MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392952748 · doi:10.3390/catal14030202

Conversion of Biomass-Derived Tars in a Fluidized Catalytic Post-Gasification Process

2024· article· en· W4392952748 on OpenAlexaff
Floria Rojas Chaves, Nicolas Torres Brauer, Cindy Torres, Hugo de Lasa

Bibliographic record

VenueCatalysts · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)Biomass (ecology)ChemistryEnvironmental scienceProcess engineeringComputer scienceBiologyEngineeringAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study deals with the development, characterization, and performance of a Ni-based catalyst over a ceria-doped alumina support as a post-gasification step, in the conversion of biomass-derived tars. The catalysts were prepared using the incipient wetness technique and characterized chemically and physically using NH3-TPD, CO2-TPD, H2-TPR, XRD, Pyridine-FTIR, N2 physisorption, and H2-Pulse Chemisorption. It was observed that the 5 wt% CeO2 reduced the strong and very strong acid sites of the alumina support and helped with the dispersion of nickel. It was noticed that the nickel crystallite sizes and metal dispersion remained unchanged as the nickel loading increased. The performance of the catalysts was studied in a mini-fluidized CREC Riser Simulator at different temperatures and reaction times. The selected tar surrogate was 2-methoxy-4-methylphenol, given its functional group similarities with lignin-derived tars. A H2/CO2 gas blend was used to emulate the syngas at post-gasification conditions. The obtained tar surrogate conversion was higher than 75%, regardless of the reaction conditions. Furthermore, the catalysts used in this research provided an enhancement in the syngas product composition when compared to that observed in the thermal experiments. The presence of hydrocarbons greater than CH4 (C1+) was reduced at 525 °C, from 96 ± 3% with no catalyst, to 85 ± 2% with catalyst and steam, to 68 ± 4% with catalyst and steam-H2/CO2. Thus, the catalyst that we developed promoted tar cracking, tar reforming, and water-gas shift reactions, with a H2/CO ratio higher than 3.8, providing a syngas suitable for alcohol synthesis.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.634

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCatalystsSame topicThermochemical Biomass Conversion ProcessesFrench-language works237,207