MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408444304 · doi:10.3390/en18061443

Advancing Hybrid Cryogenic Natural Gas Systems: A Comprehensive Review of Processes and Performance Optimization

2025· review· en· W4408444304 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft and Cryogenic Technologies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNatural gasProcess engineeringComputer scienceBiochemical engineeringEnvironmental scienceSystems engineeringEngineeringWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent research in the liquefied natural gas (LNG) industry has concentrated on reducing specific power consumption (SPC) during production, which helps to lower operating costs and decrease the carbon footprint. Although reducing the SPC offers benefits, it can complicate the system and increase investment costs. This review investigates the thermodynamic parameters of various natural gas (NG) liquefaction technologies. It examines the cryogenic NG processes, including integrating NG liquid recovery plants, nitrogen rejection cycles, helium recovery units, and LNG facilities. It explores various approaches to improve hybrid NG liquefaction performance, including the application of optimization algorithms, mixed refrigerant units, absorption refrigeration cycles, diffusion–absorption refrigeration systems, auto-cascade absorption refrigeration processes, thermoelectric generator plants, liquid air cold recovery units, ejector refrigeration cycles, and the integration of renewable energy sources and waste heat. The review evaluates the economic aspects of hybrid LNG systems, focusing on specific capital costs, LNG pricing, and capacity. LNG capital cost estimates from academic sources (173.2–1184 USD/TPA) are lower than those in technical reports (486.7–3839 USD/TPA). LNG prices in research studies (0.2–0.45 USD/kg, 2024) are lower than in technical reports (0.3–0.7 USD/kg), based on 2024 data. Also, this review investigates LNG accidents in detail and provides valuable insights into safety protocols, risk management strategies, and the overall resilience of LNG operations in the face of potential hazards. A detailed evaluation of LNG plants built in recent years is provided, focusing on technological advancements, operational efficiency, and safety measures. Moreover, this study investigates LNG ports in the United States, examining their infrastructures, regulatory compliance, and strategic role in the global LNG supply chain. In addition, it outlines LNG’s current status and future outlook, focusing on key industry trends. Finally, it presents a market share analysis that examines LNG distribution by export, import, re-loading, and receiving markets.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.614
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.234 · 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