MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W6996078872

A Rapid Field Method to Estimate the Concentration of Sorbing Particulate Amendments in Soil Samples

2023· dissertation· en· W6996078872 sur OpenAlexfundno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2023
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineAgricultural and Biological Sciences
ThématiquePlant responses to elevated CO2
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesUniversity of Waterloo
Mots-clésAdsorptionEnvironmental remediationGroundwaterPlumeContaminationParticulatesActivated carbonPermeable reactive barrier
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The immobilization of plumes of contaminants in groundwater via in-situ adsorption is an emerging remediation technology. This technology involves injecting adsorbent particles into the subsurface to form a stationary barrier that intercepts a contaminant plume. As the plume travels through the barrier, the target contaminants can adsorb onto the injected particles and become immobilized. In-situ immobilization has been utilized for the treatment of groundwater contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons and chlorinated solvents. It has also been applied or proposed for the treatment of a variety of other compounds, including per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), which are emerging groundwater contaminants that have garnered worldwide attention. \n \nThere are a wide variety of adsorbents that could be used to form an in-situ barrier, including activated carbon (AC). The ability of an AC barrier to immobilize contaminants partially depends on the concentration and distribution of AC particles. Ideally, the concentration of AC in a barrier would be sufficient to adsorb all target compounds entering the barrier. Additionally, AC particles should be uniformly distributed so that the plume is fully intercepted. A common method used in the field to determine if these two criteria have been met is to visually inspect soil cores taken shortly after an injection event. Although visual inspection can indicate if the distribution of AC particles in the barrier is uniform, this approach is prone to human bias. Moreover, this method cannot quantitatively assess if the AC concentration is sufficient (i.e., falls within the range specified for the barrier design) or if additional injections are required. Alternatively, the concentration of AC in a soil core could be quantitatively determined via total organic carbon (TOC) analysis. However, TOC analysis is time-consuming and generally cannot be performed in the field. Therefore, there is a need for a rapid and simple method to quantify AC in soil samples to provide real-time or near-real-time feedback to the injection team. The objective of this research was to develop such a method. The method was designed to be rapid (less than 30 min), simple, easily performed in the field, and was envisioned to rely upon a tracer that adsorbs to AC particles. By quantifying the percent of the tracer adsorbed, the concentration of AC in the soil sample could be determined. \n \nThe development of the tracer method commenced with screening for a tracer that adsorbs preferentially to AC than to soil (Phase 1). Of the tracers tested, Orange G, which is a hydrophilic dye that can be readily measured using a portable spectrophotometer, did not appreciably adsorb (<10 %) to nine types of sandy soils. To further assess if Orange G could be employed as a tracer, the relationship between the concentration of AC in artificial samples (i.e., soils spiked with known amounts of AC) and the amount of Orange G adsorbed was investigated (Phase 2). Reproducible, linear adsorption trends between these variables were observed for PlumeStop¬® colloidal activated carbon and Calgon WPC powdered activated carbon, which are two AC materials that are widely used in in-situ applications. Finally, the method was validated using samples collected from two AC-soil column studies and soil cores collected from two field sites where AC was injected (Phase 3). The AC concentration in these soil samples was measured based on Orange G adsorption as well as by TOC analysis. For eight of the nine tested samples in which the AC concentrations derived via Orange G adsorption fell within the tracer method limits (i.e., between 0.065 – 0.75 wt. % for PlumeStop¬® or between 0.2 – 1 wt. % for Calgon WPC), the percent difference between the AC concentrations derived via the two methods was below 35 %. This confirms that the tracer analysis has the potential to be a quick and robust method for the quantification of AC in soil samples. While this research focused specifically on AC, the developed approach (i.e., tracer adsorption) and methodologies could potentially be used to quantify other types of adsorbents utilized in in-situ immobilization.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Méthodes · Signal consensuel: Méthodes
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,006
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,019

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0040,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0060,007

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,025
Tête enseignante GPT0,258
Écart entre enseignants0,233 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreMéthodes

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Même sujetPlant responses to elevated CO2Travaux en français237 207