↓ Skip to main content

Impact Assessment and Environmental Evaluation of Various Ammonia Production Processes

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Management, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
102 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
273 Mendeley
Title
Impact Assessment and Environmental Evaluation of Various Ammonia Production Processes
Published in
Environmental Management, February 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00267-017-0831-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yusuf Bicer, Ibrahim Dincer, Greg Vezina, Frank Raso

Abstract

In the current study, conventional resources-based ammonia generation routes are comparatively studied through a comprehensive life cycle assessment. The selected ammonia generation options range from mostly used steam methane reforming to partial oxidation of heavy oil. The chosen ammonia synthesis process is the most common commercially available Haber-Bosch process. The essential energy input for the methods are used from various conventional resources such as coal, nuclear, natural gas and heavy oil. Using the life cycle assessment methodology, the environmental impacts of selected methods are identified and quantified from cradle to gate. The life cycle assessment outcomes of the conventional resources based ammonia production routes show that nuclear electrolysis-based ammonia generation method yields the lowest global warming and climate change impacts while the coal-based electrolysis options bring higher environmental problems. The calculated greenhouse gas emission from nuclear-based electrolysis is 0.48 kg CO2 equivalent while it is 13.6 kg CO2 per kg of ammonia for coal-based electrolysis method.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 273 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 273 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 39 14%
Student > Master 38 14%
Researcher 30 11%
Student > Bachelor 25 9%
Professor 10 4%
Other 37 14%
Unknown 94 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 46 17%
Chemical Engineering 38 14%
Chemistry 19 7%
Energy 17 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 3%
Other 35 13%
Unknown 109 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 07 October 2021.
All research outputs
#5,449,088
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Management
#403
of 1,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,261
of 433,728 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Management
#5
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,914 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 433,728 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.