Evaluation of on-site biological treatment options for hydrothermal liquefaction aqueous phase derived from sludge in municipal wastewater treatment plants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aerobic treatment, mesophilic anaerobic digestion, thermophilic anaerobic digestion, and dark fermentation were evaluated for on-site biological treatment of municipal sludge derived HTL aqueous. For all four described batch test scenarios, municipal sludge-derived HTL aqueous samples obtained under 290–360 °C and 0–30 min retention time were used. In the aerobic respirometric tests, HTL aqueous samples resulted in a five-day biochemical oxygen demand range of 40.75 g/L (350 °C-25.6 min) to 54 g/L (325 °C-0 min). The calculated aerobic biodegradability index showed that approximately 50 % of the organics in HTL aqueous were easily biodegradable. Mesophilic and thermophilic biochemical methane potential tests resulted in specific yields of 151–179 mL CH4/g chemical oxygen demand (COD) and 103–122 mL CH4/g COD, respectively. HTL aqueous obtained under 360 °C-15 min condition caused total inhibition in both mesophilic and thermophilic anaerobic digestion. Possible causes for this inhibition were pyridine, pyrrolidinone, piperidinone, pyridinol, and phenolic compounds, which were higher in abundance in the 360 °C-15 min sample. HTL aqueous was found unfit for hydrogen production in dark fermentation due to inhibitory composition. In summary, on-site biological treatment of HTL aqueous was found to be most suitable under aerobic and mesophilic anaerobic conditions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".