CO<sub>2</sub> sequestration using calcium-silicate concrete
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The potential for using calcium silicate concrete to sequester CO 2 and simultaneously develop strong and durable concrete building products is studied. It is the calcium compounds in cement that react with CO 2 through the early-age carbonation curing, forming geologically stable calcium carbonates. Both type 10 and type 30 Portland cements were investigated as CO 2 binders in concretes with 0%, 25%, 50%, and 75% quartz aggregates and lightweight aggregates. The sequestration took place in a chamber under 0.5 MPa pressure at ambient temperature for a duration of 2 h; a 100% concentration of CO 2 was used to simulate the recovered CO 2 from flue gas. The CO 2 uptake was quantified by direct mass gain and by infrared-based carbon analyzer, and the performance of the carbonated concrete was evaluated by its strength. A CO 2 uptake of 9%16% by binder mass was achieved in 2 h. The X-ray diffraction spectra showed the presence of strong calcite peaks and a total absence of Ca(OH) 2 . The 2 h carbonation strength exceeded the 7 d hydration strength. The calcium silicate concrete approach is shown to be feasible for CO 2 sequestration and would result in technical, environmental, and economical benefits.Key words: CO 2 sequestration, concrete, carbonation curing, calcium carbonates, strength.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it