A Counter-Current Acid Leaching Process for the Remediation of Contaminated Soils from a Small-Arms Shooting Range
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this research was to use a counter-current leaching process (CCLP) with leachate treatment to develop a remediation process for contaminated soils at a small-arms shooting range (SASR). The soil contaminant concentrations were 245 mg Cu kg−1, 3,368 mg Pb kg−1, 73 mg Sb kg−1, and 177 mg Zn kg−1. The CCLP includes three acid leaching steps (1M H2SO4 + 4M NaCl, t = 1 h, T = 20°C, soil suspension = 100 g L−1), followed by one water rinsing step (1 h). Seven counter-current remediation cycles were completed, and the average resulting metal removals were 93.2 ± 3.5% of Cu, 91.5 ± 5.7% of Pb, 82.2 ± 10.9% of Sb, and 30.0 ± 11.4% of Zn. The metal leaching performances decreased with the number of completed cycles. Soil treated with the CCLP with leachate treatment process met the USEPA threshold criteria of 5 mg Pb L−1 in the TCLP leachate. The CCLP allows a decrease of the water use by 32.9 m3 t−1 and the chemicals’ consumption by approximately 2,650 kg H2SO4, 6,014 kg NaCl, and 1,150 kg NaOH per ton of treated soil, in comparison to standard leaching processes. This corresponds to 78%, 69%, 83%, and 67% of reduction, respectively.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".