MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2611925722 · doi:10.1002/cjce.22883

Potassium‐catalyzed steam gasification of ash‐free lignite coal with CO<sub>2</sub> capture

2017· article· en· W2611925722 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Negar Manafi Rasi, Ehsan Mostafavi, Maria Angelica Retuta, Moshfiqur M. Rahman, Rajender Gupta, Nader Mahinpey

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicChemical Looping and Thermochemical Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCarbon Management Canada
KeywordsCatalysisChemistryCoalSorbentHydrogen productionCoal gasificationCarbon fibersWaste managementHydrogenChemical engineeringPotassiumRaw materialMaterials scienceOrganic chemistryAdsorption

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The purpose of this research was to study steam gasification of ash‐free coal integrated with CO 2 capture in the presence of a K 2 O catalyst for enhancement of the key water‐gas shift reaction and promotion of hydrogen production. To achieve this goal, gasification experiments on ash‐free coal (AFC) were carried out at varying temperatures (600, 650, 675, 700, and 750 °C) with a sorbent‐to‐carbon (CaO/C) ratio of 2 and a catalyst (K 2 O) loading of 0.2 g/g (20 weight percent (wt%)) in a fixed‐bed reactor equipped with a gas chromatography analyzer. The sorbent‐to‐carbon (CaO/C) ratio of 2 is based on dry and ash‐free basis. The CaO/C ratio and K 2 O wt% were chosen to maximize hydrogen production based on our previously determined optimal values. The AFC was originally extracted from raw lignite coal using organic solvents, which allowed the sorption‐enhanced gasification to be conducted with minimal ash‐catalyst interactions. The effect of temperature on the yield and the initial reaction rate were investigated. The optimal reaction temperature of 675 °C was determined. Carbon balance and final carbon conversions were calculated based on the residue analysis. Activation energy was also calculated using intrinsic kinetics of the reaction. In this study, using AFC offered the potential advantage of operating the gasification process with catalyst recycle.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.646

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicChemical Looping and Thermochemical ProcessesFrench-language works237,207