Management of hydrocarbon-contaminated soil through bioremediation and landfill disposal at a remote location in Northern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Northern communities often have limited resources to resolve petroleum hydrocarbon (PHC) contamination. This project investigated an innovative approach for the management of diesel-contaminated soil in a remote community in Labrador. The soil was first treated in a passively aerated biopile to reduce the concentrations of mobile PHCs. The treated soil was then disposed of in the local landfill. Maximum total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH) concentrations in soil, concentrations of PHCs with less than 16 carbons in soil, and TPH in leachate decreased during the 1 year field treatment. Microcosms incubated at 7 and 22 °C in the laboratory showed the potential for biodegradation of the PHCs. However, volatilization was likely the predominant PHC removal mechanism in the field. Disposal of treated soil to landfills has the advantage of transforming waste (i.e., soil) into a valued product (i.e., cover for the refuse). The development of risk-based guidelines for the disposal of PHC-contaminated soil into landfills in Canada appears to be needed and is discussed in this paper. Guidelines should be protective of the environment while prevent over-treatment of the soil, which may result in unnecessary spending and environmental impacts. The cost of the system tested was compared to that of treating soil in an off-site facility.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".