MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220883236 · doi:10.3390/fuels3010010

Torrefaction and Densification of Wood Sawdust for Bioenergy Applications

2022· article· en· W4220883236 on OpenAlexafffund
Peyman Alizadeh, Lope G. Tabil, Phani Adapa, Duncan Cree, Edmund Mupondwa, Bagher Emadi

Bibliographic record

VenueFuels · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaSaskatchewan PolytechnicGlobal Institute for Water SecurityUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaBioFuelNet Canada
KeywordsTorrefactionSawdustPelletsPulp and paper industryHeat of combustionBiocharMaterials sciencePyrolysisBioenergyWaste managementPelletizingFurfuralRaw materialSteam explosionBriquettePelletStrawCoalBiofuelComposite materialChemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, wood sawdust as waste residue from wood processing mills was pretreated using torrefaction to improve fuel properties and densified to facilitate transportation. Sawdust was torrefied in a fixed bed reactor using inside temperatures (IT) of 230, 260 and 290 °C for 15, 30 and 45 min, residence time. Due to the low calorific value of the treatments, the outside temperature (OT) of the fixed bed reactor was used instead for a fixed duration of 45 min, which resulted in an increase in energy value by 40% for the most severe conditions. The mechanical strength of the pellets was enhanced by adding 20% binder (steam-treated spruce sawdust) to biochar, which improved the pellet tensile strength by 50%. Liquid by-products from the torrefaction process contained furfural and acetic acid, which can be separated for commercial uses. Thermochemical analysis showed better fuel properties of OT torrefied samples such as high fixed carbon (52%), low volatiles (41%) and lower oxygen contents (27%) compared to IT torrefied samples (18, 77 and 43%, respectively). Low moisture uptake of torrefied pellets compared to raw pellets, along with other attributes such as renewability, make them competent substitutes to fossil-based energy carriers such as coal.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations32
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFuelsSame topicThermochemical Biomass Conversion ProcessesFrench-language works237,207