MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401623053 · doi:10.1002/cjce.25453

Catalytic pyrolysis of pine needles: Role of zeolite structure and <scp>SiO<sub>2</sub></scp>/<scp>Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub></scp> ratio on bio‐oil yield and product distribution

2024· article· en· W4401623053 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Omvesh Yadav, Meenu Jindal, Richa Bhatt, Akul Agarwal, Venkata Chandra Sekhar Palla

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCatalysisPyrolysisYield (engineering)Biomass (ecology)ZeoliteRenewable energyLignocellulosic biomassChemistryChemical engineeringPyrolysis oilMaterials scienceBiofuelPulp and paper industryWaste managementOrganic chemistryLigninAgronomyMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Renewable and sustainable energy production has gained significant attention to meet sustainable development goals (SDGs). Pine needles, an abundant typical forestry residue, can be used as a renewable biomass source for sustainable energy production. Pyrolysis is a well‐established and commercialized technique for the thermochemical valorization of lignocellulosic biomass. The present work focuses on improving the bio‐oil yield by introducing SiO2‐Al2O3‐based catalysts, including different zeolites and SiO2‐Al2O3 materials with varying SiO2‐Al2O3 ratios, during the pyrolysis. Bio‐oil yield increased from 45.2 wt.% to 47.2 wt.% with the introduction of SiO2‐Al2O3 catalysts and increased to 51.2 wt.% and 50.6 wt.% with HZSM‐5 and Y‐zeolite, respectively, and decreased to 40.0 wt.% with β‐zeolite catalyst. The pyrolysis experiments of physically mixed biomass and catalyst were carried out in a fixed‐bed down‐flow reactor. Various process parameters such as temperature, retention time, and catalyst‐to‐biomass ratio were examined to evaluate their effect on product yield. The catalyst's introduction slightly decreased phenolic compound content, enhancing carbonyl and hydrocarbon production. Maximum improvement in bio‐oil yield by 6 wt.% was achieved using an H‐ZSM‐5 catalyst at 450°C temperature and 30 min residence time with a catalyst‐to‐biomass ratio of 1:4.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.163
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicThermochemical Biomass Conversion ProcessesFrench-language works237,207