MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1976175146 · doi:10.1021/es8016107

Mercury Emissions during Cofiring of Sub-bituminous Coal and Biomass (Chicken Waste, Wood, Coffee Residue, and Tobacco Stalk) in a Laboratory-Scale Fluidized Bed Combustor

2008· article· en· W1976175146 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yan Cao, Hongcang Zhou, Junjie Fan, Hou-Yin Zhao, Tuo Zhou, Pauline Hack, Chia-Chun Chan, Jian-Chang Liou, Wei‐Ping Pan

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsStalkWaste managementCombustorEnvironmental scienceMercury (programming language)Biomass fuelsCofiringCoalBituminous coalCombustionPulp and paper industryBiofuelChemistryEngineeringHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Four types of biomass (chicken waste, wood pellets, coffee residue, and tobacco stalks) were cofired at 30 wt % with a U.S. sub-bituminous coal (Powder River Basin Coal) in a laboratory-scale fluidized bed combustor. A cyclone, followed by a quartz filter, was used for fly ash removal during tests. The temperatures of the cyclone and filter were controlled at 250 and 150 degrees C, respectively. Mercury speciation and emissions during cofiring were investigated using a semicontinuous mercury monitor, which was certified using ASTM standard Ontario Hydra Method. Test results indicated mercury emissions were strongly correlative to the gaseous chlorine concentrations, but not necessarily correlative to the chlorine contents in cofiring fuels. Mercury emissions could be reduced by 35% during firing of sub-bituminous coal using only a quartz filter. Cofiring high-chlorine fuel, such as chicken waste (Cl = 22340 wppm), could largely reduce mercury emissions by over 80%. When low-chlorine biomass, such as wood pellets (Cl = 132 wppm) and coffee residue (Cl = 134 wppm), is cofired, mercury emissions could only be reduced by about 50%. Cofiring tobacco stalks with higher chlorine content (Cl = 4237 wppm) did not significantly reduce mercury emissions. This was also true when limestone was added while cofiring coal and chicken waste because the gaseous chlorine was reduced in the freeboard of the fluidized bed combustor, where the temperature was generally below 650 degrees C without addition of the secondary air. Gaseous speciated mercury in flue gas after a quartz filter indicated the occurrence of about 50% of total gaseous mercury to be the elemental mercury for cofiring chicken waste, but occurrence of above 90% of the elemental mercury for all other cases. Both the higher content of alkali metal oxides or alkali earth metal oxides in tested biomass and the occurrence of temperatures lower than 650 degrees C in the upper part of the fluidized bed combustor seemed to be responsible for the reduction of gaseous chlorine and, consequently, limited mercury emissions reduction during cofiring. This study identified the important impacts of temperature profile and oxides of alkali metal (alkali earth metal) on mercury emissions during cofiring in the fluidized bed combustor.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations19
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & Technology→Same topicMercury impact and mitigation studies→French-language works237,207→