MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283171589 · doi:10.1080/08827508.2022.2084733

Towards an integrated approach for zero coal mine waste storage: solutions based on materials circularity and sustainable resource governance

2022· article· en· W4283171589 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yassine Taha, Abdellatif Elghali, Manar Derhy, Mustapha Amrani, Rachid Hakkou, Mostafa Benzaazoua

Bibliographic record

VenueMineral Processing and Extractive Metallurgy Review · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMine drainage and remediation techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsCoalAnthraciteEnvironmental scienceWaste managementTailingsCoal miningHeat of combustionCompressive strengthBriquetteMining engineeringEngineeringMaterials scienceCombustionMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Around 25 million tons of coal mine waste rock (CMWR) are stored in many places in Morocco due to coal mining activities. As a result, air and water quality of the neighborhood is polluted and large lands are occupied. This study aimed to investigate the use of an integrated and circular approach based on coal recovery and waste rock recycling. More than 30 drill core samples were taken from the big coal dump reaching a depth of 60 m and analyzed to evaluate the chemical composition variability. Froth flotation was used to recover coal particles using diesel as a collector and Methyl Isobutyl Carbinol as a frother, 100 g/t each. The tailings of coal flotation process (CFT) were used to manufacture fired bricks at a pilot scale. The results of this study highlighted the possibility to valorize the whole waste material toward an objective of zero waste in the future. On a basis of 100t feed, (i) 10-15t can be recovered as high-quality anthracite coal with a calorific value over 7500 kcal/kg using flotation processing at a recovery yield over 80%, (ii) 45-60t can be reused as shales for bricks production with a compressive strength over 16MPa, (iii) 20-30t can be reused as aggregates for concrete production with a compressive strength over 20MPa. The remaining material can be reused as sand. The recovered anthracite can be reused to manufacture coal briquettes or used at it is in the thermal power plant next to the dump site.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations22
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMineral Processing and Extractive Metallurgy ReviewSame topicMine drainage and remediation techniquesFrench-language works237,207