MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007572900 · doi:10.1021/es026346m

Recycling of Meat and Bone Meal Animal Feed by Vacuum Pyrolysis

2003· article· en· W2007572900 on OpenAlexaff
Abdelkader Chaala, C. Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeat and bone mealPyrolysisWaste managementIncinerationPulp and paper industryHeat of combustionEnvironmental scienceChemistrySawdustCombustionOrganic chemistryFish meal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the recent bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) crisis in the European beef industry, the use of animal-derived products to feed cattle is now severely restricted. Large quantities of waste animal meat and bone meal (MBM), also known as animal flour, have to be safely disposed of or transformed. One disposal option is pyrolysis. Vacuum pyrolysis of an animal flour sample has been performed in a laboratory reactor. The results obtained revealed that vacuum pyrolysis can be an attractive alternative to incineration and cement kilns. The process generated a combustible gas (15.1 wt %), a high calorific value oil (35.1 wt %), a solid residue rich in minerals (39.1 wt %), and an aqueous phase rich in organics (10.7 wt %). The gas and the aqueous phase can be used to provide heat to the vacuum pyrolysis reactor and the MBM drying unit. The oil can be used alone or mixed with petroleum products as a fuel in boilers or gas turbines. Conversion of animal waste by pyrolysis into fuels can contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gases. It is suggested to use the solid residue for agricultural soil enrichment in minerals and as a soil moisturizer.

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 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.170 · 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.

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

Citations79
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicThermochemical Biomass Conversion ProcessesFrench-language works237,207