Large‐scale commercial production of cellulosic ethanol from agricultural residues: A case study of wheat straw in the Canadian Prairies
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper provides a business case for a large‐scale wheat‐straw‐based cellulosic ethanol plant in the Canadian Prairies. Feedstock availability and costs were quantified for 11 locations representing the region’s agroecological soil zones. The economic feasibility of the cellulosic ethanol plant was evaluated using SuperPro Designer® based on simultaneous saccharification and cofermentation process. Total capital investment is approximately $90–$200 million for corresponding plant with capacities of 69–208 million liters annum ‐1 . The lowest operating costs are associated with high volume biomass locations such as Yorkton, Lanigan, and Weyburn. A range of discount rates (7–15%), ethanol selling price ($1.00–$1.70 L ‐1 ), and feedstock cost ($35–70 tonne ‐1 ) was used to assess the sensitivity of plant profitability ( NPV ) to changes in these parameters. Average total cost of ethanol production decreased with increasing plant size, from $0.90 L ‐1 in a small ethanol plant to $0.66 L ‐1 for plant capacity higher than 125 million L. The sensitivity analysis showed better economies of scale for larger plants, with marginal costs and average cost curves suggesting that Canadian Prairies could support a cellulosic ethanol plant capacity of 250 million L annum ‐1 at a single location. Yorkton, Melfort, Weyburn, Prince Albert, and Lanigan generate positive NPV over a wider range of annual plant capacities (138–208 million L). Swift Current, Rosetown, and Kindersley have the lowest NPV , associated with their low straw density and correspondingly higher transportation costs. © 2017 Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining © 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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 it