A critical review of sustianable refuse-derived fuel production in waste processing facility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transformation of municipal solid waste into refuse-derived fuel (RDF) offers a promising solution for waste-to-energy conversion. In this context, a systematic literature review and scientometric analysis is conducted showing refinements in RDF application for energy-from-waste (EfW) initiatives, forging a comprehensive approach to sustainable waste management. Key aspects of EfW projects using RDF are examined, focusing on methodologies for calorific value estimation, waste characterization, quality assessment, and public–private partnerships (PPPs). Emphasis is placed on the necessity of accurate energy potential measurement and advanced characterization techniques, including computer vision, for effective waste sorting and analysis. Quality assessments of RDF are highlighted for their impact on decisions within the biomass fuel supply chain, emphasizing the importance of optimizing energy recovery. PPP’s are identified as key to successful execution of EfW projects, with their roles, trends, and risk modeling crucial for fostering effective collaboration between public and private sectors. The study concludes by identifying research gaps, such as the deficiency of new frameworks to support technical assessments of waste processing facilities for strategic, tactical, and operational improvements. Additionally, RDF applications in EfW are limited because of inconsistent waste sorting, deviation from specifications and environmental regulations. This approach aims to enhance sustainable waste management and energy recovery, guiding future research and implementation in the field.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".