MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412570262 · doi:10.3390/en18153902

Turning Construction, Renovation, and Demolition (CRD) Wood Waste into Biochar: A Scalable and Sustainable Solution for Energy and Environmental Applications

2025· article· en· W4412570262 on OpenAlexafffund
Aravind Ganesan, Simon Barnabé, Younès Bareha, Simon Langlois, Olivier Rezazgui, Cyrine Boussabbeh

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRecycling and Waste Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersMitacs
KeywordsBiocharDemolitionDemolition wasteConstruction wasteWaste managementEnvironmental scienceWaste recyclingSustainable energyEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringCivil engineeringRenewable energyPyrolysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the pyrolysis of construction, renovation, and demolition (CRD) wood waste to produce biochar, with a focus on its robustness, scalability, and characterization for energy and environmental applications. Pyrolysis conditions, including the temperature, biomass residence time (BRT), and feedstock mass, were varied to evaluate their effects on biochar properties. High-temperature biochars (B800) showed the highest fixed carbon (FC) (87%) and thermostable fraction (TSF) (96%) and the lowest volatile carbon (VC) (9%), with a high carbon content (92%), a large BET surface area (300 m2/g), and a high micropore volume (0.146 cm3/g). However, the hydrogen (0.9%) and oxygen (2.2%) content, Van-Krevelen parameters (H/C: 0.1; O/C: 0.02), and biochar yield (21%) decreased with increasing temperature. Moderate-temperature biochars (B600) have balanced physicochemical properties and yields, making them suitable for adsorption applications. Methyl orange dye removal exceeded 90% under the optimal conditions, with B600 fitting well with the Freundlich isotherm model (R2 = 0.97; 1/n = 0.5) and pseudo-second-order kinetic model (R2 = 1). The study highlights biochar’s suitability for varied applications, emphasizing the need for scalability in CRD wood pyrolysis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.403
Threshold uncertainty score0.390

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicRecycling and Waste Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207