Design and eco-technoeconomic analysis of a natural gas cogeneration energy management center (EMC) with short-term thermal storage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work proposes a non-islanded cogeneration energy management center (EMC) that can be used to displace grid-level natural gas turbine systems and natural gas combustion systems for heat. The design of the proposed EMC included a weighted multi-objective optimization aimed at minimizing: i) natural gas consumption; ii) capital costs; iii) utility costs; and iv) unmet thermal demand. The decision variables consisted of the existence and capacity of the equipment comprising the EMC, including: i) a natural gas boiler; ii) an internal combustion engine that generates heat and electricity; and iii) a hot water thermal storage system. Four resulting candidates EMC designs were then compared with the status-quo (SQ) in an eco-technoeconomic analysis; The SQ draws electricity from the grid and heating for dwellings come from natural gas boilers. Emissions at grid level change which alternative is favored. The findings showed that, for a system that serves 4-5 dense urban city blocks over a 20-year lifetime, the SQ system had cumulative levelized costs of 9.6 million USD for the final consumer, while the levelized costs of the EMC designs ranged from 12.9 to 15.1 million USD. In terms of emissions, the SQ emitted 959 tonnes of CO2eq per year, while the EMC system produced around 500 tonnes of CO2eq per year depending on the year, yielding a CCA varying between 364 and 653 USD/ tonneCO2eq
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".