MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282938448 · doi:10.1016/j.egyr.2022.06.004

Optimization and energy assessment of technological process for CO2 capture system of natural gas and coal combustion

2022· article· en· W4282938448 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCarbon Dioxide Capture Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlue gasNatural gasProcess engineeringCoalPower stationCarbon capture and storage (timeline)Waste managementEngineeringCombined cycleProcess simulationPetroleum engineeringEnvironmental scienceProcess (computing)Mechanical engineeringComputer scienceTurbineElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flue gas stream generated from combusted natural gas, petroleum, and coal in power plants contains enormous CO2 with detrimental effects on the environment. CO2 capture systems must be integrated into these power plants to prevent emissions of CO2 into the open atmosphere. This work uses rate-based process modelling and a parametric design approach to optimally design large-scale amine-based PCC and compression systems that can be integrated into real 550 MW coal-fired and 555MW NGCC fired power plants. A comparative analysis of energy and economy is also conducted. Based on monoethanolamine (MEA), the process parameters of the post-combustion capture and compression system for CO2 were used as the study baseline. Different amines and alternative flow scheme optimization of the post-combustion capture with compression models are developed for coal and natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) cases and their energy consumption performances compared. Also, the operating and capital costs of the CO2 Capture and Storage (CCS) plant are determined for the overall process of economic evaluation concerning technical and economic performance parameters. The results show that rich solvent cooled recycle (RSR) and lean vapour compression (LVC) process modification under the integration case of CO2 capture and compressed Coal, energy savings of 20.4%, 41.8% and 34.8% for MEA, piperazine activated methyldiethanolamine solution (MDEA+PZ) and piperazine activated monoethanolamine (MEA+PZ) respectively, is possible when compared with the basic situation of MEA. RSR+LVC process modification under the integration case of CO2 capture and compressed NGCC, energy savings of 18.9%, 35.4% and 34.4% for MEA, MDEA+PZ and MEA+PZ, respectively, is possible when compared with the basic situation of MEA. Economic performance: the total annual operating costs of MDEA+PZ, RSR+LVC technological process optimized for the coal case was reduced by approximately 30% compared with the basic situation of MEA, while that for the NGCC case was reduced by 19%. The cost of CO2 avoided for the coal used MDEA+PZ into RSR+LVC technological process optimized capture is decreased by 13% compared with coal captured in MEA basic situation. For the NGCC cases, the cost of CO2 avoided for the NGCC of MDEA+PZ, RSR+LVC process optimized capture is decreased by 7% compared with NGCC with MEA basic case capture.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.461

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.205 · 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