MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412483743 · doi:10.2172/2346005

Development and Characterization of Densified Biomass-plastic Blend for Entrained Flow Gasification (Final Technical Report)

2024· report· en· W4412483743 on OpenAlexaff
Dimitrios Koumoulis, Jameson R. Hunter, Heather Nikolic, Kunlei Liu, Jian Shi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsCarbon Engineering (Canada)
FundersUniversity of Kentucky Center for Applied Energy ResearchNational Energy Technology LaboratoryU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsBiomass (ecology)Characterization (materials science)Flow (mathematics)Biomass gasificationPlasticityFlow propertiesMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceWaste managementProcess engineeringChemical engineeringComposite materialEngineeringMechanicsNanotechnologyBiologyEcologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Supported by the U.S. DOE NETL Award DE-FE0032043, this project was a collaborative effort. Project participants included the University of Kentucky Institute for Decarbonization and Energy Advancement (UK IDEA), Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering department (UK BAE), and Wabash Valley Resources, LLC. The goal of this final technical project report is to comprehensively summarize the work conducted on project DE-FE0032043. In accordance with the Statement of Project Objectives (SOPO), the University of Kentucky (UK) (Project Prime Recipient) has developed and studied a biomass/plastic fuel with a hydrophobic surface area less than 10 m2/m3 that is suitable for oxygen-blown entrained flow gasification with slurry feed. The project involved the utilization of an existing thermogravimetric analysis (TGA)-mass spectrometer (MS), 1.5” drop tube furnace, 1 ton per day (TPD) coal gasifier, and high-pressure extruder operated at UK. The pilot-scale production of blended material was done at the Polymers Technology Center in Charlotte, North Carolina. Parametric testing and solid fuel blend slurry performance validation was completed using the UK entrained flow gasifier with multiple opposed burners to narrow the major near-term technical gaps that impede gasification of biomass and carbonaceous mixed wastes such as plastics in order to achieve net-negative CO2 emissions. Project results validated the UK approach to address the major technical challenges on the biomass/plastic pretreatment and gasification. Previously, this has been limited in application to fluidized-type or moving bed-type gasifiers due to the high-water uptake of porous biomass containing hydroxyl groups during the conventional slurry preparation, resulting in a highly viscous, un-pumpable slurry. The biomass pretreatment with plastic developed for this project demonstrates advantages in cost and flexibility, which include: 1) the development of a blended solid fuel slurry with 55-60 wt% solids and comparable heating value to 100% coal-based water slurry; 2) the collection of gasification kinetic data and identification of preliminary operating conditions by performing thermogravimetric analysis, gasification experiments by using a 1.5” drop tube furnace; and finally 3) the demonstrated gasification of the blended solid fuel in the UK entrained flow gasifier with a long-lasting stable solid fuel blend slurry, dataset detailing operating conditions, and characterization of slag phase formation and solidification. The lab-scale data and experience obtained during this project encourages the development of technologies and commercial approaches to enable a hydrogen-based energy economy while achieving net-negative CO2 emissions through gasification of coal, biomass, and carbonaceous mixed wastes such as plastics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicThermochemical Biomass Conversion ProcessesFrench-language works237,207