↓ Skip to main content

Study of the performance of a thermophilic biological methanation system

Overview of attention for article published in Bioresource Technology, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
69 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
153 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Study of the performance of a thermophilic biological methanation system
Published in
Bioresource Technology, November 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.biortech.2016.11.066
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amita Jacob Guneratnam, Eoin Ahern, Jamie A. FitzGerald, Stephen A. Jackson, Ao Xia, Alan D.W. Dobson, Jerry D. Murphy

Abstract

This study investigated the operation of ex-situ biological methanation at two thermophilic temperatures (55°C and 65°C). Methane composition of 85-88% was obtained and volumetric productivities of 0.45 and 0.4LCH4/Lreactor were observed at 55°C and 65°C after 24h respectively. It is postulated that at 55°C the process operated as a mixed culture as the residual organic substrates in the starting inoculum were still available. These were consumed prior to the assessment at 65°C; thus the methanogens were now dependent on gaseous substrates CO2 and H2. The experiment was repeated at 65°C with fresh inoculum (a mixed culture); methane composition and volumetric productivity of 92% and 0.46LCH4/Lreactor were achieved in 24h. Methanothermobacter species represent likely and resilient candidates for thermophilic biogas upgrading.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 153 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 153 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 41 27%
Researcher 20 13%
Student > Master 15 10%
Student > Bachelor 9 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 5%
Other 20 13%
Unknown 40 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 28 18%
Chemical Engineering 18 12%
Environmental Science 16 10%
Energy 12 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 6%
Other 15 10%
Unknown 55 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 28 June 2021.
All research outputs
#8,261,756
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Bioresource Technology
#2,110
of 8,264 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,550
of 415,795 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bioresource Technology
#19
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,264 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
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 415,795 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 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.