Performance of Different Biocover Materials in Mitigating Methane Emissions from Landfills in Cold Climate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research investigated the performance of biocover materials in mitigating methane emissions through column experiments, pilot-scale testing, and numerical simulation.Laboratory column experiments were used to evaluate the impact of different CH4 loading rates on the performance of biocover materials, including food waste compost, yard waste compost, and peat moss in reducing methane emissions.In the second part of the research study, the methane removal performance of two biocover materials (i.e., food and yard waste composts) were examined under different temperature conditions using laboratory column experiments.A numerical model was also validated and used to develop a better understanding of the material properties, gas transport mechanisms, CH4 oxidation processes, and overall impact on methane removal efficiency under different CH4 loading rates and temperatures.In the third part, the performance of different biocover materials, including food waste compost and yard waste compost, in mitigating methane emissions was investigated using outdoor pilot-scale biocover systems exposed to seasonal temperature variations over a 400-day period in Ottawa, Canada.Results of this study indicated that the CH4 removal efficiency in the column tests at 22°C was greater than 96.6% when the loading rate was below 96 g m -2 day -1 .It was also found that the oxidation rate was affected by temperature as the CH4 removal efficiency at 8 o C decreased by 70% of CH4 removal efficiency at 22 o C. The pilot-scale test also proved that CH4 removal efficiency was influenced by seasonal temperature variations as the removal efficiency was limited during the winter season, but it approached to 100% CH4 removal in the summer season at a CH4 loading rate of 45 g m -2 day -1 .The findings also indicated that the oxidation capacity was limited not only by the maximum CH4 oxidation rate, but also the biocover
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".