Fate of Mercury in Volatiles and Char during in Situ Gasification Chemical-Looping Combustion of Coal
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
Mercury emission is an important issue during in-situ gasification chemical-looping combustion (iG-CLC) of coal. This work focused on experimentally “isolating” two elementary subprocesses (coal pyrolysis and char gasification) during iG-CLC of coal, identifying mercury distribution within the two subprocesses, and examining the effects of a hematite oxygen carrier (OC) on the mercury fate. The mercury measurement accuracy was carefully ensured by comparing online measurements (by a VM 3000 instrument) and benchmark measurements (by the standard Ontario Hydro Method, ASTM D6784) as well as repeated tests (10 times for each case). The mercury mass balance was 115% for the entire iG-CLC. A total of 44.7% of the mercury was released as the gas phase form within the coal pyrolysis process at a typical CLC operation temperature (950 °C), whereas 13.4% was released during the char gasification process. The release rate and amount of mercury were minimally affected by the presence of OC; however, the OC promoted the conversion of Hg0(g) to Hg2+(g). Only a small amount of mercury was absorbed by the OC and transported into the air reactor along with carbon residue, released as Hg0(g) and Hg2+(g) or remained in the OC and coal ash as particulate mercury.
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