pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.23714 · v1 · pith:WUE4XBRKnew · submitted 2026-05-22 · ⚛️ physics.ins-det · physics.app-ph

Application of LHC Gas Recuperation Systems for Methane Emission Control in Livestock Housing

Ilaria Vai , Francesco Alessandro Angiulli , Chiara Aim\`e , Maria Cristina Arena , Davide Biagini , Amin Bouzaiene , Alessandro Braghieri , Matteo Brunoldi
show 21 more authors
Domenico Calabr\`o Simone Calzaferri Alessandro Caserio Elio Dinuccio Daniele Dondi Linda Finco Giulia Giannandrea Samuel Guelfo Gigli Gabriele Giunta Roberto Guida Nithish Kumar Kameswaran Beatrice Mandelli Paolo Montagna Cristina Riccardi Paola Salvini Claudio Scagliotti Alessandro Tamigio Dhanalakshmi Vadivel Filippo Vercellati Riccardo Verna Paolo Vitulo
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 02:41 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.ins-det physics.app-ph
keywords methane capturelivestock emissionsgas recuperationzeolite adsorptionvacuum swing adsorptionlow concentration capturegreenhouse gas mitigation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Adapting gas recuperation systems from particle physics experiments makes methane capture feasible in livestock housing at concentrations down to 0.1%.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper investigates whether technology developed for recovering gases in high-energy physics can be repurposed to capture methane from livestock barns. A laboratory prototype was built with humidity removal stages and pressurized flows to test adsorbent materials, leading to selection of commercial Z5 zeolite for its capacity and ability to regenerate repeatedly through vacuum cycles. Tests establish that capture works at 0.1% concentration, and a negative exponential fit to the data is used to predict performance at the lower 10-100 ppm levels typical of real barns. A reader would care because methane from agriculture is a significant greenhouse gas, and a workable capture method could address one source of emissions if the approach scales.

Core claim

The adaptation of high-energy physics gas recuperation systems is technically feasible for CH4 capture in livestock housing, with Z5 zeolite selected as the primary adsorbent due to its high adsorption capacity and stable regeneration performance through Vacuum Swing Adsorption cycles, supported by prototype results down to 0.1% concentration and negative exponential extrapolation for the ultra-low regime.

What carries the argument

Laboratory-scale prototype with multi-stage humidity removal and pressurized gas flows, using Vacuum Swing Adsorption cycles on Z5 zeolite adsorbent.

If this is right

  • A full-scale system for field installation in livestock housing can be designed using the measured parameters.
  • Methane capture remains feasible at concentrations as low as 0.1%.
  • Adsorption capacity increases when CH4 partial pressure is raised, with tests up to approximately 5 bar.
  • The adsorption behavior at ultra-low concentrations can be modeled via the negative exponential extrapolation of the data.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the extrapolation holds in practice, the system could operate effectively under the dilute conditions of actual barns.
  • The same hardware principles might extend to other dilute gas streams where conventional capture methods are inefficient.
  • Pilot installations in operating livestock facilities would be needed to check whether real-world variables such as dust or variable humidity alter the observed performance.

Load-bearing premise

The negative exponential extrapolation from laboratory data at 0.1% concentration accurately describes adsorption behavior at the 10-100 ppm levels typical of dairy barn environments.

