Treatment of laundry wastewater using extracellular polymeric substances (EPS)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The problem of management and treatment of wastewater from commercial laundries is a matter of concern. The present study provides an effective and eco-friendly solution to the treatment of wastewater from commercial laundries in Quebec (Canada) by using the extracellular polymeric substance (EPS) as a bio-flocculant. EPS was produced from the valorization of crude glycerol and paper mill sludge by a bacterial strain (BS-04). Two different types of EPS: Slime EPS (S-EPS) and Broth EPS (B-EPS) were used for the treatment of commercial laundry wastewater (CLWW). This is the first study for the treatment of CLWW using bio-flocculant EPS. A comparison between the conventional treatment of laundry wastewater (LWW) by chemical coagulants (FeSO 4 , CaCl 2 , Alum) and enhanced treatment by bio-flocculant EPS has been drawn in the study. Moreover, LWW treatment by a combination of EPS and chemical coagulants was also investigated. It was observed that S-EPS (0.6 g/L) gave better flocculation activity (FA) than B-EPS. S-EPS alone can remove 83.20% of turbidity, 77.69% of suspended solids (SS), and 76.37% of chemical oxygen demand (COD). The best results were obtained by combining S-EPS (0.6 g/L) with alum (300 mg/L) at pH 7 for a treatment time of 30 min. This combination was able to remove 98% of turbidity, 95.42% of SS, and 83.08% of COD from LWW. When treatment time has been increased to 4 h at pH 7, it resulted in more than 88% COD removal from CLWW. Graphical Abstract
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
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 it