MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2388599496

Effect of Flue-gas Cleaning Devices on Mercury Emission From Coal-fired Boiler

2008· article· en· W2388599496 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zhou Jin-song

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the CSEE · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMercury (programming language)Flue gasBoiler (water heating)Waste managementCoalSeawaterEnvironmental scienceChemistryNOxEnvironmental chemistryFly ashEnvironmental engineeringCombustion
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to study the effect of flue-gas cleaning devices on mercury emission from coal-fired boiler, Ontario-Hydro method had been applied to determine the mercury concentration and speciation in the flue-gas emitted from a 300MW coal-fired boiler, which was equipped with various pollution control devices, including selective catalyst reduction (SCR) De-NOx system, electrostatic precipitator (ESP), and flue-gas seawater De-SO2 system (FGD). Mercury concentration in raw coal, bottom ash and fly ash of the boiler, seawater at the inlet and outlet of SO2 absorption reactor and the drainage of aeration sink, were also analyzed. The results indicate that the percentage of gaseous mercury in total mercury discharged is more than 79.1%. De-NOx catalyst strongly affects the mercury speciation transformation, showing a conversion rate of 83.4% for Hg0 to Hg2+. The removal efficiency of particulate mercury by ESP is close to 100%. With seawater FGD, the removal efficiency of mercury is as high as 73.6%. The mercury concentration in the seawater of drainage from aeration sink is 5.5 times higher than that in fresh seawater. The study shows that the flue-gas cleaning devices in coal-fired power plant play an important role on mercury emission characterization.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the CSEESame topicMercury impact and mitigation studiesFrench-language works237,207