MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205439513 · doi:10.1093/ce/zkab023

NRG COSIA Carbon XPRIZE: carbon-dioxide mineralization in recycled concrete wash water

2021· article· en· W3205439513 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sean Monkman, Travis Janke, Alex Hanmore

Bibliographic record

VenueClean Energy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsCarbonCure Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSlurryCementitiousCementCalcium carbonateCarbon dioxideMineralization (soil science)Compressive strengthEnvironmental scienceReuseWaste managementMaterials scienceEnvironmental engineeringChemistryMetallurgyComposite materialEngineeringSoil scienceSoil water

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Wash water is generated as a waste stream from ready-mixed-concrete production. Reuse of the water as mixture water is limited, in practice, by the negative material performance impacts associated with the water chemistry and properties; the effects are intensified with increasing content of suspended solids and age. However, this waste material can be used as a beneficial additive to concrete by profiting from the cementitious properties of the suspended solids, if variability can be reduced. A method of stabilizing this material is through CO2 treatment. The added CO2 is mineralized through a reaction with the calcium from the cement particles. This provides a calcium-carbonate coating that prevents further cement hydration, making the material predictable. This has been shown to alleviate concerns with set acceleration and inconsistencies in compressive strength. A method of CO2 treatment was tested as part of the NRG COSIA Carbon XPRIZE at a site in Calgary, Alberta. The slurry for the treatment was provided by a local concrete plant and had a specific gravity of 1.15. The simulated wash water was treated in 1000-L quantities with each treatment mineralizing an average of 40 kg of CO2. The system ran for 1600 hours of operation over 127 treatment cycles and converted 14.5 tonnes of CO2 at an average mineralization efficiency of 80%. The treated slurry was used as an additive in >300 batches of concrete where the concrete met the necessary requirements for fresh properties and setting time, while achieving a strength benefit. Replacement of 5% and 10% of batch water with treated slurry (9.4 and 18.8 kg slurry/m3 concrete) showed a strength benefit of 3% and 6% compared to a reference. The technology was selected as the winner of the NRG COSIA Carbon XPRIZE (Track B: Natural Gas) in April 2021.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.189
Threshold uncertainty score0.376

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.203 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClean EnergySame topicConcrete and Cement Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207