MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386252622 · doi:10.26434/chemrxiv-2023-hvjxn

Electrochemical capture and conversion of CO2 into syngas

2023· preprint· en· W4386252622 on OpenAlex
Yongwook Kim, Eric W. Lees, Chaitanya Donde, Christopher E. B. Waizenegger, Grace L. Simpson, Akshi Valji, Curtis P. Berlinguette

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueChemRxiv · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicCO2 Reduction Techniques and Catalysts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanada First Research Excellence FundUniversity of TokyoCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsSyngasElectrolysisFlue gasSeparator (oil production)ChemistryElectrochemistryBicarbonateActivated carbonAqueous solutionChemical engineeringInorganic chemistryAdsorptionCatalysisElectrolyteOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For waste CO2 to be electrolytically converted into higher-value chemicals and fuels, electrolyzers that drive the CO2 reduction reaction need to be integrated with upstream CO2 capture units. However, this has not yet been demonstrated because of the large operational gap for the capture and conversion steps. Here, we report a coupled carbon reactor that captures and converts CO2 into syngas with a 1.7:1 ratio of H2 to CO. The resulting syngas can be utilized in the production of a wide range of valuable chemicals. This CCR uses a packed bed absorption column (“capture unit”) to react alkaline aqueous solution enriched in K2CO3(aq) with CO2 to form bicarbonate enriched solutions (“reactive carbon solutions”). These reactive carbon solutions are then fed into an electrochemical reactor (“bicarbonate electrolyzer”) to form CO(g) and OH– product. This alkaline product is then passed through a gas-liquid separator (“separator”) and recycled back to the capture unit for further reaction with CO2(g). These collective elements close the full loop for CO2 capture and conversion. An electrochemically inert CO2 capture promoter (glycine) was used to better match the CO2 capture rates in the absorption column to the OH– production rates in the electrolyzer, thereby producing CO at steady-state without intervention. We demonstrate that the CCR captures and converts CO2 from simulated flue gas (20% CO2; 80% N2) into CO with a Faradaic efficiency of 30% at 100 mA cm–2 for 30 hours of operation.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.232 · 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