MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3009159571 · doi:10.31025/2611-4135/2020.13909

Use of Alternative Cover Materials to Control Surface Emissions (H2S and VOCs) at an Engineered Landfill

2020· article· en· W3009159571 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueDetritus · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandfill Environmental Impact Studies
Canadian institutionsEnGlobe (Canada)Centre de Recherche Industrielle du Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceLandfill gasWaste managementCompostIncinerationMunicipal solid wasteEnvironmental engineeringBiogasBiofilterMethaneEnvironmental chemistryEngineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Between 2010 and 2015, the Bellechasse Regional County Municipality (Bellechasse RCM) was affected by particularly noxious odors issuing from its Municipal Solid Waste Landfill (Bellechasse RCM MSWL) in Armagh, Canada. A study carried out in 2015-2016 by Centre de recherche industrielle du Québec (CRIQ) confirmed that it was still possible for hydrogen sulfide (H2S) emissions to cause odor issues in and around the site. The experimental project carried out by CRIQ in cooperation with Bellechasse RCM, Englobe, Quebec City and the Regroupement des récupérateurs et des recycleurs de matériaux de construction et de démolition du Québec (represented by AIM Éco-centre) made it possible to test three (3) different industrial residue as an alternative cover materials on site and study how they controlled H2S emissions, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and odors at the Bellechasse RCM’s landfill. The site was monitored from November 2016 to September 2017 to confirm the effectiveness of alternative biofiltration cover materials (soil + compost), domestic waste incineration bottom ash and 0 to 2.5-inch concrete residues and to compare the results with the sand cover currently used as the cover material. Effectiveness was determined by measuring the Area Source Emission Rate (ASER) with a 3 m x 3 m static flux chamber developed for the project. Methane measurements were concomitantly taken to confirm that the biogas could escape through the cover materials. The monitoring results made it possible to demonstrate that domestic waste incineration bottom ash as well as 0-2.5 in. concrete received the highest load of H2S and showed an H2S capture performance of greater than 83ϿFor volatile organic compounds, materials such as 0-2.5 in. concrete and the alternative biofiltration cover materials were most effective for capture (greater than 73Ͽfor the highest loads. The lowest content of CH4 after covering was measured for the alternative cover materials. The site where the incineration bottom ash was used managed to decrease odors by ±200 odor units. Overall, we have demonstrated in this project, the capacity of different alternative cover materials under real condition for the control of gas emissions from landfill.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it