Influence of coal properties on the CO<sub>2</sub> adsorption capacity of coal gasification residues
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 Post‐underground coal gasification ( UCG ) sites hold attractive prospects for geological storage of carbon dioxide. For the successful commercial implementation of UCG with carbon capture and storage ( CCS ), site‐selection is crucial, and a careful techno‐economic feasibility analysis is essential to systematically assess the site related parameters aside from evaluating the environmental risk. This study is related to one of the important aspects of site selection‐ the coal type. Specifically, this work investigates the influence of coal properties and gasification conditions on the adsorption capacities of CO 2 on gasified coal chars. For this purpose, four coals of diverse ranks varying from lignite to bituminous were selected and subjected to CO 2 gasification at atmospheric pressure for 10 min at 800, 900, and 1000°C under a low heating rate of 5°C/min. Subsequently, the gasified chars, as well as the raw coals, were tested for their adsorption capacity in a purpose built volumetric adsorption apparatus at 45.5°C and pressures up to 90 bar. Also, complementary coal and char analysis were carried out for determining the surface area, pore size distribution, and surface morphology. The CO 2 storage capacity was observed to be a strong function of the coal properties and gasification conditions. Among the samples examined, the highest adsorption capacity was observed for chars of the sub‐bituminous coals. The CO 2 adsorption capacity at 80 bar and 45.5°C on the sub‐bituminous char samples was 2.08, 2.43, and 1.95 mmole/g that were prepared at 800, 900, and 1000°C, respectively. The experimental adsorption isotherms were fitted to the Dubinin‐Radushkevic ( DR ) and the Dubinin‐Astakhov ( DA ) models.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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