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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Trace organic contaminants in biosolids: Impact of conventional wastewater and sludge processing technologies and emerging alternatives
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Hazardous Materials, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2015.06.037 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Galilee U. Semblante, Faisal I. Hai, Xia Huang, Andrew S. Ball, William E. Price, Long D. Nghiem |
| Abstract |
This paper critically reviews the fate of trace organic contaminants (TrOCs) in biosolids, with emphasis on identifying operation conditions that impact the accumulation of TrOCs in sludge during conventional wastewater and sludge treatment and assessing the technologies available for TrOC removal from biosolids. The fate of TrOCs during sludge thickening, stabilisation (e.g. aerobic digestion, anaerobic digestion, alkaline stabilisation, and composting), conditioning, and dewatering is elucidated. Operation pH, sludge retention time (SRT), and temperature have significant impact on the sorption and biodegradation of TrOCs in activated sludge that ends up in the sludge treatment line. Anaerobic digestion may exacerbate the estrogenicity of sludge due to bioconversion to more potent metabolites. Application of advanced oxidation or thermal pre-treatment may minimise TrOCs in biosolids by increasing the bioavailability of TrOCs, converting TrOCs into more biodegradable products, or inducing complete mineralisation of TrOCs. Treatment of sludge by bioaugmentation using various bacteria, yeast, or fungus has the potential to reduce TrOC levels in biosolids. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 235 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Ecuador | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 232 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 50 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 34 | 14% |
| Researcher | 26 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 22 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 18 | 8% |
| Other | 31 | 13% |
| Unknown | 54 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 53 | 23% |
| Engineering | 40 | 17% |
| Chemistry | 16 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 6% |
| Chemical Engineering | 14 | 6% |
| Other | 21 | 9% |
| Unknown | 76 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 29 July 2015.
All research outputs
#15,168,964
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Hazardous Materials
#3,499
of 7,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,802
of 278,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Hazardous Materials
#22
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,088 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 278,432 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 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 60% of its contemporaries.