Comparison of nutrient solubilisation and dewatering by freeze/thaw processing of sludge from Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR) and Non-BNR wastewater treatment plants.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Natural freeze/thaw processing is a simple, practical and low-cost solid-liquid separation method, which can effectively dewater wastewater sludge in Northern Canadian communities located in cold climate conditions. This method is especially effective when used in small treatment plants in remote and cold regions as typical dewatering methods require complex and expensive equipment, skilled operators and special maintenance. The objective of this research was to evaluate freeze/thaw processing as a method for dewatering, nutrient solubilisation and organics separation of wastewater sludge originating from two different wastewater treatment facilities: a Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR) plant and non-BNR plant. The results of experiments showed the effectiveness of this method for sludge dewatering and solubilisation of organics and nutrients. The sludge solid content increased approximately 10-fold after freeze/thaw processing. The treatment solubilised 15.2%, 33.5% and 21.5% of the initial total nitrogen, total phosphorus and total chemical oxygen demand, respectively for the non-BNR sludge. These values were 6.3%, 80.0% and 16.5%, respectively for the BNR sludge. The released phosphorus and nitrogen in the water can be recovered and used as fertilizer for agricultural purposes, supporting northern food production.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".