Comparative Study on Plastic Materials as a New Source of Energy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The pyrolysis can be an attractive way to reduce the plastic waste and, in the same time, to obtain alternative conventional fuels. In this respect, four polymers (low-density polyethylene, high-density polyethylene, propylene and polystyrene) were used in the pyrolysis process. The experiments were carried out by using an in-house plant, which allowed a maximum test temperature of 450 �C. The product oil and the derived gas from the pyrolysis process were evaluated using different techniques, such as elemental analysis (EA), calorimetry, gas chromatography (GC), gas chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry (GC-MS). Furthermore, for a comparative study two catalysts, zeolite and lignite, were also used for the pyrolysis process, in order to observe their influences on the final products. The higher heating value obtained for the oil was in the 40.17-45.35 MJ/kg range, acceptable for the use of these oil as an alternative fuel for diesel engine. Also, the sulphur content from the obtained oil does not cause environment problems, being lower than the allowed limits (10 mg/L). In addition, the pyrolysis derived gas was rich in hydrocarbons, conducting to a high calorific value, in the 73.42 - 121.18 MJ/kg range.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".