Integrated Mineral Carbonation of Ultramafic Mine Deposits—A Review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, integrated mineral carbonation for CO2 sequestration has received significant attention due to the high potential for commercialization towards mitigating climate change. This review compiles the work conducted by various researchers over the last few years on integrated mineral carbonation processes in the mining industry, which use ultramafic mine wastes as feedstock for mineral carbonation. Here, we introduce the basic concepts of mineral carbonation including a brief description of the process routes and pre-treatment techniques. We discuss the scope of integrated mineral carbonation process application, and critically review the integrated mineral carbonation process in the mining industry including modified passive carbonation techniques in tailing storage facilities, and ex-situ carbonation routes using fresh tailings. The focus of the discussions is the role of reaction condition on the carbonation efficiency of mine waste with various mineralogical compositions, and the benefits and drawbacks of each integrated mineral carbonation process. All discussions lead to suggestions for the technological improvement of integrated mineral carbonation. Finally, we review the techno-economic assessments on existing integrated mineral carbonation technologies. Research to date indicates that value-added by-products will play an important role in the commercialization of an integrated mineral carbonation process.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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 it