Recovery of Acetic Acid from the Prehydrolysis Liquor of Kraft Based Dissolving Pulp Production Process: Sodium Hydroxide Back Extraction from the Trioctylamine/Octanol System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acetic acid is an important potential product from the prehydrolysis liquor (PHL) of the kraft based dissolving pulp production process. This study focuses on the recovery of acetic acid from an industrial PHL from an Eastern Canadian Pulp mill that contains about 1% acetic acid. Reactive extraction with tri- n -octylamine (TOA) using octanol as a diluent was investigated as the potential process. Subsequently, the complexed acetic acid in the organic phase (TOA–octanol) was back extracted using a sodium hydroxide solution, while the solvent (TOA–octanol) was regenerated. The recovered acetic acid concentration was increased with increasing organic to aqueous phase ratio but at the expense of decreased extraction efficiency. At the organic to aqueous phase ratio of 40 and the NaOH to acetic acid (HAc) mole ratio of 1, the acetic acid concentration reached to 15.0, 9.8, and 10.3% for MAA (1% model acetic acid), PHL (prehydrolysis liquor), and TPHL (treated prehydrolysis liquor), respectively. It was concluded that the reactive extraction using TOA–octanol, followed by sodium hydroxide back extraction, is an efficient process in recovering and concentrating acetic acid from PHL.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".