MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6910239878 · doi:10.4224/40002783

H₂ blending into the Canadian NG grid network and H₂ tolerances in end-use appliances

2022· report· en· W6910239878 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2022
Typereport
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaBibliothèque et Archives nationales du QuébecGDG Environnement
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNatural gasPower to gasGridRenewable energyRenewable natural gasMethanationHydrogenEuropean union

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report presents the codes, standards, and regulations (CSR), R&D needs and gaps, hydrogen tolerance of key components and systems, demo cases, and Technology Development Matrix (TDM) analysis identified and determined for Power-to-Gas (P2G) technology. P2G technology enables hydrogen produced from electrolysis and renewable natural gas (RNG) produced by methanation to be injected into national gas grids, which permits large scale storage of green energy. If economically feasible, methane injection in the grid could represent considerable volumes since RNG complies with grid specifications. However, the amount of direct hydrogen injected into the gas grid is limited by country-specific standards and regulations. In the European Union the maximum is 0-12 vol.% or 0-2 wt.%. A detailed investigation of CSR on the injection of renewable hydrogen and RNG into natural gas (NG) pipelines has clarified current constraints and safety considerations in terms of gas injection, transport and end-use systems.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARC→French-language works237,207→