↓ Skip to main content

Groundwater Modeling and Remediation Scenarios of a Hexavalent Chromium Plume Released from an Industrial Site

Overview of attention for article published in Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
Groundwater Modeling and Remediation Scenarios of a Hexavalent Chromium Plume Released from an Industrial Site
Published in
Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, October 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00128-016-1951-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zoi Dokou, George P. Karatzas, Iraklis Panagiotakis, Dimitris Dermatas

Abstract

In recent years, high concentrations of hexavalent chromium [Cr(VI)] have been found in the groundwater system of the Asopos River Basin. This work focuses on a Cr(VI) plume detected in the industrial area of Inofyta, the most important contamination hot spot of the Asopos River Basin. A groundwater flow and Cr(VI) transport model was developed to assess the behaviour of the plume and investigate the location of a suspected nearby source zone. According to the model results, the suspected source zone location is highly probable and the Cr(VI) plume does not migrate significantly. Based on the above findings, it is believed that the remediation effort could potentially be very effective in the area, if the remediation plan is designed properly. In order to assess the remediation potential of (a) natural attenuation and (b) polyphenol-coated nZVI treatment, two model scenarios were created and their results were compared and discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 21%
Professor 2 14%
Researcher 2 14%
Student > Master 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Other 2 14%
Unknown 3 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 3 21%
Engineering 3 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 7%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 October 2016.
All research outputs
#18,922,529
of 24,119,703 outputs
Outputs from Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
#2,738
of 4,112 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#229,270
of 318,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
#19
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,119,703 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,112 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 318,435 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.