Variability of release rate of flame retardants in wastewater treatment plants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Information on variability is important in the assessment of the releases and potential risks of brominated flame retardants (BRFs) in the environment, but related data are limited. In this study, two release-characterizing parameters, release fraction to final effluent and influent-biosolids transfer coefficient, were used to quantify releases of five BFRs from eight secondary wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs). The five BFRs are recalcitrant, hydrophobic, and low in volatility. The two parameters for these BFRs were found to vary from day to day and season to season within individual WWTPs as well as from one WWTP to another. These temporal and spatial variations were, however, comparable to each other and both within a factor of 3 above or below the parameter averages. Averages for release fraction were in the range of 0.02-0.29 and those for influent-biosolids transfer coefficient in the range of 3-26 L/g, depending upon a given BFR at a given WWTP. These ranges and the observed factor-3 variability are not only useful for estimating releases of the five BFRs, but more importantly provide read-across data for the assessment of substances with similar physical-chemical properties.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 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".