MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017394170 · doi:10.2495/sdp-v6-n3-312-324

Analysis of the effects of temperature, the amount of nutrient solution and the carbon dioxide concentration on methane biofiltration

2011· article· en· W2017394170 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Camille Ménard, Antonio Avalos Ramírez, Josiane Nikiema, Michèle Heitz

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandfill Environmental Impact Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbon dioxideBiofilterMethaneChemistryGreenhouse gasNutrientEnvironmental chemistryEnvironmental engineeringEnvironmental scienceEcologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Landfi ll gas emissions contribute to the greenhouse effect due to the presence of methane (CH 4 ). CH 4 emissions from old and small landfi lls can be reduced by using biofi ltration. The objective of this study was to optimize parameters that control CH 4 removal in a biofi lter. Temperature is one of the important parameters as well as the amount of nutrient solution (NS) supplied. The effects of the carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) concentration on CH 4 biofi ltration were also studied. Four biofi lters using an inorganic fi lter bed were studied under similar conditions: an inlet CH 4 concentration of 7000 ppmv and an air fl ow rate of 0.25 m 3 /h. A NS was supplied daily. The temperature was varied from 4C to 43C. The highest performance was obtained in the range of 31-34C with an elimination capacity (EC) of 30 g CH 4 /m 3 /h for an inlet load (IL) of 80 g CH 4 /m 3 /h. The effect of the amount of NS supplied to the biofi lter at ambient temperature was also analyzed. The EC was 23 g CH 4 /m 3 /h for both 101 L NS /m 3 V bed /d and 34 L NS /m 3 V bed /d, but it fell to 17 g CH 4 /m 3 /h at 17 L NS /m 3 V bed /d. CO 2 concentrations were varied from 650 to 18,500 ppmv and no effect was noticed on the EC which remained constant at 18 g CH 4 /m 3 /h for an inlet load of 72 g CH 4 /m 3 /h.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicLandfill Environmental Impact StudiesFrench-language works237,207