MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4301265352

Fate of Mercury in Synthetic Gypsum Used for Wallboard Production

2006· other· en· W4301265352 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jessica Sanderson, Gary M Blythe, Mandi Richardson

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas) · 2006
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicBuilding materials and conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGypsumMercury (programming language)Environmental scienceProduction (economics)Environmental chemistryWaste managementGeologyChemistryEngineeringComputer scienceEconomicsPaleontology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report presents and discusses results from Task 6 of the study 'Fate of Mercury in Synthetic Gypsum Used for Wallboard Production,' performed at a full-scale commercial wallboard plant. Synthetic gypsum produced by wet flue gas desulfurization (FGD) systems on coal-fired power plants is commonly used in the manufacture of wallboard. This practice has long benefited the environment by recycling the FGD gypsum byproduct, which is becoming available in increasing quantities, decreasing the need to landfill this material, and increasing the sustainable design of the wallboard product. However, new concerns have arisen as recent mercury control strategies involve the capture of mercury in FGD systems. The objective of this study is to determine whether any mercury is released into the atmosphere when the synthetic gypsum material is used as a feedstock for wallboard production. The project is being co-funded by the U.S. DOE National Energy Technology Laboratory (Cooperative Agreement DE-FC26-04NT42080), USG Corporation, and EPRI. USG Corporation is the prime contractor, and URS Group is a subcontractor. The project scope now includes six discrete tasks, each conducted at various USG wallboard plants using synthetic gypsum from different FGD systems. The project was originally composed of five tasks, which were to include (1) a baseline test, then variations representing differing power plant: (2) emissions control configurations, (3) treatment of fine gypsum particles, (4) coal types, and (5) FGD reagent types. However, Task 5, which was to include testing with an alternate FGD reagent, could not be conducted as planned. Instead, Task 5 was conducted at conditions similar to Task 3, although with gypsum from an alternate FGD system. Subsequent to conducting Task 5 under these revised conditions, an opportunity arose to test gypsum produced at the same FGD system, but with an additive (Degussa Corporation's TMT-15) being used in the FGD system. TMT-15 was expected to impact the stability of mercury in synthetic gypsum used to produce wallboard, so Task 6 was added to the project to test this theory. In this project, process stacks in the wallboard plant have been sampled using the Ontario Hydro method. For every task, the stack locations sampled have included a dryer for the wet gypsum as it enters the plant and a gypsum calciner. For Tasks 1, 4, 5 and 6, the stack of the dryer for the wet wallboard product was also tested. Also at each site, in-stream process samples were collected and analyzed for mercury concentration before and after each significant step in wallboard production. The Ontario Hydro results, process sample mercury concentration data, and process data were used to construct mercury mass balances across the wallboard plants. Task 6 was conducted at a wallboard plant processing synthetic gypsum from a power plant that fires Eastern bituminous coal. The power plant has a single-loop, open spray tower limestone forced oxidation FGD system, with the forced oxidation conducted in the reaction tank integral with the FGD absorber. The FGD system has gypsum fines blow down as part of the dewatering step. The power plant is equipped with a selective catalytic reduction (SCR) system for NOX emissions control, and the SCR was in service during the time period the gypsum tested was produced. Also, as mentioned above, Degussa additive TMT-15 was being added to the FGD system when this gypsum was produced. The results of the Task 6 stack testing, as measured by the Ontario Hydro method, detected that an average of 55% of the incoming mercury was emitted during wallboard production. These losses were distributed as about 4% across the dryer mill, 6% across the board dryer kiln, and 45% across the kettle calciner. Emissions were similar to what Task 5 results showed on a percentage basis, but about 30% lower on a mass basis. The same power plant FGD system produced the synthetic gypsum used in Task 5 (with no use of TMT-15) and in Task 6 (with TMT-15 added to the FGD system). The lower emissions on a mass basis appeared to be due to lower average mercury content in the gypsum being processed. It is not certain whether the lower average mercury content in the gypsum was an effect of TMT-15 addition to the FGD system. As was seen in the Task 1 through 5 results, most of the mercury detected in the Ontario Hydro method stack testing was in the form of elemental mercury.

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)0.000
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.155
Teacher spread0.145 · 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas)Same topicBuilding materials and conservationFrench-language works237,207