Coupling membrane filtration and wet air oxidation for advanced wastewater treatment: Performance at the pilot scale and process intensification potential
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Bio‐refractory wastewater treatment is compulsory for a safe discharge into the environment. This paper aims to study the use of membrane processes to concentrate wastewater to be then treated by a hydrothermal process such as wet air oxidation for advanced and intensified wastewater treatment. The work focused on three different synthetic wastewaters of public or industrial interest: pharmaceutical wastewater, grey wastewater, and bilge wastewater. Membrane processes operated at the pilot scale enabled retentions as high as 100% of total organic carbon, more than 99% of turbidity, and 70% of hydrocarbon, respectively. High concentration factors were obtained. Membrane foulings were chemically reversible whatever the type of wastewater or the membrane process. Thanks to membrane filtrations, the volumes to be treated by wet air oxidation were drastically reduced, leading to high energy savings. Membrane retentates were then treated by wet air oxidation (300°C, 15 MPa) and resulted in more than an 83% mineralization rate, regardless of the effluent. The hybrid intensified process presented in this work strongly increased the possibility of discharging into the environment by mixing the process outputs or greatly reducing the discharge volume and ultimately the waste load.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".