Comparison of Gaseous Emissions from Stored Biomass Residues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Woody biomass used as alternative fuel to generate power becomes a significant element of sustainability nowadays. Biomass is usually stored for some period before direct combustion or processing in biorefineries. The objective of this study is to quantify and compare the gas emissions from Western Red Cedar (WRC) and Douglas fir (DF) chips during storage at a range of temperatures (5-50 o C) under both non-aerobic and aerobic conditions. Results showed that the dominant mechanism is different depending on the stored materials. Emissions of CO and CH4 were 2-5 orders of magnitude less than CO2 emission for both WRC and DF chips. The major components of VOCs detected by GC/MS from both materials are similar, consisting of hydrocarbons, aldehyde, terpenes, methanol, acetone, ketone, acid and esters, benzene and its derivatives. The total concentrations of VOC (TVOC) under both conditions differed with temperature, and they were much higher from the DF chips than WRC. The emission factors under the aerobic condition were higher when compared to those under the non-aerobic condition over the storage time period.
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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".