MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410845442 · doi:10.1016/j.jece.2025.117336

Continuous-flow aerobic co-treatment of municipal sludge derived hydrothermal liquefaction aqueous phase with wastewater in treatment plants

2025· article· en· W4410845442 on OpenAlexafffund
İbrahim Alper Başar, Çiğdem Eskicioğlu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of environmental chemical engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Reuse
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSewage treatmentHydrothermal liquefactionWastewaterLiquefactionAqueous solutionWaste managementHydrothermal circulationEnvironmental sciencePhase (matter)ChemistryEnvironmental engineeringChemical engineeringBiofuelEngineeringOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aerobic treatment of hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) aqueous phase from municipal sludge is a potential on-site treatment option that could help overcome a major challenge, effectively managing HTL aqueous phase. In this study, HTL aqueous phase, derived from mixed sludge cake at 332°C, 16.9 min, was blended with synthetic wastewater in a 1:1000 volumetric ratio representative of sludge processing at a full-scale treatment plant. This mixture was then fed into a bench-scale activated sludge unit, comprised of aeration and settling tanks, under organic loading rates of 1.2–1.6 kg BOD/m 3 ·d. Results revealed that blending HTL aqueous phase into influent wastewater resulted in significant changes in chemical oxygen demand (COD), five-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD 5 ), total ammonium nitrogen (TAN), PO 4 3- -P, and total phenolics concentrations of influent wastewater. There was no evidence of inhibition on aerobic biomass throughout the testing period. However, significant increases in COD (40–45 %), TAN (10–14 %), PO 4 3- -P (8 %), and total phenolics concentrations (75–87 %) were detected in the treated effluent while the BOD 5 of treated effluent was not affected by HTL aqueous phase blending. Although the sludge volume index of biomass significantly increased after blending HTL aqueous phase into the wastewater, the total suspended solids concentration of the settling underflow and sludge recycle were not affected. Finally, recalcitrant compounds were found to increase the UV 254 absorbance. The techno-economic analysis showed that returning the HTL aqueous phase to the activated sludge process would increase aeration cost by 22.5 %, while overall treatment cost would decrease by 13.5 % through HTL integration. • Aerobic treatment tested for wastewater with sludge-derived HTL aqueous phase. • HTL aqueous phase spiking (1:1000 v/v) significantly changed influent quality. • Treatment was not inhibited by HTL aqueous phase at HRT/SRT: 4.5-h/9-d and 6-h/9-d. • Addition of HTL aqueous phase to wastewater affected effluent quality, except BOD. • Slower settling was observed in system fed with HTL aqueous phase mixed wastewater.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.205 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of environmental chemical engineeringSame topicWastewater Treatment and ReuseFrench-language works237,207