Conceptual Design and Energy Analysis of Integrated Combined Cycle Gasification System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, an integrated gasification combined cycle conceptual design that achieves optimum energy efficiency and 82.9% heat integration between hot and cold utilities is illustrated. The integrated combined gasification cycle (IGCC) is also modeled and evaluated for the co-production of electricity, ammonia and methane for 543.13 kilo tonne per annum (KTA) of municipal solid waste (MSW). The final products are 1284.89 MW, 8731.07 kg/h of liquid ammonia at 8 °C and 32,468 kg/h of methane gas at 271 °C. The conceptual design includes advanced heat integration between syngas and hot and cold streams in all process units. The water gas shift (WGS) unit includes integration between equilibrium reactors and cold streams. The air separation unit (ASU) includes four air compressors followed by a pressure swing adsorber (PSA), which separates oxygen and nitrogen gases into separate streams. Both O2 and N2 gases are compressed and sent to gasifier and syngas cleaning unit, respectively. The overall design shows reliability and solved steady state equations for all process units with improvements in thermal efficiency in comparison with single cycle gasification plants. The environmental emissions for GHGs such CO2 and SO2 are lower due to higher overall energy efficiency.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".