MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3089253459 · doi:10.1007/s10098-020-01945-5

The production of fuels and chemicals in the new world: critical analysis of the choice between crude oil and biomass vis-à-vis sustainability and the environment

2020· review· en· W3089253459 on OpenAlexafffund
Vikramaditya G. Yadav, Ganapati D. Yadav, Saurabh C. Patankar

Bibliographic record

VenueClean Technologies and Environmental Policy · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India
KeywordsIndustrial and production engineeringSustainabilityBiomass (ecology)Production (economics)Crude oilWaste managementEnvironmental scienceBiochemical engineeringNatural resource economicsEconomicsEngineeringPetroleum engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Energy and the environment are intimately related and hotly debated issues. Today’s crude oil-based economy for the manufacture of fuels, chemicals and materials will not have a sustainable future. The over-use of oil products has done a great damage to the environment. Faced with the twin challenges of sustaining socioeconomic development and shrinking the environmental footprint of chemicals and fuel manufacturing, a major emphasis is on either converting biomass into low-value, high-volume biofuels or refining it into a wide spectrum of products. Using carbon for fuel is a flawed approach and unlikely to achieve any nation’s socioeconomic or environmental targets. Biomass is chemically and geographically incompatible with the existing refining and pipeline infrastructure, and biorefining and biofuels production in their current forms will not achieve economies of scale in most nations. Synergistic use of crude oil, biomass, and shale gas to produce fuels, value-added chemicals, and commodity chemicals, respectively, can continue for some time. However, carbon should not be used as a source of fuel or energy but be valorized to other products. In controlling CO 2 emissions, hydrogen will play a critical role. Hydrogen is best suited for converting waste biomass and carbon dioxide emanated from different sources, whether it be fossil fuel-derived carbon or biomass-derived carbon, into fuels and chemicals as well as it will also lead, on its own as energy source, to the carbon negative scenario in conjunction with other renewable non-carbon sources. This new paradigm for production of fuels and chemicals not only offers the greatest monetization potential for biomass and shale gas, but it could also scale down output and improve the atom and energy economies of oil refineries. We have also highlighted the technology gaps with the intention to drive R&D in these directions. We believe this article will generate a considerable debate in energy sector and lead to better energy and material policy across the world. Graphic abstract

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations165
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClean Technologies and Environmental PolicySame topicGlobal Energy and Sustainability ResearchFrench-language works237,207