MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7139066623 · doi:10.5006/m2025-00335

Innovative Solutions for Enhanced Safety of Onsite Hydrogen Storage

2025· article· W7139066623 on OpenAlexaff
J.-P. Bernard, Omar Elshamy, Igor Turevsky, Laurent Boufflers, Stephane Kemgang, Nayana Mady, Adrien Piel, Vincent Designolle

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and Detonation Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydrogen storageSAFERProcess (computing)HydrogenService (business)Compressed hydrogenComputer data storage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The decarbonization of heavy industries and mobility—such as refineries, green ammonia, e-fuels, and steelmaking—relies increasingly on low-carbon hydrogen, often produced via electrolysis. This introduces variability in supply, making reliable hydrogen storage essential. Where large-scale underground storage (e.g., salt caverns) is unavailable, onsite storage becomes critical, typically requiring capacities from a few to several tens of tons. This paper presents the development, qualification, and safety validation of a novel onsite underground compressed hydrogen storage solution. The system features vertically oriented subsurface pressure vessels designed for large capacity, enhanced safety and minimal space requirement. The research details the validation for hydrogen service of the materials and connections used in this solution. It introduced the full technology qualification process based on DNV RP-A203, including results from a demonstration project in France. Safety performance is assessed through Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) and Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA), comparing this solution with conventional above-ground systems. The paper synthesizes lessons learned from design, testing, and risk modeling, and evaluates the technology’s applicability to hydrogen and derivative production. It demonstrates how this compact, modular, and safer storage option supports project integration and accelerates permitting in the hydrogen economy.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.857

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCombustion and Detonation ProcessesFrench-language works237,207