MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888928184 · doi:10.1021/acs.iecr.8b00246

Optimization of Coke Oven Gas Desulfurization and Combined Cycle Power Plant Electricity Generation

2018· article· en· W2888928184 on OpenAlexaff
Lingyan Deng, Thomas A. Adams

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicCatalysts for Methane Reforming
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefineryPower stationOil refineryFlue-gas desulfurizationWaste managementProcess engineeringEnvironmental scienceElectricity generationCombined cycleElectricityPetroleum cokeCokeEngineeringPower (physics)Mechanical engineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many steel refineries generate significant quantities of coke oven gas (COG), which is in some cases used only to generate low pressure steam and small amounts of electric power. In order to improve energy efficiency and reduce net greenhouse gas emissions, a combined cycle power plant (CCPP) where COG is used as fuel is proposed. However, desulfurization is necessary before the COG can be used as a fuel input for a CCPP. Using a local steel refinery as a case study, a proposed desulfurization process is designed to limit the H2S content in COG to less than 1 ppmv, and simulated using ProMax. In addition, the proposed CCPP plant is simulated in Aspen Plus and is optimized using GAMS to global optimality with net present value as the objective function. Furthermore, the carbon tax is considered in this study. The optimized CCPP plant was observed to generate more than twice the electrical efficiency when compared to the status quo for the existing steel refinery. Thus, by generating more electricity within the plant gate, the need to purchase electricity reduces, and hence reducing the lifecycle of CO2 emissions considerably.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations20
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry ResearchSame topicCatalysts for Methane ReformingFrench-language works237,207