Potential for using paper mill fly-ash as an alternate liming material \nand mobility and leachability of heavy metals in fly-ash and biochar \namended agricultural soil in Western Newfoundland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most agricultural soils in Western Newfoundland are acidic and need lime to raise the soil pH to \nbe productive. Corner Brook Pulp and Paper Ltd produces a substantial amount of fly-ash which \nis being disposed at a local landfill. This study was conducted to assess the potential for using fly-ash as a liming material for an agricultural soil (pH:5.5) in Western Newfoundland with the \naddition of biochar for heavy metal stabilization. Heavy metal concentration in the soil and fly-ash were analysed and compared with soil and compost guidelines. Lab scale leaching and pot \nexperiments were conducted to assess the leaching and bioavailability of heavy metals in fly-ash \namended soil with different biochar rates. As per quality guidelines, only part of the lime \nrequirement can be substituted by fly-ash. Biochar increased the soil pH and biomass production. \nTotal heavy metal leached from biochar treated soils were low and unlikely to cause groundwater \ncontamination. In general biochar reduces the leachability and the bio availability of heavy metals. \nApplication of biochar could provide a sustainable solution for the heavy metal stabilization of \nfly-ash treated soil.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".