MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116068211 · doi:10.1021/acsestwater.5c01094

Granular Activated Carbon Filtration as a Lead Control Strategy

2025· article· en· W7116068211 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueACS ES&T Water · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Treatment and Disinfection
Canadian institutionsGreenfield Research (Canada)Dalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWater treatmentGalvanic cellActivated carbonFiltration (mathematics)Powdered activated carbon treatmentCarbon fibersGalvanic corrosionLead (geology)Total organic carbon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change-related increases in organic carbon in surface waters may present challenges in meeting regulatory requirements with regard to drinking water quality. Treatment adaptation that alters natural organic matter (NOM), metal oxides, and water chemistry can have a downstream influence on lead release. We compared the effect of the coagulant and filter type on water quality and lead release in a galvanic lead solder-copper system. Aluminum sulfate (alum), polyaluminum chloride (PACl), anthracite/sand, and granular activated carbon (GAC) were tested in a pilot-scale system. Lead release was evaluated in a bench-scale dump and fill experiment with treated water dosed with 0-2 ppm zinc-orthophosphate. GAC contactors reduced organic carbon in both systems and had a strong protective effect on lead release, likely due to less NOM complexation and improved orthophosphate performance. At equivalent Al doses, organic carbon removal was comparable between PACl and alum, but PACl showed slower GAC exhaustion rates, improving the removal efficiency. PACl was linked with increased galvanic corrosion due to higher CSMR. Zinc-orthophosphate mitigated galvanic corrosion of lead solder. Treatment facilities can decrease lead release by removing NOM, but alternative coagulants that may be considered for enhanced NOM removal can increase the chloride concentration and have detrimental effects as well.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.807

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)0.0010.001

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 head0.214
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS ES&T WaterSame topicWater Treatment and DisinfectionFrench-language works237,207