steam and electricity to meet internal plant demand, while the excess power was sold to the grid. The base case BgTL plant (2 000 Nm 3 /h) produced about 4.6 million gallons per annum of total FT fuels which consisted of 62% diesel, 32% gasoline, 6% LPG with an overall biogas conversion of 54%. A discounted cash flow rate of return ( DCFOROR ) approach for the Nth plant was used to estimate the capital and operating costs with the minimum selling price for the FT drop‐in fuels of about $5.67/gal ($5.29/ GGE ). The increase in plant feed capacity to 20 000 Nm 3 /h decreased the minimum selling price to $2.06/gal ($1.92/ GGE ). The sensitivity analysis conducted on the base case plant demonstrated that the internal rate of return ( IRR ), FT conversion rate, plant operating hours, and biogas cost were the most sensitivity parameters to the minimum selling price. Overall, the BgTL technology is deemed to be economically feasible to meet US biofuels demand. © 2017 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.259 · 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