MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4285399980 · doi:10.1149/ma2022-01412445mtgabs

(Digital Presentation) Assessing the Energy Intensity of Product Purification in CO<sub>2</sub> Electrolysis

2022· article· en· W4285399980 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan P. Edwards, Théo Alerte, Christine M. Gabardo, Colin P. O’Brien, Adriana Gaona, Joshua Wicks, Ana Obradović, Amitava Sarkar, Shaffiq A. Jaffer, Heather L. MacLean, David Sinton, Edward H. Sargent

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicCO2 Reduction Techniques and Catalysts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDownstream (manufacturing)ElectrolysisElectrochemistryRenewable energyProcess engineeringEnvironmental scienceElectricityCarbon dioxideSelectivityElectrolytic cellElectrochemical cellChemistryChemical engineeringPulp and paper industryCatalysisElectrodeEngineeringOperations managementElectrical engineeringOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The electrochemical reduction of carbon dioxide (CO2RR) to chemical feedstocks, such as ethylene (C2H4), is an attractive means to mitigate emissions and store intermittent renewable electricity. Much research has focused on improving CO2 electrolysis cell efficiency; less attention has been paid to the downstream purification of outlet product streams. In this presentation, we model the use of mature downstream separation technologies as part of the overall production of polymer-grade C2H4 from CO2. We find that CO2 removal is the most energy-intensive downstream separation step. We identify opportunities to reduce separation energies ten-fold to ∼22 GJ/tonne C2H4 through necessary improvements in C2H4 selectivity (>57%), cathodic CO2 conversion (>80%), and CO2 crossover (0 mol CO2/mol e−). This work highlights the influence of cell performance parameters on downstream separation costs and motivates the development of new, efficient separation processes better suited to the distinctive outlet streams of CO2 electrolyzers.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting Abstracts→Same topicCO2 Reduction Techniques and Catalysts→French-language works237,207→