Characterization of carbon dioxide emissions from late stage windrow composting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As organic waste is converted to usable amendments via composting, there are large CO2 emissions associated with the decomposition of organic matter via microorganisms. While the active composting phase produces the largest emissions over a short duration, compost can often be stored during and after the maturation phase for much longer periods of time, increasing cumulative emissions. As such, the objectives of this study were to examine the spatial and temporal variability associated with in situ emissions sampling while identifying the environmental and chemical controls on emissions in windrow composting facilities during and after the maturation phase. A total of 665 flux measurements were taken from four windrows representing different ages and compositions between June and November 2020. Factorial analysis of covariance (ANOVA) was used to determine the variability between sampling locations, while multiple linear regression was used to identify those parameters which had the most influence on CO2 flux. Emissions showed significant variability over time that were attributed to ambient temperatures. During the summer, each windrow reached peak emissions between 5.0 and 32.3 g CO2 m-2 hr-1. As temperatures cooled, the windrows saw a 62%–86% decline in emissions, generally falling below 2 g CO2 m-2 hr-1. Significant differences occurred between the top-most sampling location and all others on the windrow, emitting between 33%–100% more CO2. The environmental controls of surface temperature, moisture content, and internal temperature showed the highest influence on emissions (R2 = 0.62). Chemical properties including organic nitrogen, carbon, pH, magnesium, and nitrate also showed significant influence (R2 = 0.43). This research has shown that environmental factors including temperature and moisture show the strongest influence over emission rates in mature compost. A significant negative effect of organic nitrogen on CO2 flux was found, indicating that increased presence of organic nitrogen would aid in the retention of carbon after the maturation phase, acting to lower total emissions.
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 | 0.001 | 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".