MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3195942078 · doi:10.22215/etd/2019-13906

An Evaluation of Various Carbonaceous and Synthetic Adsorbents for the Treatment of Sulfolane

2019· dissertation· en· W3195942078 on OpenAlexaff
My Dinh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Chemical Sensor Technologies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSulfolaneAdsorptionChemistrySolventBenzeneAqueous solutionOrganic chemistryChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sulfolane (2,3,4,5-tetrahydrothiophene-1,1-dioxide) is an industrial solvent used in a variety of applications including in synthetic chemistry, electric and electrical circuit processing, and in the oil and gas industry.The most popular application of sulfolane is for the extraction of aromatic hydrocarbons and sweetening of natural gas in which sulfolane is mixed with alkanolamines (such as diisopropanolamine) as well as other organic substances.Improper handling, storage, and disposal of pure sulfolane solvent and sulfolane-containing wastes have created contaminated sites where the concentration of sulfolane can be hundreds of mg/L.Sulfolane is miscible with water, non-volatile, does not adsorb to mineral surfaces to an appreciable extent, and does not biodegrade quickly under conditions where nutrients and oxygen are limited.As such, once sulfolane is released into the subsurface it will travel long distances and create large contamination plumes that can be difficult to contain and mitigate.Sulfolane in groundwater systems and private wells have been detected in Canada, the US, Australia, and other countries.While sulfolane's toxicity and the risk that it can pose to human health are not thoroughly understood, residences whose drinking water wells containing detectable levels of sulfolane (0.01 mg/L -1 mg/L) have been put under water advisories.Therefore, there is an urgent need to develop treatment technologies capable of cleaning up sulfolane-contaminated sites and removing sulfolane from drinking water to protect water resources and human health.The overall objective of this research was to investigate the adsorption of sulfolane on a wide variety of natural and synthetic adsorbents, including sand, iron oxide, aluminum oxide, eight types of granular activated carbons (GAC), Ambersorb 560, Optipore L493, silica gel, zeolite, and silica gel.The removal of sulfolane by these materials were iii investigated by employing synthetic solutions and authentic groundwater samples spiked with 1 -500 mg/L of sulfolane.In some experiments, the solution also consisted of either diisopropanolamine or benzene (i.e., co-contaminants).A pre-screening test indicated that GACs, Ambersorb 560, and Optipore L493 possessed the highest sulfolane adsorption capacity.These materials were tested further in a series of experiments that aimed to examine the kinetics of sulfolane adsorption, adsorption isotherm, and effects of cocontaminants and other water chemistry conditions on the adsorption.It was observed that while the adsorption capacity of GACs and Ambersorb 560 were comparable, the adsorption equilibrium was established much faster on GACs (less than 24 hours) than on Ambersorb 560 (over 10 days).It was also observed that sulfolane adsorption was influenced by major divalent cations in groundwater (e.g., calcium, and magnesium) and dissolved organic carbon.Additionally, it was observed that diisopropanol amine and benzene inhibited sulfolane adsorption, although the degree of inhibition varied among adsorbents.Overall, the research suggests that the treatment of sulfolane by adsorption is a feasible approach for the treatment of contaminated groundwater by pump and treat (i.e., ex situ treatment).Although the research focused particularly on treating sulfolanecontaminated source zones where the concentration of sulfolane and other co-contaminants can range from a few mg/L to up to a few hundred mg/L, the knowledge generated can be relevant to the treatment of water systems with low contamination levels (i.e., less than 1 mg/L).Another objective of this research was to develop a simple, robust, and sensitive method for the analysis of sulfolane in aqueous solution based on prepping samples by isotopic dilution and liquid-liquid extraction, followed by analysis by Gas-Chromatography Mass List of Acronyms and AbbreviationsAC Activated carbon AS Ambersorb OP Optipore AL Amberlite DIPA Diisopropanolamine LD Lethal dose MDL Method detection limit MQL Method quantification limit GC Gas chromatograph LC Liquid chromatograph MS Mass spectrometry FID Flame ionization detection eCD Electron capture detection UV Ultraviolet UHPLC Ultra-high performance liquid chromatograph IC Ion chromatograph BTEX Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Chemical Sensor TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207