MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W603247356 · doi:10.1115/fbc2003-169

A Simulation Study for Fluidized Bed Combustion of Petroleum Coke With CO2 Capture

2003· article· en· W603247356 on OpenAlexaff
Jinsheng Wang, Edward J. Anthony, J.C. Abánades

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicChemical Looping and Thermochemical Processes
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetroleum cokeAnthraciteWaste managementCokeCombustionFluidized bed combustionCombustorSorbentEnvironmental scienceFluidized bedPetroleumElectricity generationCoalEngineeringChemistryPower (physics)Adsorption

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Petroleum coke is regarded as a difficult fuel because of its high sulphur content and low volatile content. However, its low price and increased production, means that there is a powerful economic stimulus to use it for power generation. In this work, a process simulation has been performed as part of a feasibility study on the utilization of petroleum coke for power generation with low-cost CO2 capture. The proposed system employs a pressurized fluidized bed combustor and a calciner. In the combustor itself, the petroleum coke is burned and most of the CO2 generated is captured by a CaO sorbent under pressurized condition to form CaCO3. The CaCO3 is transported into the calciner where limited proportion of the petroleum coke is burned with pure O2, and calcines the spent sorbent back into CaO and CO2. A nearly pure CO2 stream is obtained from the calciner for subsequent disposal or utilization. The predicted overall efficiency of the combustion is near 40%. The proposed system would also be suitable for firing other high carbon and low ash fuel, such as anthracite.

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 score0.397
Threshold uncertainty score0.272

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicChemical Looping and Thermochemical ProcessesFrench-language works237,207