MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Thermochemical process of polypropylene plastic waste recovered from electric and electronic apparatuses-to-clean hydrogen energy

2025· article· en· W4414057534 on OpenAlexaff
Rezgar Hasanzadeh, Taher Azdast, Chul B. Park

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Hydrogen Energy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRecycling and Waste Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolypropyleneSyngasHydrogenMethaneYield (engineering)Molar ratioCarbon fibers

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the thermochemical gasification of polypropylene plastic waste recovered from electronic and electrical apparatuses to produce clean hydrogen and syngas. A thermodynamic model was developed to simulate the gasification process using steam as the gasification agent. The model's accuracy was validated by comparing the syngas composition with experimental data from previous studies. The root mean square error (RMSE) of smaller than 2 confirmed the high precision of the model. The study explores the effects of key parameters-process temperature, steam-to-plastic waste ratio (SPWR), and moisture content-on the syngas composition. An increase in process temperature from 950 to 1250 K led to a rise in the molar percentage of H 2 from 64.86 % to 67.62 %, while CH 4 decreased from 4.50 % to nearly 0 %. A similar increase in CO from 21.32 % to 28.35 % was observed, while CO 2 decreased from 9.31 % to 4.02 %. Furthermore, increasing the SPWR from 1 to 3 resulted in a significant increase in H 2 from 58.47 % to 69.44 % and a decrease in CH 4 from 7.77 % to 0.04 %. Simultaneous optimization of temperature and SPWR further enhanced the molar percentage of H 2 by 36 %, from 51.30 % to 69.70 %. These results demonstrate that optimizing the gasification process by controlling temperature and SPWR is crucial for improving hydrogen yield and reducing methane and carbon dioxide emissions, contributing to cleaner energy 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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.605

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.226 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Hydrogen EnergySame topicRecycling and Waste Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207