MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312443948 · doi:10.4236/jsbs.2022.124006

Bamboo Biomass for Bioenergy Production in Mauritius

2022· article· en· W4312443948 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Anthony Hansley Bernard, Marc Lucotte

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Bioenergy Systems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBamboo properties and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersUniversity of Mauritius
KeywordsBambooBiomass (ecology)BagasseBioenergyEnvironmental scienceBiofuelRaw materialPulp and paper industryFossil fuelToxicologyBiotechnologyAgroforestryMathematicsAgronomyBiologyBotanyEngineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bamboo, globally renowned as being one of the fastest-growing plants in the world with versatile applications, has gained increasing attention during the past decades. It is being used by millions of people around the globe as a biomass resource for energy production, as timber for furniture making, in the food industry and many more. So far, on the Island of Mauritius, little to no consideration has been given to this fascinating plant. This paper presents the physical and chemical properties of two species of bamboo—Bambusia vulgaris and Bambusia bambos, compared to sugarcane bagasse for bio-energy production. Ten samples of each species were tested for gross calorific value (GCV), moisture, ash and chloride content. The results show that both species have a very good potential for energy recovery with a GCV of 16.77 MJ/kg for Bambusia vulgaris and 17.44 MJ/kg for Bambusia bambos, and are valuable sources of biomass with an average energetic yield of 717.8 GJ/ha/yr and 1587.1 GJ/ha/yr respectively. In comparison, the GCV for sugarcane bagasse was found to be 18.33 MJ/kg with an energetic yield of 824.9 GJ/ha/yr. Simultaneously, a research survey on community acceptance and perception of the Mauritian citizens towards the utilisation of bamboo biomass as an alternative to fossil fuels for bio-energy production was conducted via semi-structured questionnaires. The questionnaires were administered to a total of 54 respondents. 3 women and 3 men were randomly interviewed in each of the 9 districts of the island. The results show that the participants are very much aware of the many issues related to the exploitation of fossil fuels and support the use and implementation of renewable sources of energy for bio-energy production. Eighty percent of the participants supported the implementation of bamboo biomass in the overall energy generation mix in a bold move to lessen their ecological footprint.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.920
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable Bioenergy SystemsSame topicBamboo properties and applicationsFrench-language works237,207