MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412688265 · doi:10.1016/j.ceja.2025.100816

Computational modeling of inhomogeneities in the scale-up of industrial CO2 electrolyzers for formate production

2025· article· en· W4412688265 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohammad Bahreini, Martin Désilets, Ergys Pahija, Ulrich Legrand

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Engineering Journal Advances · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicCO2 Reduction Techniques and Catalysts
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalGrain Research CentreUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsProduction (economics)Scale (ratio)Process engineeringFormateIndustrial productionMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceChemistryEngineeringPhysicsCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CO₂ electroreduction (CO₂ER) offers a sustainable pathway for producing value-added chemicals from CO₂ using renewable electricity. Among its products, formate (HCOO⁻) is particularly attractive for energy storage and industrial applications. However, scaling CO₂ER systems from laboratory to industrial dimensions presents challenges including inhomogeneous reactant distribution, mass transport limitations, and local pH gradients. These effects are exacerbated at high current densities, leading to intensified CO₂ depletion and increased hydrogen evolution (HER). In this study, a validated 2D transient-state model is developed to investigate the impact of cell height, operating pressure, and electrolyte flow rate on formate production performance. Results show that shorter cells (4 cm) better maintain Faradaic efficiency by reducing HER and reactant depletion, whereas longer cells (40 cm) exhibit pronounced concentration gradients and non-uniform current densities. Operating at elevated pressures (5.5 atm) improves CO₂ solubility, limiting efficiency loss to 11 %, compared to 16 % at 1.5 atm under current densities of 150–400 mA cm⁻². These insights provide design and operation guidelines for optimizing industrial-scale CO₂ electrolyzers for efficient formate production.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemical Engineering Journal AdvancesSame topicCO2 Reduction Techniques and CatalystsFrench-language works237,207