Green Recovery of Rare Earths from Waste Cathode Ray Tube Phosphors: Oxidative Leaching and Kinetic Aspects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, we developed a green and efficient process for the recovery of rare earths from waste cathode ray tube phosphors. The mixture of hydrochloric acid and hydrogen peroxide was identified as the most suitable leaching agent due to the synergistic effect. The effects of various parameters on leaching process were explored, and the optimal conditions with stirring speed 600 rpm, temperature 313 K, 1 M of H 2 O 2, 4 M of HCl, and leaching time of 90 min were determined. Furthermore, a possible reaction mechanism was proposed, and the kinetics for the leaching process was investigated in detail. The leaching process was found to follow a shirking-core model, with the chemical reaction as the rate-controlling step. The apparent activation energy of the reaction was calculated as 52.3 kJ/mol, and the reaction orders for H 2 O 2 and HCl were established as 0.82 and 2.13, respectively. The kinetic equation was established. Moreover, the optimal leaching conditions were applied to the waste phosphors, and the oxalate precipitation process was employed, achieving the recovery rate of rare earths >99.5%. After calcining, a well crystallized (Y 0.95 Eu 0.05 ) 2 O 3 product with a purity of 99% was obtained with an average diameter of 5 μm.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".