Development of a novel biomass-wind energy system for clean hydrogen production along with other useful products for a residential community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• A novel integrated biomass-wind energy system is developed for buildings. • The system is evaluated through energy and exergy analyses. • Both economic study and environmental impact assessment are performed. • The system achieves energy and exergy efficiencies of 67.6% and 59.7%. The study presents the development of a novel integrated wind-biomass energy system designed for sustainable urban development, leveraging municipality waste and wind power energy sources. This innovative system is capable of producing multiple forms of energy, including electricity, cooling, heat, and hydrogen, addressing the diverse energy needs of urban communities. It integrates advanced thermodynamic cycles like Kalina and water electrolysis via an alkaline electrolyzer. In addition, the system uniquely combines power and refrigeration while utilizing landfills as an energy source. The designed system is thermodynamically modeled using the Engineering Equation Solver and process wise simulated by the Aspen Plus software to ensure better performance. By integrating advanced thermodynamic cycles, such as the Kalina, combined power and refrigeration systems, the overall system is then designed to maximize the utilization of biomass energy content and enhances overall performance. The thermodynamic analysis results show that the current system achieves an energy efficiency of 67.60% and an exergy efficiency of 59.70%, demonstrating its tangible performance compared to other standalone energy systems. The refrigeration system has an energetic COP of 5.41 and an exergetic COP of 1.70. Additionally, the system's hydrogen production, facilitated by an alkaline electrolyzer, reaches a rate of 5.38 kg/h, highlighting its potential to contribute to clean hydrogen energy solutions. Moreover, the exergo-environmental assessment confirms that the system is environmentally friendly. The cost assessment shows that the system reaches profitability in seven years and demonstrates growth, achieving a substantial NPV of 192.39 million dollars by 30 years, highlighting its long-term financial viability.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".