What would settle it

Direct measurement of Z5 zeolite adsorption capacity at methane concentrations of 10-100 ppm that deviates substantially from the values predicted by the negative exponential extrapolation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.23714 by Alessandro Braghieri, Alessandro Caserio, Alessandro Tamigio, Amin Bouzaiene, Beatrice Mandelli, Chiara Aim\`e, Claudio Scagliotti, Cristina Riccardi, Daniele Dondi, Davide Biagini, Dhanalakshmi Vadivel, Domenico Calabr\`o, Elio Dinuccio, Filippo Vercellati, Francesco Alessandro Angiulli, Gabriele Giunta, Giulia Giannandrea, Ilaria Vai, Linda Finco, Maria Cristina Arena, Matteo Brunoldi, Nithish Kumar Kameswaran, Paola Salvini, Paolo Montagna, Paolo Vitulo, Riccardo Verna, Roberto Guida, Samuel Guelfo Gigli, Simone Calzaferri.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic view of a recirculation system for a gaseous detector (in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Process flow of the CF4 recuperation system for CSCs. Adapted from Ref. [10]. free volume of the module (∼60-70%). Following adsorption, the CF4 is desorbed via material regeneration, typically achieved through temperature increase or pressure reduction. The resulting mixture of CF4, Ar, and N2 is subsequently compressed into a dedicated storage volume for re-usage into the detector gas mixture. The methan… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Molecular structure of CF4 (a) and CH4 (b). 3. Preliminary considerations on dedicated filter materials As introduced in the previous section, the starting point of the analysis of adsorbent materials dedicated to methane capture is the observation that both CH4 and CF4 are tetrahedral molecules with similar molecular dimen￾sions ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The microporous molecular structure of a zeolite, ZSM-5 or Z5. This [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of PXRD patterns of commercial Z5 (black) and reference [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (A) SEM image of Z5 molecular sieve at 200x magnification. (B) SEM [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: (a) Comparison of PXRD patterns of commercial Z5 and carbon-loaded [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (a) Comparison of PXRD patterns of prepared UCSB-9 zeolite and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: (a) PXRD of TUT-100 ZIF. (b) SEM image of TUT-100 ZIF at 5000x [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Schematic representation of the early prototype developed in the lab. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Comparison of typical chromatograms: (a) PPU and (b) MS columns. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Schematic of the setup used to evaluate the adsorption capacity of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Methane concentration sampled at the cartridge outlet for various [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Volume of methane adsorbed by Z5 following VSA regeneration cycles [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Experimental setup for evaluating humidity adsorption by Z3. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Experimental setup employed for the measurement of the baseline [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Adsorbed methane as a function of the input concentration. The error [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Volume of methane adsorbed by 270 g of Z5 zeolite as a function of CH4 concentration in the gas mixture. (a) Volume of methane adsorbed up to the BK; (b) total volume adsorbed up to complete saturation. The error bars are included in the markers. projection was instrumental in establishing the required order of magnitude for the zeolite mass in the final prototype intended for installation in the barn. 4.… view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Mass of Z5 zeolite needed to adsorb one liter of methane as a function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_19.png] view at source ↗
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Methane volume adsorbed by the Z5 zeolite per unit mass as a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_20.png] view at source ↗
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: Scheme of recuperation system to be installed in the barn. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_21.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The CH4rLiE (CH4 Livestock Emission) project investigates the technical feasibility of adapting gas recovery systems from high-energy physics to mitigate methane (CH4) emissions in livestock housing. This work presents a proof-of-principle based on the adaptation of CERN's gas recuperation systems for the capture of CH4 at low concentrations. A laboratory-scale prototype was developed to evaluate the performance of various adsorbent materials under realistic conditions, including multi-stage humidity removal and pressurized gas flows. Experimental results obtained with the prototype led to the selection of commercial Z5 zeolite as the primary adsorbent due to its high adsorption capacity and stable regeneration performance through Vacuum Swing Adsorption cycles. The study demonstrates the feasibility of CH4 capture at concentrations down to 0.1%. Furthermore, it was observed that increasing the CH4 partial pressure enhances the adsorption capacity, with tests conducted up to approximately 5 bar. To bridge the gap between laboratory conditions and the representative 10-100 ppm levels found in dairy barn environments, a negative exponential extrapolation was applied to the experimental data. This allowed for the modeling of the adsorption behavior in the ultra-low concentration regime. These results validate the operational principle and provide the necessary parameters for the design of a full-scale system for field installation.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a proof-of-principle adaptation of CERN LHC gas recuperation systems for CH4 capture in livestock housing. A laboratory prototype with multi-stage humidity removal and pressurized flows is used to test adsorbents; Z5 zeolite is selected for its capacity and Vacuum Swing Adsorption regeneration performance. Feasibility is demonstrated down to 0.1% CH4, with tests up to ~5 bar showing increased capacity at higher partial pressure. A negative-exponential extrapolation from the measured data is applied to model adsorption at the 10-100 ppm levels typical of dairy barns.

