MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080899826 · doi:10.1080/10934529.2013.776332

Chemical fingerprinting of naphthenic acids and oil sands process waters—A review of analytical methods for environmental samples

2013· review· en· W2080899826 on OpenAlexaff
John V. Headley, Kerry M. Peru, Mostafa Mohamed, Richard Frank, Jonathan W. Martin, R. R.O. Hazewinkel, David Humphries, Narine P. Gurprasad, L. Mark Hewitt, Derek C. G. Muir, Dorothy Lindeman, R. Strub, Rozlyn F. Young, David M. Grewer, Randy M. Whittal, Phillip M. Fedorak, Detlef Birkholz, Ralph Hindle, Richard M. Reisdorph, Xiaomeng Wang, Kim L. Kasperski, Coreen Hamilton, Million B. Woudneh, G. Wang, B. Loescher, Andrea J. Farwell, D. George Dixon, Matthew S. Ross, Alberto dos Santos Pereira, Elizabeth King, Mark P. Barrow, Brian Fahlman, Jonathan Bailey, Dena W. McMartin, Christoph H. Borchers, Chris Ryan, Navdeep S. Toor, H. M. Gillis, Lucia Zuin, Greg Bickerton, Mark E. McMaster, Ed Sverko, Dayue Shang, Lee D. Wilson, Frederick J. Wrona

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Science and Health Part A · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsCanadian Light Source (Canada)University of SaskatchewanUniversity of VictoriaCanadian Forest ServiceAXYS Technologies (Canada)University of ReginaAlberta InnovatesAlberta Environment and Protected AreasUniversity of AlbertaNatural Resources CanadaUniversity of WaterlooEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsNaphthenic acidOil sandsEnvironmental chemistryChemistryEnvironmental scienceOrganic chemistryMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article provides a review of the routine methods currently utilized for total naphthenic acid analyses. There is a growing need to develop chemical methods that can selectively distinguish compounds found within industrially derived oil sands process affected waters (OSPW) from those derived from the natural weathering of oil sands deposits. Attention is thus given to the characterization of other OSPW components such as oil sands polar organic compounds, PAHs, and heavy metals along with characterization of chemical additives such as polyacrylamide polymers and trace levels of boron species. Environmental samples discussed cover the following matrices: OSPW containments, on-lease interceptor well systems, on- and off-lease groundwater, and river and lake surface waters. There are diverse ranges of methods available for analyses of total naphthenic acids. However, there is a need for inter-laboratory studies to compare their accuracy and precision for routine analyses. Recent advances in high- and medium-resolution mass spectrometry, concomitant with comprehensive mass spectrometry techniques following multi-dimensional chromatography or ion-mobility separations, have allowed for the speciation of monocarboxylic naphthenic acids along with a wide range of other species including humics. The distributions of oil sands polar organic compounds, particularly the sulphur containing species (i.e., OxS and OxS2) may allow for distinguishing sources of OSPW. The ratios of oxygen- (i.e., Ox) and nitrogen-containing species (i.e., NOx, and N2Ox) are useful for differentiating organic components derived from OSPW from natural components found within receiving waters. Synchronous fluorescence spectroscopy also provides a powerful screening technique capable of quickly detecting the presence of aromatic organic acids contained within oil sands naphthenic acid mixtures. Synchronous fluorescence spectroscopy provides diagnostic profiles for OSPW and potentially impacted groundwater that can be compared against reference groundwater and surface water samples. Novel applications of X-ray absorption near edge spectroscopy (XANES) are emerging for speciation of sulphur-containing species (both organic and inorganic components) as well as industrially derived boron-containing species. There is strong potential for an environmental forensics application of XANES for chemical fingerprinting of weathered sulphur-containing species and industrial additives in OSPW.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations127
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Science and Health Part ASame topicPetroleum Processing and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207