MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411471362 · doi:10.3390/catal15070611

Biomass-Derived Tar Conversion via Catalytic Post-Gasification in Circulating Fluidized Beds: A Review

2025· review· en· W4411471362 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Hugo de Lasa, Nicolas Torres Brauer, Floria Rojas Chaves, Benito Serrano

Bibliographic record

VenueCatalysts · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
Keywordstar (computing)SyngasWood gas generatorWaste managementBiomass (ecology)Fluidized bedCokeEnvironmental scienceBiomass gasificationChemistryChemical engineeringCatalysisPulp and paper industryProcess engineeringBiofuelOrganic chemistryComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Waste biomass gasification can contribute to the production of alternative and environmentally sustainable green fuels. Research at the CREC–UWO (Chemical Reactor Engineering Center–University of Western Ontario) considers an integrated gasification process where both electrical power, biochar, and tar-free syngas suitable for alcohol synthesis are produced. In particular, the present review addresses the issues concerning tar removal from the syngas produced in a waste biomass gasifier via a catalytic post-gasification (CPG) downer unit. Various questions concerning CPG, such as reaction conditions, thermodynamics, a Tar Conversion Catalyst (TCC), and tar surrogate chemical species that can be employed for catalyst performance evaluations are reported. Catalyst performance-reported results were obtained in a fluidizable CREC Riser Simulator invented at CREC–UWO. The present review shows the suitability of the developed fluidizable Ni–Ceria γ-alumina catalyst, given the high level of tar removal it provides, the minimum coke that is formed with its use, and the adequate reforming of the syngas exiting the biomass waste gasifier, suitable for alcohol synthesis.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.469
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.250 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCatalystsSame topicThermochemical Biomass Conversion ProcessesFrench-language works237,207