Making sustainable aluminum by recycling scrap: The science of “dirty” alloys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are several facets of aluminum when it comes to sustainability. While it helps to save fuel due to its low density, producing it from ores is very energy-intensive. Recycling it shifts the balance towards higher sustainability, because the energy needed to melt aluminum from scrap is only about 5% of that consumed in ore reduction. The amount of aluminum available for recycling is estimated to double by 2050. This offers an opportunity to bring the metallurgical sector closer to a circular economy. A challenge is that large amounts of scrap are post-consumer scrap, containing high levels of elemental contamination. This has to be taken into account in more sustainable alloy design strategies. A “green aluminum” trend has already triggered a new trading platform for low-carbon aluminum at the London Metal Exchange (2020). The trend may lead to limits on the use of less-sustainable materials in future products. The shift from primary synthesis (ore reduction) to secondary synthesis (scrap melting) requires to gain better understanding of how multiple scrap-related contaminant elements act on aluminum alloys and how future alloys can be designed upfront to become scrap-compatible and composition-tolerant. The paper therefore discusses the influence of scrap-related impurities on the thermodynamics and kinetics of precipitation reactions and their mechanical and electrochemical effects; impurity effects on precipitation-free zones around grain boundaries; their effects on casting microstructures; and the possibilities presented by adjusting processing parameters and the associated mechanical, functional and chemical properties. The objective is to foster the design and production of aluminum alloys with the highest possible scrap fractions, using even low-quality scrap and scrap types which match only a few target alloys when recycled.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".