Pressurized Chemical Looping for Direct Reduced Iron Production: Economics of Carbon Neutral Process Configurations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The replacement of the blast furnace—basic oxygen furnace (BF-BOF) steelmaking route with the direct reduced iron—electric arc furnace (DRI-EAF) route reduces the direct CO2 emissions from steelmaking by up to 68%; however, the DRI shaft furnace is one of the largest remaining point source emitters in steelmaking. The capital and operating expenses of two potential nearly carbon-neutral DRI process configurations were investigated as a modification to a standard Midrex DRI facility. First, amine-based post-combustion capture with a 95% capture rate was considered as the benchmark, as it is currently commercially available. A second, novel configuration integrated the Midrex process with pressurized chemical looping—direct reduced iron (PCL-DRI) production. The capital expenditures were 71% and 28% higher than the standard Midrex process for a Midrex + amine capture plant, and a PCL-DRI plant, respectively. There was an incremental variable operating cost of USD 103 and USD 44 per tonne of CO2 for DRI production using amine capture and PCL-DRI, respectively. The amine capture configuration is most sensitive to the cost of steam generation, while PCL-DRI is more sensitive to the cost of electricity and the makeup oxygen carrier. An iron-based natural ore is recommended for PCL-DRI due to the low cost and availability. Based on the lower costs compared to amine-based post-combustion capture, PCL-DRI is an attractive means of eliminating CO2 emissions from DRI production.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".