MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1796291915

A dynamic modelling approach to evaluate GHG emissions from wastewater treatment plants

2012· article· en· W1796291915 on OpenAlexafffund
Xavier Flores‐Alsina, Magnus Arnell, Youri Amerlinck, Lluís Corominas, Krist V. Gernaey, Liquan Guo, Erik Lindblom, Ingmar Nopens, José Porro, Andrew Shaw, Peter A. Vanrolleghem, Ulf Jeppsson

Bibliographic record

VenueLund University Publications (Lund University) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen Removal
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersVlaamse regeringMinistero dello Sviluppo EconomicoFonds Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekMinistère du Développement Économique, de l’Innovation et de l’Exportation
KeywordsGreenhouse gasEnvironmental scienceSewage treatmentWastewaterWaste managementEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringGeologyOceanography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The widened scope for wastewater treatment plants (WWTP) to consider not only water quality and cost, but also greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and climate change calls for new tools to evaluate operational strategies/treatment technologies. The IWA Benchmark Simulation Model no. 2 (BSM2) has been widely used within the scientific community for the unbiased comparison of control strategies in wastewater treatment facilities. In this paper, the default set of BSM models is extended with a set of comprehensive dynamic approaches that estimate the most significant on-site (secondary treatment, sludge processing) and off-site (net energy use, embedded chemicals, sludge disposal) sources of GHG emissions. The case study presented here calculates and discusses the changes in the effluent quality (EQI) and operational cost (OCI) indices and the formation of carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) when modifying the percentage of total suspended solids (TSS) removal efficiency in the primary clarifier (PRIM). Simulations show that high PRIM efficiency decreases the quantity of TSS entering the activate sludge (AS) section leading to lower operational cost due to better energy recovery (and subsequent reduced GHG emissions) in the sludge line, but increases the overall N2O emissions due to the low C/N ratio as a trade-off. Overloading of the bioreactors as a result of poor PRIM performance: i) increases the biogenic CO2 emissions from BOD oxidation and biomass decay in the AS section; ii) increases off-site CO2 emissions due to higher energy demand during the nitrification stage; and, iii) reduces energy recovery from settled organics. The reported results emphasize the importance of a plant-wide approach and the need to consider the interactions between the different treatment units when evaluating the global warming potential (GWP) of a WWTP. Finally, the paper demonstrates the potential of using the proposed approach as a general model-based tool for determining the most sustainable WWTP operational strategies, which is essential in a water sector where climate change, energy and sustainability are key challenges to be tackled.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.181 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations10
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLund University Publications (Lund University)Same topicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen RemovalFrench-language works237,207