The Potential of Energy Efficiency on Recycle Paper Bioprocess
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increasing use of recycled paper by the paper industry to support the Green Industry in the Indonesian Pulp and Paper Industry. But technically, there are some disadvantages of recycled fiber usage such as low drainage rate in which boosted the high energy consumption on drying process. As already known, the drying process consumes the highest energy in papermaking. To overcome this problem, the research using the concentrate of endoglucanase Egl-II has done. The steps of research included production of endoglucanase Egl-II; concentration by ultrafiltration method, modification of recycled paper fibers using endoglucanase Egl-II; characterization of paper sheet; and evaluation of energy consumption in drying the sheet of paper. The results showed that endoglucanase Egl-II had increase drainage rate of recycled fiber stock, which indicate by the freeness number. The number had increased by 80 ml CSF (Canadian Standard Freeness) from 190 ml CSF to 270 ml CSF, and fiber retention increased by 0,63% from 99,31% to 99,94%. The dissolved cellobiose test results of recycled fiber stock by the enzyme treatment at low dosage showed that no degradation of cellulose, no change into soluble sugars. Characterization of sheet of paper that has been modified with endoglucanase Egl-II based FTIR spectra showed no change in functional group, SEM results showed on the fiber surface fibrils grow more, and the results of the XRD analysis showed area reduction of amorphous regions is about 6%. The potential for energy efficiency is calculated through thermodynamic approach is about 15%.
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".