High Pressure Injection of Chemicals in a Gravel Beach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The remediation of beaches contaminated with oil includes the application of surfactants and/or the application of amendments to enhance oil biodegradation (i.e., bioremediation). This study focused on evaluating the practicability of the high pressure injection (HPI) of dissolved chemicals into the subsurface of a lentic Alaskan beach subjected to a 5 m tidal range. A conservative tracer, lithium, in a lithium bromide (LiBr) solution, was injected into the beach at 1.0 m depth near the mid-tide line. The flow rate was varied between 1.0 and 1.5 L/min, and the resulting injection pressure varied between 3 m and 6 m of water. The concentration of the injected tracer was measured from four surrounding monitoring wells at multiple depths. The HPI associated with a flow rate of 1.5 L/min resulted in a Darcy flux in the cross-shore direction at 1.15 × 10−5 m/s compared to that of 7.5 × 10−6 m/s under normal conditions. The HPI, thus, enhanced the hydraulic conveyance of the beach. The results revealed that the tracer plume dispersed an area of ~12 m2 within 24 h. These results suggest that deep injection of solutions into a gravel beach is a viable approach for remediating beaches.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".