↓ Skip to main content

Managing the Potential Risks of Using Bacteria-Laden Water in Mineral Processing to Protect Freshwater

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Science & Technology, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 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
Managing the Potential Risks of Using Bacteria-Laden Water in Mineral Processing to Protect Freshwater
Published in
Environmental Science & Technology, May 2013
DOI 10.1021/es400671h
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wenying Liu, Chris J. Moran, Sue Vink

Abstract

The minerals industry is being driven to access multiple water sources and increase water reuse to minimize freshwater withdrawal. Bacteria-laden water, such as treated effluent, has been increasingly used as an alternative to freshwater for mineral processing, in particular flotation, where conditions are favorable for bacterial growth. However, the risk posed by bacteria to flotation efficiency is poorly understood. This could be a barrier to the ongoing use of this water source. This study tested the potential of a previously published risk-based approach as a management tool to both assist mine sites in quantifying the risk from bacteria, and finding system-wide cost-effective solutions for risk mitigation. The result shows that the solution of adjusting the flotation chemical regime could only partly control the risk. The second solution of using tailings as an absorbent was shown to be effective in the laboratory in reducing bacterial concentration and thus removing the threat to flotation recovery. The best solution is likely to combine internal and external approaches, that is, inside and outside processing plants. Findings in this study contribute possible methods applicable to managing the risk from water-borne bacteria to plant operations that choose to use bacteria-containing water, when attempting to minimize freshwater use, and avoiding the undesirable consequences of increasing its use.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 18%
Researcher 5 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 18%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 4 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 4 14%
Environmental Science 3 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 11%
Chemistry 3 11%
Other 5 18%
Unknown 7 25%
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 19 June 2013.
All research outputs
#22,760,732
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science & Technology
#19,590
of 20,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,006
of 206,989 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science & Technology
#248
of 268 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,675 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 206,989 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 268 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.