Significance. If the extrapolation is shown to be reliable, the work would provide a concrete bridge between high-energy-physics gas-handling hardware and agricultural emission control, supplying design parameters for a field-scale system. The directly measured results at and above 0.1% constitute a solid experimental foundation; the extrapolation step is the element whose validity determines whether the barn-relevant claim holds.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract (final paragraph): the feasibility claim for dairy-barn conditions (10-100 ppm CH4) rests entirely on a negative-exponential extrapolation from laboratory data obtained only down to 0.1% (1000 ppm). No measurements, cross-validation, fit-parameter covariance, or prediction intervals are reported for the two-orders-of-magnitude lower target regime, leaving the functional form and uncertainty unquantified.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Clarify whether the 'approximately 5 bar' tests refer to total pressure or CH4 partial pressure, and state the corresponding concentration range explicitly.
  2. [Abstract] The abstract states that the extrapolation 'allowed for the modeling' but does not indicate whether the resulting model parameters are tabulated or supplied as supplementary material for use in full-scale design.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and for highlighting the distinction between measured and extrapolated regimes. We agree that the abstract requires clarification on this point and will revise it accordingly while preserving the proof-of-principle nature of the work.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (final paragraph): the feasibility claim for dairy-barn conditions (10-100 ppm CH4) rests entirely on a negative-exponential extrapolation from laboratory data obtained only down to 0.1% (1000 ppm). No measurements, cross-validation, fit-parameter covariance, or prediction intervals are reported for the two-orders-of-magnitude lower target regime, leaving the functional form and uncertainty unquantified.

    Authors: We accept the referee's observation. The laboratory data stop at 0.1 % CH4; the 10–100 ppm range is obtained solely by fitting a negative-exponential model to the measured points and extending it. No additional low-concentration measurements, cross-validation, or statistical uncertainty quantification (covariance matrix or prediction intervals) are provided. In the revised manuscript we will (i) rephrase the abstract to state explicitly that performance at barn-relevant concentrations is estimated by extrapolation, (ii) add a dedicated paragraph in the results section describing the fitting procedure, the data range used, and the physical motivation for the chosen functional form, and (iii) insert a clear limitations statement noting the absence of direct validation below 0.1 %. Because the present study is a laboratory proof-of-principle, new measurements at 10–100 ppm would require a different apparatus and are outside its scope; the extrapolation therefore remains an indicative design tool rather than a validated prediction. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Experimental study with explicit post-hoc extrapolation; no derivation reduces to inputs by construction

full rationale

The paper's core content is a laboratory prototype demonstration of CH4 adsorption on Z5 zeolite down to 0.1% concentration, with measured capacity, pressure dependence up to 5 bar, and VSA regeneration performance. The negative exponential extrapolation is applied after the fact to estimate behavior at 10-100 ppm and is presented as a modeling bridge rather than a derived result. No equations, self-citations, or fitted parameters are shown to be load-bearing in a way that makes any claim equivalent to its inputs by definition. The experimental data and selection of adsorbent stand independently of the extrapolation step.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the assumption that the negative-exponential model fitted to higher-concentration data remains valid at 10-100 ppm; no free parameters are explicitly named, but the extrapolation itself introduces at least one fitted functional form whose justification is external to the reported measurements.

