MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2142374373

A modified septic system for the treatment of dairy farm milk house wastewaters

2008· preprint· en· W2142374373 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sophie Morin, Suzelle Barrington, J. Whalen And J. Martinez

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen Removal
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeptic tankWastewaterEnvironmental scienceDrainageWaste managementWater qualityEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringBiologyEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The characterization of food waste (FW) and locally available bulking agents (BA) are a prerequisite to optimizing compost recipes.\nThis study measured the variation in FW characteristics (pH, dry matter (DM), carbon (C), wet bulk density and Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen\n(TKN)) produced by a restaurant and a community kitchen in downtown Montreal, Canada from May to August 2004. The project\nalso measured the mass of FW produced by another restaurant and a group of 2048 households, from June to August 2004. Locally\navailable BA (hay, straw, pine wood shavings, cardboard, left over cattle feed and wheat residue pellets) were also characterized to formulate composting recipes based on the FW characteristics observed during a period representative of winter and summer conditions.\nResidential and restaurant FW characteristics varied significantly over the summer months, although the mass produced remained constant\nat 0.61 and 0.56 kg capita1 day1, respectively. In addition, the number of customers served by the restaurant increased by nearly\n50% from June to August. The BA with the highest moisture adsorption capacity was found to be the wheat residue pellets, followed by\nchopped straw. Wheat residue pellets, chopped hay and left over cattle feed all presented a balanced C/N ratio. Wheat residue pellets and wheat straw, chopped hay and cardboard demonstrated neutral pH values. Based on the variable FW characteristics and monthly production rates, the formulation of recipes indicates that compost facilities must be flexible enough to handle seasonal variations of as\nmuch as 50% by volume. / En 2001, le Ministère de l'Environnement du Québec\nmodifiait son règlement sur la gestion des fumiers à la ferme et\nexigeait le traitement des eaux usées de laiterie. Par conséquent,\nles entreprises laitières avec moins de 60 vaches se voyaient\nobligées d'investir plus de 15 000$ Can. pour l'installation d'un\nsystème conventionnel de traitement de ces eaux usées.\nL'objectif du projet était donc de modifier le système de fosse\nseptique et champ d'épuration pour pouvoir traiter à coût\nraisonnable les eaux usées de laiterie, tout en valorisant ces\neaux et leurs nutriments. Sur deux fermes avec 40 et 50 vaches,\nun basin de sédimentation et de captage de gras fut installé en\namont de la fosse septique existante, et un champ d'épuration\ndrainé de 0,45 ha fut construit en aval de la fosse septique. Le\nprojet consistait à: faire le suivi des champs d'épuration pour\névaluer leur colmatage après deux ans d'opération; mesurer et\néchantillonner les eaux usées de laiterie pour établir leur charge\nannuelle en nutriment, élément qui dimensionne le champ\nd'épuration pour un traitement durable, et; faire le suivi des charges de contaminants évacués par le système de drainage du champ d'épuration qui assure son opération. En effectuant la moyenne des deux fermes, les eaux usées de laiterie offraient une charge annuelle de NT, PT et KT de 60, 50 and 80 kg ha-1 an-1, respectivement; le volume moyen généré était de 17,5 mm/mois, ce qui ne suffisait pas à colmater le champ d'épuration tel que constaté à la fin du projet. L'accumulation de gras dans les tuyaux du champ d'épuration d'une des fermes résultait de l'envoie de lait sale dans le système, l'absence\nd'adoucisseur d'eau dans la laiterie et le manque de nettoyage de la\nfosse à sédiments et gras. Le drainage du champ d'épuration assurait\nson bon fonctionnement sans décharger de charge contaminante dans\nles fossés environnants. Le système modifié ne coûtait que 4400$ Can.,\net réussissait à traiter de façon durable les eaux usées des fermes\nlaitières.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen Removal→French-language works237,207→