Unique Approaches of Coal Ash Management Using Geotextile Tubes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently the Environmental Protection Agency established national regulations for the safe disposal of coal combustion residuals (CCRs) from coal-fired power plants. These CCR byproducts, such as fly ash and bottom ash, can be a real challenge for both small and large facilities to remove and manage. The Environmental Protection Agency’s comprehensive set of requirements addresses the risks from coal ash disposal like leaking of contaminants into ground water, blowing of contaminants into the air as dust, and the catastrophic failure of coal ash surface impoundments. Geotextile tube dewatering technology can provide a unique approach for the management of coal combustion residuals. By incorporating geotextile tube technology, coal-fired facilities can dewater and contain CCRs. This technology can be utilized in the operation of existing surface impoundments, efforts to beneficially use consolidated ash, and the continued operation of coal-fired operations by direct sluicing the daily flows from the plant into geotextile tubes. This paper will discuss several unique approaches involving the remediation or clean closure of surface impoundments, beneficial use of dewatered CCRs, and direct sluicing operations incorporating geotextile tube technology for the safe disposal of by-products from coal-fired power plants.
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 | 0.001 | 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".