MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7019044830

Evaluation of the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Oil Sands Upgrading Technologies Using a Novel Life Cycle-based Model

2019· dissertation· W7019044830 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2019
Typedissertation
Language
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
KeywordsOil sandsGreenhouse gasAsphaltOil refineryRefineryLife-cycle assessmentSynthetic crudeFossil fuelBaseline (sea)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the production of oil sands bitumen and associated final products (e.g., transportation fuels) continues to grow, so do the environmental impacts associated with the life cycle of fuel production and use. This has motivated research on developing novel analytical methods that model these impacts on a life cycle basis. Upgrading generated 23% of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from oil sands operations or 2% of Canada’s GHG emissions in 2016. Upgrading is a stage in the production of oil sands-derived transportation fuels that transforms bitumen into higher value products, most of them refinery feedstocks. A novel life cycle-based model, the Oil Sands Technologies for Upgrading Model (OSTUM), that assesses the direct and indirect energy use and GHG intensities of current and emerging upgrading technologies, was developed and implemented using publicly available data. OSTUM is applied to commercial upgrading technologies operating in Canada in 2018: delayed coking based- (DC), hydroconversion based- (HC), and combined hydroconversion and fluid coking based upgrading (HC/FC). Two emerging partial upgrading technologies are also modeled: the HI-Q® Process and EST technology. These latter applications demonstrate OSTUM’s flexibility to produce adequate assessments as the oil sands industry evolves. DC’s baseline intensity is 8.5 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per megajoule of synthetic crude oil (g CO2e/MJ SCO) and range is 6.3–11.2 g CO2e/MJ SCO. HC’s baseline intensity is 10.8 g CO2e/MJ SCO (range: 8.6-14.3 g CO2e/MJ SCO) and HC/FC’s is 12.2 g CO2e/MJ SCO (range: 9.7-14.8 g CO2e/MJ SCO). The baseline, low and high scenario GHG intensities for HI-Q® are 3.7, 2.3 and 6.4 g CO2e/MJ of partially upgraded bitumen (PUB), respectively, and 8.3, 6.6 and 12.3 g CO2e/MJ PUB for EST. Contributions include 1) the development of a framework to systematically assess/compare the GHG intensities of upgrading technologies using consistent boundaries, assumptions, sources, and methodologies; 2) comprehensive and transparent results obtained with a well-documented model; 3) improved characterization of emission sources/drivers of variability; 4) improved estimation of hydrogen consumption; and 5) estimation of GHG intensities of upgrading co-products of different qualities. OSTUM can provide insight and assist stakeholders in regulating and mitigating upgrading GHG emissions.

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)0.001
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 score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicPetroleum Processing and Analysis→French-language works237,207→