Advanced leachate treatment at Buckden landfill, Huntingdon, U.K.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During April 1994, Aspinwall and Company was appointed to design and commission a treatment plant to treat leachate from the Buckden South Landfill Site, located about 1 km SW of Huntingdon in Cambridgeshire, U.K. The landfill is located in the flood plain of the River Great Ouse, which flows within 400 m of the site. Leachate characterization and flow studies took place during early 1994, after an extensive fin drain collection and interception system had been installed. Aspinwall then undertook leachate treatment trials, as part of the detailed design of the on-site treatment plant that needed to be capable of treating 200 m3/d of leachate to very high standards. The treatment trials were carried out to investigate and design an aerobic biological process that would provide primary treatment, before secondary effluent polishing stages that would involve reed beds and ozonation. The latter specialized stage was intended to provide treatment of a range of pesticides, including the herbicides mecoprop and isoproturon, which were found in leachate and might not be removed fully by biological treatment stages. The leachate also contained contaminants typical of methanogenic conditions, including ammoniacal-N at values in excess of 400 mg/L, with a required effluent discharge consent standard of 10 mg/L. Key words: leachate, mecoprop, isoproturon, biological treatment, ozonation, reed bed, toxicity-based consent.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".