Direct Comparison of Fluidized and Packed Bed Bioreactors for Bioremediation of an Air Pollutant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A gas-solid fluidized bed bioreactor has been successfully used for the bioremediation of ethanol (a model volatile organic compound, VOC) contaminated air. A key objective of this fluidized bioreactor study was to compare the performance of fluid bed operation to packed bed operation. A fluid bed system increased homogeneity and improved upon operating problems such as plugging and channelling normally associated with packed bed bioreactors. The bioreactor bed was comprised of a mixture of moist sawdust particles and glass spheres. Depending on the superficial velocity of the waste gas stream, the bioreactor could be operated in either packed or fluidized mode. During fluid bed operation, the sawdust and glass sphere mixture was maintained in a bubbling/slugging regime. As expected, fluid bed operation demonstrated significantly higher mass transfer rates but the maximum elimination capacity was 75 g m-3sawdust h-1 as compared to 225 g m-3sawdust h-1 for packed bed operation. In packed bed mode, higher ethanol concentrations were used in order to have comparable ethanol loadings and this may have contributed to faster growth rates and thus faster bioremediation rates.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".