MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391692296 · doi:10.3390/recycling9010019

Drivers and Barriers in the Production and Utilization of Second-Generation Bioethanol in India

2024· article· en· W4391692296 on OpenAlexafffund
Falguni Pattnaik, Biswa R. Patra, Sonil Nanda, M. Mohanty, Ajay K. Dalai, J. K. Rawat

Bibliographic record

VenueRecycling · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiofuel production and bioconversion
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsBioFuelNet Canada
KeywordsBiofuelProduction (economics)BusinessNatural resource economicsAgricultural economicsEnvironmental sciencePulp and paper industryWaste managementEconomicsEngineeringMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Second-generation biorefinery refers to the production of different types of biofuels, biomaterials, and biochemicals by using agri-based and other lignocellulosic biomasses as substrates, which do not compete with arable lands, water for irrigation, and food supply. From the perspective of transportation fuels, second-generation bioethanol plays a crucial role in minimizing the dependency on fossil-based fuels, especially gasoline. Significant efforts have been invested in the research and development of second-generation bioethanol for commercialization in both developing and developed countries. However, in different developing countries like India, commercialization of second-generation bioethanol has been obstructed despite the abundance and variety of agricultural feedstocks. This commercial obstruction was majorly attributed to the recalcitrance of the feedstock, by-product management, and marginal subsidies compared to other nations. This article reviews the major roadblocks to the viability and commercialization of second-generation biofuels, especially bioethanol in India and a few other leading developed and developing nations. This article also reviews the biomass availability, technological advancements, investments, policies, and scale-up potential for biorefineries. A thorough discussion is made on the prospects and barriers to research, development, and demonstration as well as strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats for the commercialization of second-generation bioethanol.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations37
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRecyclingSame topicBiofuel production and bioconversionFrench-language works237,207