free parameters (1)
  • negative-exponential extrapolation parameters
    The functional form and coefficients used to extend laboratory adsorption data to the 10-100 ppm regime are chosen to fit the measured points and are not derived from first principles.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The adsorption isotherm shape observed at 0.1% and above continues to follow the same negative-exponential trend at two orders of magnitude lower concentration.
    Invoked when the paper states that the extrapolation bridges the gap to barn conditions.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5882 in / 1405 out tokens · 29363 ms · 2026-05-25T02:41:37.188896+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    D. J. Wuebbles, K. Hayhoe, Atmospheric methane and global change, Earth-Sci. Rev. 57 (3-4) (2002) 177–210. doi:10.1016/S0012- 8252(01)00062-9. 37

    work page doi:10.1016/s0012- 2002

  2. [2]

    rep., Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2017)

    FAO, Livestock solutions for climate change, Tech. rep., Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2017). URLhttps://openknowledge.fao.org/handle/20.500.14283/ i8098en

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    Guida, et al., Commissioning of the CF4 recuperation plant for the CathodeStripChambersdetectorattheCERNCompactMuonSolenoid experiment, in: 2011 IEEE Nucl

    R. Guida, et al., Commissioning of the CF4 recuperation plant for the CathodeStripChambersdetectorattheCERNCompactMuonSolenoid experiment, in: 2011 IEEE Nucl. Sci. Symp. Conf. Rec., 2011, pp. 1814–

    work page 2011

  4. [4]

    doi:10.1109/NSSMIC.2011.6154690

    work page doi:10.1109/nssmic.2011.6154690 2011

  5. [5]

    V. Masson-Delmotte, et al., Climate change 2021: the physical science basis, Contribution of working group I to the sixth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change 2 (1) (2021) 2391. doi:10.1017/9781009157896

    work page doi:10.1017/9781009157896 2021

  6. [6]

    Capeans, et al., Strategies for reducing the environmental im- pact of gaseous detector operation at the CERN LHC experi- ments, Nucl

    M. Capeans, et al., Strategies for reducing the environmental im- pact of gaseous detector operation at the CERN LHC experi- ments, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 845 (2017) 253–256. doi:10.1016/j.nima.2016.04.067

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nima.2016.04.067 2017

  7. [7]

    Wei, et al., Microporous adsorbents for CH4 capture and separa- tion from coalbed methane with low CH4 concentration, Nanomaterials 15 (3) (2025) 208

    X. Wei, et al., Microporous adsorbents for CH4 capture and separa- tion from coalbed methane with low CH4 concentration, Nanomaterials 15 (3) (2025) 208. doi:10.3390/nano15030208

    work page doi:10.3390/nano15030208 2025

  8. [8]

    Vadivel, et al., Perspective on methane capture strategies from natural low-level emissions, Energy Nexus 19 (2025) 100459

    D. Vadivel, et al., Perspective on methane capture strategies from natural low-level emissions, Energy Nexus 19 (2025) 100459. doi:10.1016/j.nexus.2025.100459. 38

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nexus.2025.100459 2025

  9. [9]

    O. Esen, A. Fişne, A comprehensive study on methane adsorption ca- pacities and pore characteristics of coal seams: Implications for efficient coalbed methane development in the Soma Basin, Türkiye, Rock Mech. Rock Eng. 57 (8) (2024) 6355–6375. doi:10.1007/s00603-024-03854-1

    work page doi:10.1007/s00603-024-03854-1 2024

  10. [10]

    R. Guida, et al., Results from the first operational period of the CF4 recuperation plant for the Cathode Strip Chambers detector at the CERN Compact Muon Solenoid experiment, in: 2012 IEEE Nucl. Sci. Symp. Med. Imaging Conf. Rec., 2012, pp. 1141–1145. doi:10.1109/NSSMIC.2012.6551286

    work page doi:10.1109/nssmic.2012.6551286 2012

  11. [11]

    M. C. Arena, R&D for gas recovery systems and study of eco-friendly gas mixtures for new gas detectors for the Experiments at the CERN LHC, Ph.D. thesis, University of Pavia (2023). URLhttps://hdl.handle.net/11571/1517101

    work page 2023

  12. [12]

    C. D. Williams, Application of zeolites to environmen- tal remediation, Urban Pollut. Sci. Manag. (2018) 249– 258doi:10.1002/9781119260493.ch19

    work page doi:10.1002/9781119260493.ch19 2018

  13. [13]

