↓ Skip to main content

Efficiency of conventional drinking-water-treatment processes in removal of pharmaceuticals and other organic compounds

Overview of attention for article published in Science of the Total Environment, March 2007
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
586 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
764 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
Efficiency of conventional drinking-water-treatment processes in removal of pharmaceuticals and other organic compounds
Published in
Science of the Total Environment, March 2007
DOI 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2007.01.095
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul E. Stackelberg, Jacob Gibs, Edward T. Furlong, Michael T. Meyer, Steven D. Zaugg, R. Lee Lippincott

Abstract

Samples of water and sediment from a conventional drinking-water-treatment (DWT) plant were analyzed for 113 organic compounds (OCs) that included pharmaceuticals, detergent degradates, flame retardants and plasticizers, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), fragrances and flavorants, pesticides and an insect repellent, and plant and animal steroids. 45 of these compounds were detected in samples of source water and 34 were detected in samples of settled sludge and (or) filter-backwash sediments. The average percent removal of these compounds was calculated from their average concentration in time-composited water samples collected after clarification, disinfection (chlorination), and granular-activated-carbon (GAC) filtration. In general, GAC filtration accounted for 53% of the removal of these compounds from the aqueous phase; disinfection accounted for 32%, and clarification accounted for 15%. The effectiveness of these treatments varied widely within and among classes of compounds; some hydrophobic compounds were strongly oxidized by free chlorine, and some hydrophilic compounds were partly removed through adsorption processes. The detection of 21 of the compounds in 1 or more samples of finished water, and of 3 to 13 compounds in every finished-water sample, indicates substantial but incomplete degradation or removal of OCs through the conventional DWT process used at this plant.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 764 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 <1%
India 3 <1%
France 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Burkina Faso 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 744 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 154 20%
Student > Master 148 19%
Researcher 82 11%
Student > Bachelor 77 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 50 7%
Other 104 14%
Unknown 149 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 176 23%
Engineering 132 17%
Chemistry 118 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 47 6%
Chemical Engineering 37 5%
Other 57 7%
Unknown 197 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 21 January 2015.
All research outputs
#8,543,833
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Science of the Total Environment
#11,328
of 29,655 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,227
of 91,167 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science of the Total Environment
#22
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,655 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 91,167 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.