Treatment of thermomechanical pulping condensate using thermophilic and mesophilic sequencing batch reactors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In-mill thermophilic treatment of individual wastewater streams to achieve water system closure has received much attention in pulp and paper mills. Aerobic biological treatment of thermomechanical pulping (TMP) condensate was conducted using thermophilic (55 °C) and mesophilic (35 °C) sequencing batch reactors (SBRs) for a period of 143 days at a cyclic time of 6, 8 and 12 h. A soluble chemical oxygen demand (SCOD) removal efficiency of 77 to 91% was achieved, given an organic loading rate of 0.7-1.3 kg/m³ d. The COD removal efficiency of the thermophilic SBR was slightly lower than that of the mesophilic SBR. Majority of the soluble COD was removed by biodegradation with a small portion (9-13%) of soluble COD stripped by aeration. The settleability (sludge volume index) and the flocculating ability (effluent suspended solids) of thermophilic sludge were comparable to or slightly poorer than that of the mesophilic sludge. The level of filaments in thermophilic sludge was usually higher than that in mesophilic sludge. The results of the study indicate that both thermophilic and mesophilic SBRs can be successfully operated for in-mill treatment of TMP condensate. The treated effluent has the potential for subsequent reuse in the mill.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".