CO<sub>2</sub> Sequestration by Aqueous Red Mud Carbonation at Ambient Pressure and Temperature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An analysis of carbonation was carried out with the aqueous fresh red mud suspension at a liquid-to-solid ratio of 10 kg/kg, as well as in the leached-hydrated matrixes and leachates isolated from this red mud suspension after three successive leachings, to evaluate their intrinsic carbonation potential at ambient conditions (temperature of 20 ± 1 °C and atmospheric pressure). The carbonation assays were performed at 20 °C using a CO 2 concentration of 15.00 vol% at a flow rate of 5 mL/min. The red mud matrix has a great leaching capacity of Na−(hydr)oxide, which is the principal hydroxide that seems to be implicated in the carbonation of leachates that have half-carbonation capacity of red mud. Moreover, the carbonation of the red mud suspension also involves a portlandite-containing matrix. The carbonation of the red mud suspension and leachates implicates a complete neutralization of their content in Ca− and Na−(hydr)oxides. Although the leached hydrated-matrixes seem to be partially carbonated, it preserves a carbonation capacity near to that of leachate after three successive leachings. Moreover, three leached hydrated-matrixes and leachates have a carbonation capacity (7.09 g of CO 2 /100 g of red mud) higher than the carbonation capacity obtained for the red mud suspension, which is evaluated to 4.15 g of CO 2 /100 g of red mud. Taken together, these results suggest that the carbonation of the red mud may be enhanced by the use of leached hydrated-matrixes and leachates obtained from multiple leaching.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".