MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391652540 · doi:10.3390/wevj15020057

Optimization of H2 Supply to the Refuelling Infrastructure for Long-Haul Trucks: Centralized versus Local H2 Production, and Using Transportation by Tanker Truck or Pipeline

2024· article· en· W4391652540 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nafisa Mahbub, Hajo Ribberink

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Electric Vehicle Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicHybrid Renewable Energy Systems
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTruckPipeline (software)Production (economics)Transport engineeringBusinessEnvironmental scienceAutomotive engineeringEngineeringEconomicsMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a simulation study, it was investigated how the costs of supplying H2 for the refuelling of long-haul trucks along highways in Canada can be minimized by optimizing the design of the refuelling infrastructure. Scenarios using local or centralized blue H2 production were evaluated using two different modes of H2 transportation (liquid H2 tanker trucks and pipelines). For each scenario, the average H2 supply costs were determined considering H2 production costs from facilities of different sizes and transportation costs for H2 that was not produced locally. Average H2 supply costs were 2.83 CAD/kg H2 for the scenario with local H2 production at each refuelling site, 3.22–3.27 CAD/kg H2 for scenarios using centralized H2 production and tanker truck transportation, and 2.92–2.96 CAD/kg H2 for centralized H2 production scenarios with pipeline transportation. Optimized scenarios using the cheaper transportation option (tanker truck or pipeline) for each highway segment had average H2 supply costs (2.82–2.88 CAD/kg H2) similar to those of using only local H2 production, with slightly lower costs for the scenario using the largest H2 production volumes. Follow-on research is recommended to include the impact of CO2 transportation (from blue H2 production) on the design of an optimum supply infrastructure.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.672
Threshold uncertainty score0.708

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.254
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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Electric Vehicle JournalSame topicHybrid Renewable Energy SystemsFrench-language works237,207