    Splettstoesser,https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File: Zeolite-ZSM-5-vdW.png, Wikimedia Commons, licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0

    T. Splettstoesser,https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File: Zeolite-ZSM-5-vdW.png, Wikimedia Commons, licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0

    work page

  14. [14]

    Díaz, et al., Surface structure of zeolite (MFI) crystals, Chem

    I. Díaz, et al., Surface structure of zeolite (MFI) crystals, Chem. Mater. 16 (25) (2004) 5226–5232. doi:10.1021/cm0488534

    work page doi:10.1021/cm0488534 2004

  15. [15]

    39 URLhttps://america.iza-structure.org/IZA-SC/material_tm

    IZA-SC, Database of Zeolite Structures - Material TM: FAU. 39 URLhttps://america.iza-structure.org/IZA-SC/material_tm. php?ID=149

    work page

  16. [16]

    T. C. Hoff, et al., Thermal stability of aluminum-rich ZSM-5 zeolites and consequences on aromatization reactions, J. Phys. Chem. C 120 (36) (2016) 20103–20113. doi:10.1021/acs.jpcc.6b04671

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.jpcc.6b04671 2016

  17. [17]

    URLhttps://america.iza-structure.org/IZA-SC/pow_plot.php

    IZA-SC, Database of Zeolite Structures - Powder Pattern Simulation. URLhttps://america.iza-structure.org/IZA-SC/pow_plot.php

    work page

  18. [18]

    Talu, et al., Effect of cations on methane adsorption by NaY, MgY, CaY,SrY,andBaYzeolites, J.Phys.Chem.97(49)(1993)12894–12898

    O. Talu, et al., Effect of cations on methane adsorption by NaY, MgY, CaY,SrY,andBaYzeolites, J.Phys.Chem.97(49)(1993)12894–12898. doi:10.1021/j100151a043

    work page doi:10.1021/j100151a043 1993

  19. [19]

    Roohollahi, et al., Recent advances in adsorption and separation of methane and carbon dioxide greenhouse gases using metal–organic framework-based composites, Ind

    H. Roohollahi, et al., Recent advances in adsorption and separation of methane and carbon dioxide greenhouse gases using metal–organic framework-based composites, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 61 (30) (2022) 10555–10586. doi:10.1021/acs.iecr.2c00664

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.iecr.2c00664 2022

  20. [20]

    Dondi, et al., The role of inorganic sulfur compounds in the py- rolysis of Kraft lignin, J

    D. Dondi, et al., The role of inorganic sulfur compounds in the py- rolysis of Kraft lignin, J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 107 (2014) 53–58. doi:10.1016/j.jaap.2014.02.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jaap.2014.02.002 2014

  21. [21]

    Speltini, et al., Preparation of silica-supported carbon by Kraft lignin pyrolysis, and its use in solid-phase extraction of fluoroquinolones from environmental waters, Microchim

    A. Speltini, et al., Preparation of silica-supported carbon by Kraft lignin pyrolysis, and its use in solid-phase extraction of fluoroquinolones from environmental waters, Microchim. Acta 183 (7) (2016) 2241–2249. doi:10.1007/s00604-016-1859-7

    work page doi:10.1007/s00604-016-1859-7 2016

  22. [22]

    Vadivel, et al., Pyrolytic formation of TiO2/carbon nanocomposite 40 from kraft lignin: characterization and photoactivities, Catalysts 10 (3) (2020) 270

    D. Vadivel, et al., Pyrolytic formation of TiO2/carbon nanocomposite 40 from kraft lignin: characterization and photoactivities, Catalysts 10 (3) (2020) 270. doi:10.3390/catal10030270

    work page doi:10.3390/catal10030270 2020

  23. [23]

