MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404443214 · doi:10.1021/acs.est.4c02933

Assessing Best Practices in Natural Gas Production and Emerging CO<sub>2</sub> Capture Techniques to Minimize the Carbon Footprint of Electricity Generation

2024· article· en· W4404443214 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ryan Cownden, Mathieu Lucquiaud

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Sheffield
KeywordsCarbon footprintNatural gasElectricity generationProduction (economics)ElectricityEnvironmental scienceFootprintGreenhouse gasSubstitute natural gasCarbon fibersNatural resource economicsWaste managementEnvironmental economicsEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceSyngasChemistryEconomicsPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Natural gas (NG) is expected to provide a substantial portion of electricity generation in many jurisdictions for the foreseeable future. Postcombustion carbon capture and storage (CCS) effectively abates direct CO 2 emissions; however, indirect NG supply chain emissions in most jurisdictions are incompatible with climate change mitigation goals. This life cycle assessment evaluates specific opportunities to reduce the carbon footprint of combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) generation with CCS using existing low-emission NG production practices, technologies, and processes combined with emerging CCS techniques to achieve high CO 2 capture rates and mitigate startup emissions. We find baseload life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emission intensity ranges from 22 to 62 kgCO 2 e/MWh for 95–98.5% CO 2 capture, within the range of published estimates for wind and photovoltaic power and considerably below prior estimates of CCGT with CCS. Low-emission NG production practices reduce other environmental impacts, which are dominated by combustion-related air pollution. We also show how interim solvent storage can effectively mitigate emissions from CCGT start/stop cycles. This work highlights the importance of mitigating both CO 2 and methane emissions from NG supply chains and proposes a more nuanced discussion regarding the potential contribution of NG to the future energy supply. A surrogate model is provided to estimate life cycle GHG emissions for CCGT with CCS and user-input parameters.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicGlobal Energy and Sustainability ResearchFrench-language works237,207