Alternative reagents for roasting Suncor oil sands fly ash
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several roasting reagents, including Na2CO3, Na2SO4, NaNO3 and CaO, were tested on Suncor fly ash to try to improve the vanadium extractions achieved with salt roasting. Up to 95% V was extracted using Na2CO3 additions of greater than 50%, while the other reagents generally gave lower vanadium extractions than roasting with NaCl or than roasting with no reagents. Leaching with 100 g/l H2SO4 increased the vanadium extractions, but dissolved large amounts of Al and Si into solution. Leaching with 100 g/l Na2CO3 gave only modest improvements in the vanadium extraction, except for samples roasted with CaO, where up to 70% of the vanadium was leached. Thus, sodium carbonate is the only reagent tested that gave both high vanadium extractions and low levels of impurities in solution; thus, it could be used as an alternative to roasting with NaCl, but higher Na2CO3 additions (> 35%) would required to achieve vanadium extractions of greater than 75%. Characterisation with X-ray diffraction and scanning electron microscopy was also used to study the mineralogy of the roasted ash formed using these reagents.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".