MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972215227 · doi:10.1021/es200823a

Determination of Nickel Species in Stack Emissions from Eight Residual Oil-Fired Utility Steam-Generating Units

2011· article· en· W1972215227 on OpenAlexaff
Frank E. Huggins, Kevin C. Galbreath, Kurt E. Eylands, Lisa L. Van Loon, Jeremy A. Olson, Edward J. Zillioux, Stephen Ward, Paul Lynch, Paul Chu

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCoal and Its By-products
Canadian institutionsCanadian Light Source (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNickelParticulatesEnvironmental chemistryNickel sulfideChemistryResidual oilPetroleumFuel oilStack (abstract data type)Atomic absorption spectroscopySulfideResidualSulfurEnvironmental scienceWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

XAFS spectroscopy has been used to determine the Ni species in particulate matter collected on quartz thimble filters in the stacks of eight residual (No. 6 fuel) oil-burning electric utility steam-generating units. Proper speciation of nickel in emitted particulate matter is necessary to correctly anticipate potential health risks. Analysis of the spectroscopic data using least-squares linear combination methods and a newly developed method specific for small quantities of Ni sulfide compounds in such emissions show that potentially carcinogenic Ni sulfide compounds are absent within the detection limits of the method (≤ 3% of the total Ni) in the particulate matter samples investigated. In addition to the major nickel sulfate phase (NiSO(4)·6H(2)O), lesser amounts of (Ni,Mg)O and/or NiFe(2)O(4) were also identified in most emission samples. On the basis of the results from these emission characterization studies, the appropriateness of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's assumption that the Ni compound mixture emitted from residual oil-fired power plants is 50% as carcinogenic as nickel subsulfide (Ni(3)S(2)) should be re-evaluated.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicCoal and Its By-productsFrench-language works237,207