MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2798137156

Conceptual design and feasibility study of a multi-feed integrated biomass conversion system.

2018· article· en· W2798137156 on OpenAlexaff
Saeed Ghanbari, Venkatesh Meda, Catherine Hui Niu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiofuel production and bioconversion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomass (ecology)Raw materialProcess engineeringBiofuelEnvironmental scienceBiochemical engineeringRenewable energyBioenergyProduction (economics)Waste managementEngineeringAgricultural engineeringChemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biomass is recognized as a potential source for sustainable production of fuels. Forestry residuals has been used for the small-scale production of biodiesel since early 1800s. However, the biofuel market has not been suitable in recent decades due to the pronounced drop in the worldwide price of petroleum. In addition, environmental issues, low reactor yield, and uncertainties in biomass feedstock have challenged process design engineers. Hence, extensive research has been reported to address these issues. Pyrolysis and gasification processes can produce a wide range of fuels, chemical, solvents, and other valuable products from biomass. Scholars attempted to optimize various operating parameters, find innovative approaches to increase the reaction yield, and develop novel product upgrading techniques such as bio-oil upgrading; yet, limited studies were focused on implementation of these methods for a multi-feed integrated biomass production plant. Recent findings have created the foundational blocks for design of high-tech integrated biomass conversion systems. This paper is focused on conceptual design and feasibility study of such systems incorporating the strategies and technologies at hand. The available biomass conversion technologies for different feedstocks are combined in this design. To this end, a new plant is designed and simulated in ASPEN PLUS simulator using ASPEN Economic Analyzer to perform an economic analysis. Techno-feasibility results suggest that this plant is not profitable even after incorporating the new technologies and optimizing the system.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBiofuel production and bioconversionFrench-language works237,207