MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2738445243 · doi:10.1002/cjce.22944

Removal of mercury from natural gas by a new activated adsorbent from olive stones

2017· article· en· W2738445243 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammed Amin Chemrak, N. Benderdouche, Benaouda Bestanı, Mokhtar Benzekri Benallou, Benoı̂t Cagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMercury (programming language)Activated carbonAdsorptionThermogravimetric analysisChemistryPhosphoric acidPyrolysisIodine valueSulfurPorosimetryPhysisorptionNuclear chemistryPorosityEnvironmental chemistryWaste managementOrganic chemistryPorous medium

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study was devoted to the valorization of a plant waste (olive stones): that is widely available in Mediterranean countries in order to remove mercury from natural gas. The raw material from olive stones was prepared by pyrolysis, chemical activation with phosphoric acid, and physical activation under steam. Two olive stone‐based granular activated carbons were prepared: one with the virgin stones, while the other was impregnated with sulphur. After treatment, the adsorbents obtained were characterized by determining the iodine number, the methylene blue index, and by estimating the porous properties by N2 adsorption at 77 K. Thermogravimetric analysis and infrared spectroscopy analysis were carried out to determine the functional groups before and after mercury adsorption. An experimental study of vapour‐phase mercury adsorption by the activated carbons (virgin and sulphur‐impregnated) and a comparison with a commercial material (HGR) were performed. The comparison, made by analyzing the adsorption in a continuous mode, showed that the proportion of sulphur and the porosity were important for the removal of mercury. In the conditions used, the mercury adsorption on the ACs studied follows a physisorption mechanism. The results showed that granular activated carbon‐based olive stones (sulphur‐impregnated) are very efficient to remove mercury (with 2864 μg/g) and also less expensive than commercial activated carbon due to their local availability.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering→Same topicMercury impact and mitigation studies→French-language works237,207→