Beneficial uses of pulp and paper power boiler ash residues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ash residuals generated from recovery and power boilers combusting wood residues, sludges, or auxiliary fuels constitute a major fraction of the solid residues produced by pulp and paper mills. Generation rates in Canada, and likely elsewhere, for ashes of different types have increased substantially since the mid-1990s. Landfilling is the primary disposal method, but there are many potential beneficial applications for these ashes. Large-scale opportunities include land application and construction. Smaller-scale applications exist within both wastewater treatment systems and the papermaking process. Ashes from wood-fired power boilers are generally more suitable for land application than those from coal combustion, as they contain fewer metals at lower concentrations (except for cadmium). The major benefit of land application arises from the neutralizing properties of ashes, as they provide alkalinity to the soil. Compared to fly ashes, bottom ashes have higher bulk density, lower carbon content and few, if any, dioxins and furans. Land application of ashes produced from salt-laden hog fuels at coastal pulp and paper mills is regulated for dioxins and furans. However, steps can be taken to minimize the generation of such chlorinated organics, making these ashes suitable for land application.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".