I have seen it twice, typical academic paper for funding.Pulling gold out of e-waste suddenly became super profitable.
Read it here
That means it has not been properly peer reviewed or the peers have the same math deficiency as the authors“Analysis revealed that the nugget was made predominantly of gold (90.8 wt%), with copper and nickel contributing 10.9 wt% and 0.018 wt%, respectively. The findings demonstrate the high purity of the nugget, corresponding to 21 or 22 karats”
It may be my math but does the wt% numbers not add up to more than 100%? The gold would still need further refining to achieve higher purity. This second refine would be where I would be curious the most. If it will recover higher purity the second time around it would then have a more viable use I think. Time will tell.
Still I would have expected them to get their addition correct at least.It makes me wonder who actually figured this out? Was it a lab accident or was it someone thinking outside the box. You know, the kind of scientist who has gold in his pee!
What is AC ?I have seen it twice, typical academic paper for funding.
It does the same as AC, but it is effective in acidic environment so maybe if the price is low enough.....
Peer reviewed? The last few years have shown beyond doubt that peer review is no more than getting a few of the people who agree with you to mark their own homework...That means it has not been properly peer reviewed or the peers have the same math deficiency as the authors
Activated Carbon, it should be logical in terms of what is discussed.What is AC ?
Agreed, there was an incident her in Norway when one of these modern institutes had a pre-release of a research report.Peer reviewed? The last few years have shown beyond doubt that peer review is no more than getting a few of the people who agree with you to mark their own homework...
Haha so very very true.Agreed, there was an incident her in Norway when one of these modern institutes had a pre-release of a research report.
Another group not affiliated to anything asked to have the report fro peer review and was promptly told no, since they were not in the inner circle.
So in other than hard science I don't think the peer review system is robust enough today.
Too much flawed statistics and not enough attempt to break the hypothesis.
That may be true however the abbreviation AC is also used to describe Alternating Current . I asked because I didn’t know.Activated Carbon, it should be logical in terms of what is discussed.
Well in that specific reply, I compared the new cheesy material with something with respect to ability to capture Gold,That may be true however the abbreviation AC is also used to describe Alternating Current . I asked because I didn’t know.
It’s all in the details
No reason to be so snide about it
Enter your email address to join: