Enhancing Agricultural Biogas Desulfurization: Improving Cost-Efficiency and Robustness Through Micro-Aeration with Psychrophilic Anaerobic Liquid/Solid Media
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study endeavors to develop an economical and user-friendly biological sulfide oxidation system and explore its mechanism for generating biological elemental sulfur under micro-aerobic conditions using psychrophilic anaerobically digested media (liquid/solid inoculums obtained from agricultural livestock wastes) for sulfide-free biogas production. With an initial hydrogen sulfide concentration of 5000 ppm, a biogas flow rate ranging from 0.9 to 1.8 L/h-Linoculum-mix, and an air injection rate of 0.6–1% (oxygen concentration in biogas), a remarkable biodesulfurization efficiency of 99–100% was attained using solid inoculum as the biodesulfurization medium. This efficiency was achieved without compromising the methane quality in the treated biogas. Compared to liquid inoculum, solid inoculum requires less than half the volume and no mixing equipment, such as bubble column reactors. The biodesulfurization reactor requires only 1 m3, which is approximately 1.5% of the volume of a wet anaerobic digester and 3% of a dry anaerobic digester, while processing cow manure (Total Solids: 20%) at 1.03 m3 of manure per day. Moreover, it can be operated at (19–20 °C), leading to substantial reductions in cost and footprint.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".