MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W136321254 · doi:10.2166/wst.2001.0559

Biofiltration of dichlorobenzenes

2001· article· en· W136321254 on OpenAlexaff
François Roberge, M.J. Gravel, Louise Deschênes, Christophe Guy, R. Samson

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicOdor and Emission Control Technologies
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiofilterAir strippingChemistryVolatilisationContaminationBiodegradationDegradation (telecommunications)Environmental chemistryWastewaterNaphthaleneWaste managementEnvironmental engineeringEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of air biofiltration for the degradation of dichlorobenzenes (1,2-DCB and 1,4-DCB) was studied at a refinery site. At this plant, 93 m3/h of contaminated groundwater, used in a cooling system and containing a maximum of 2 ppm of dichlorobenzenes, had to be treated. Stripping of the DCBs followed by biofiltration was selected as the most suitable technology to avoid volatilization in ambient air as expected with a wastewater aerobic treatment system. A stripper of 15 m height and 1.27 m diameter was designed as a first step treatment to volatilize DCBs with 3400 m3/h of air. Two f ull-scale biofilters of 70 m3 each were built and filled with 45 m3 of filtering media for the adsorption and biodegradation of the DCBs in the gas-phase. Filtering media was composed mainly of peat moss, with animal manure, wood chips and DCBs contaminated soil. Air to be treated was also contaminated with naphthalene. Laboratory tests showed an effective microbial activity in the contaminated soil and in the filtering media for DCBs degradation. Degradation of naphthalene induced slower degradation of DCBs. Full-scale operation was studied during four months. Water flow and DCBs content in the water entering the stripper were lower than expected with only 57 m3/h and a maximum concentration of only 240 ppb. Effective desorption was obtained in the stripper in the full-scale operation (more than 99% removal). Full-scale biofilters maintained a DCB concentration of less than 1 ppmv in the air outlet, but removal efficiency varied between 0 and 79% because of the low DCB inlet concentrations, load variations and sporadic naphthalene presence.

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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.228

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations14
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Science & TechnologySame topicOdor and Emission Control TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207