MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2534300595 · doi:10.1080/10934529.2016.1237120

Removal of Ni and Zn in contaminated neutral drainage by raw and modified wood ash

2016· article· en· W2534300595 on OpenAlexaffabout
Iuliana Laura Calugaru, Carmen Mihaela Neculita, Thomas Genty, Bruno Bussière, Robin Potvin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Science and Health Part A · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMine drainage and remediation techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-TémiscamingueCégep de l'Abitibi TémiscamingueCentre Technologique des Résidus Industriels
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWood ashSorptionLeaching (pedology)Cation-exchange capacityEffluentChemistryAdsorptionAmendmentEnvironmental chemistryIon exchangeRaw materialLangmuirPulp and paper industryEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental engineeringSoil waterSoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the present study, wood ash was modified by alkaline fusion, prior to hydrothermal synthesis, for potential application in the treatment of mine drainage impacted water. With this objective, two types of wood ash (both raw and modified) were evaluated for the treatment of Ni and Zn in contaminated neutral drainage (CND). Batch adsorption experiments were initially conducted on synthetic CND, and then on two real CND, sampled on two active mine sites, contaminated by either Ni (3.7 mg/L) or Zn (9.1 mg/L). Leaching of Zn was observed during the kinetic tests for the raw wood ash, whereas its modification suppressed the leaching. The cation exchange capacity acquired by modification of the two samples of wood ash exceeded 300 meq/100 g (which is two to fourfold higher than those of the raw ash), while sorption capacity for Ni and Zn tripled relative to the raw material. The Langmuir model best described the sorption process for all materials, while potential mechanisms of metal removal include adsorption, precipitation and ion exchange, following pseudo second-order kinetics. Results also showed that within 2 h of contact of mine effluents with one modified wood ash, Ni and Zn concentrations decreased below the maximum authorized monthly mean concentration allowed by the Canadian law (0.5 mg/L), whereas the other modified wood ash allowed reaching the regulatory conformity after 2 h for Ni but 7 days for Zn (although 93% removed after 2 h). Nonetheless, the pH was raised (10.9-11.8) above the legally allowed limits (6-9.5). Based on these findings, modified wood ash could be considered as a promising option for the treatment of Ni and Zn in CND, but the pH correction of final effluent might be necessary.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.868
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations24
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Science and Health Part ASame topicMine drainage and remediation techniquesFrench-language works237,207