MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101109291 · doi:10.2166/wpt.2012.100

Wastewater and organic waste to bioenergy

2012· article· en· W2101109291 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Practice & Technology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Air Force AcademyU.S. Air ForceUniversity of AlbertaU.S. Department of DefenseWater Environment Research FoundationEnvironmental Security Technology Certification ProgramWater Research Foundation
KeywordsWaste managementBiogasAnaerobic digestionWastewaterEnvironmental scienceBiodegradable wasteBioenergySewage treatmentFood wasteWaste treatmentMunicipal solid wasteLife-cycle assessmentBiomass (ecology)Energy recoveryEnvironmental engineeringBiofuelEngineeringMethaneChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Throughout the world, wastewater and organic waste are increasingly being viewed as energy sources and the practice of converting them into bioenergy through conversion to biogas with anaerobic digestion is growing. This paper presents an overview of planning, research, and full-scale operations of both separate and codigestion of organic waste. Organic waste management methods are compared with respect to economic (life-cycle costs), environmental (equivalent carbon dioxide emissions), social, and operational impacts for a representative 100,000 population community. Management methods include using sewers or trucks to transport the organics to anaerobic digesters at a wastewater treatment plant, using a material recovery facility (MRF) to extract the organics from municipal solid waste for anaerobic digestion, composting the organic waste, or sending the organics to a landfill. Hauling the organics to anaerobic digesters had the lowest equivalent CO2 emissions, while using the sewer to convey organics had the lowest life-cycle cost. An example of codigestion of organic waste with wastewater sludge at the Des Moines Water Reclamation Facility (Iowa, USA) is described. The limits of organic loading rates for digestion of FOG (fats, oils, and grease) with wastewater sludge are presented based on research using 1,000-litre (L) pilot digesters. A specific energy loading rate (SELR) is proposed as an improved parameter for organic loading rates. The SELR is a measure of energy loading relative to the reactor biomass, and is an innovative approach to characterizing digester capacity and stability. Food wastes from the cafeteria at the U.S. Air Force Academy were digested in bench-scale, semi-continuous reactors and monitored using an online respirometer capable of continuously monitoring gas flow rate and gas composition. The biological methane potential (BMP) of several organic wastes were measured in lab-scale digesters. Organic wastes were digested with and without domestic wastewater sludge. Separate digestion of organic wastes was found to be nutrient (cobalt, nickel) deficient, where codigestion with wastewater sludge experienced no deficiencies. Codigestion could also handle a greater amount of FOG being fed to the digesters than separate digestion of food wastes.

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.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.462
Threshold uncertainty score0.793

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.199 · 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