    Vadivel, I

    D. Vadivel, I. Malaichamy, Pyrolytic formation and photoactivity of reactive oxygen species in a SiO 2/carbon nanocomposite from kraft lignin, F1000Res. 7 (2018) 1574. doi:10.12688/f1000research.16080.1

    work page doi:10.12688/f1000research.16080.1 2018

  24. [24]

    S. K. Tripathy, et al., Effect of Pore Size on CO2 Adsorption Capacity over Low-Grade Carbon-Loaded Mesoporous Zeolites, Catalysts 16 (1) (2026) 72. doi:10.3390/catal16010072

    work page doi:10.3390/catal16010072 2026

  25. [25]

    C. D. Klingshirn, et al., Quantification of elemental and total carbon in combustion particulate matter using thermal-oxidative analysis, J. Air Waste Manag. Assoc. 69 (8) (2019) 1003–1013. doi:10.1080/10962247.2019.1630025

    work page doi:10.1080/10962247.2019.1630025 2019

  26. [26]

    R. Wijiyanti, et al., Evaluation of different carbon-modified zeolite derivatives preparation methods as a filler in mixed matrix membrane on their gas separation performance, Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 359 (2023) 112650. doi:10.1016/j.micromeso.2023.112650

    work page doi:10.1016/j.micromeso.2023.112650 2023

  27. [27]

    URLhttps://europe.iza-structure.org/IZA-SC/material_tm

    IZA-SC, Database of Zeolite Structures - Material TM: LTA. URLhttps://europe.iza-structure.org/IZA-SC/material_tm. php?ID=207

    work page

  28. [28]

    Bu, et al., Novel germanate zeolite structures with 3-rings, J

    X. Bu, et al., Novel germanate zeolite structures with 3-rings, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 120 (43) (1998) 11204–11205. doi:10.1021/ja982591n

    work page doi:10.1021/ja982591n 1998

  29. [29]

    URLhttps://europe.iza-structure.org/IZA-SC/pow_plot.php 41

    IZA-SC, Database of Zeolite Structures - Powder Pattern Plot. URLhttps://europe.iza-structure.org/IZA-SC/pow_plot.php 41

    work page

  30. [30]

    Liu, et al., Superhydrophobic zeolitic imidazolate framework with suitable SOD cage for effective CH4/N2 adsorptive separation in humid environments, AIChE J

    J. Liu, et al., Superhydrophobic zeolitic imidazolate framework with suitable SOD cage for effective CH4/N2 adsorptive separation in humid environments, AIChE J. 68 (5) (2022) e17589. doi:10.1002/aic.17589

    work page doi:10.1002/aic.17589 2022

  31. [31]

    URLhttps://docs.vaisala.com/v/u/B211207EN-K/en-US

    Vaisala, Technical documentation b211207en-k. URLhttps://docs.vaisala.com/v/u/B211207EN-K/en-US

    work page

  32. [32]

    URLhttps://www.srainstruments.it/p/solia/

    SRA Instruments, SOLIA: Analizzatore di gas online. URLhttps://www.srainstruments.it/p/solia/

    work page

  33. [33]

    URLhttps://chemicalstructure.wordpress.com/portfolio/ linde-type-a/

    Linde Type A. URLhttps://chemicalstructure.wordpress.com/portfolio/ linde-type-a/

    work page

  34. [34]

    URLhttps://www.iza-online.org/natural/Datasheets/ Faujasite/faujasite.htm

    IZA, Natural zeolites datasheet: Faujasite. URLhttps://www.iza-online.org/natural/Datasheets/ Faujasite/faujasite.htm

    work page

  35. [35]

    F. A. Angiulli, Study of methane adsorption and CFD simulations for the optimization of a capture prototype in barns for the CH4rLiE project, Master’s thesis, University of Pavia (2024). URLhttps://unitesi.unipv.it/handle/20.500.14239/28881

    work page 2024

  36. [36]

    S.Piradl, A.Shadrokh, M.Yarmohammadi, Arobustestimationmethod for the linear regression model parameters with correlated error terms and outliers, Journal of Applied Statistics 49 (7) (2022) 1663–1676. 42

    work page 2022