| Title |
Managing produced water from coal seam gas projects: implications for an emerging industry in Australia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, March 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11356-015-4254-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peter J. Davies, Damian B. Gore, Stuart J. Khan |
| Abstract |
This paper reviews the environmental problems, impacts and risks associated with the generation and disposal of produced water by the emerging coal seam gas (CSG) industry and how it may be relevant to Australia and similar physical settings. With only limited independent research on the potential environmental impacts of produced water, is it necessary for industry and government policy makers and regulators to draw upon the experiences of related endeavours such as mining and groundwater extraction accepting that the conclusions may not always be directly transferrable. CSG is widely touted in Australia as having the potential to provide significant economic and energy security benefits, yet the environmental and health policies and the planning and regulatory setting are yet to mature and are continuing to evolve amidst ongoing social and environmental concerns and political indecision. In this review, produced water has been defined as water that is brought to the land surface during the process of recovering methane gas from coal seams and includes water sourced from CSG wells as well as flowback water associated with drilling, hydraulic fracturing and gas extraction. A brief overview of produced water generation, its characteristics and environmental issues is provided. A review of past lessons and identification of potential risks, including disposal options, is included to assist in planning and management of this industry. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 2 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 10% |
| Zimbabwe | 1 | 10% |
| United States | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 5 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 70% |
| Scientists | 3 | 30% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 18% |
| Unknown | 11 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 14 | 25% |
| Engineering | 10 | 18% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 13 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 38. 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 24 January 2020.
All research outputs
#975,186
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#133
of 9,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,923
of 266,754 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#2
of 150 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,883 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 266,754 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 150 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.