↓ Skip to main content

Life cycle, techno-economic and dynamic simulation assessment of bioelectrochemical systems: A case of formic acid synthesis

Overview of attention for article published in Bioresource Technology, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
290 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.
Article details
Title
Life cycle, techno-economic and dynamic simulation assessment of bioelectrochemical systems: A case of formic acid synthesis
Published in
Bioresource Technology, February 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.biortech.2018.01.071
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

A novel framework, integrating dynamic simulation (DS), life cycle assessment (LCA) and techno-economic assessment (TEA) of a bioelectrochemical system (BES), has been developed to study for the first time wastewater treatment by removal of chemical oxygen demand (COD) by oxidation in anode and thereby harvesting electron and proton for carbon dioxide reduction reaction or reuse to produce products in cathode. Increases in initial COD and applied potential increase COD removal and production (in this case formic acid) rates. DS correlations are used in LCA and TEA for holistic performance analyses. The cost of production of HCOOH is €0.015-0.005 g-1 for its production rate of 0.094-0.26 kg yr-1 and a COD removal rate of 0.038-0.106 kg yr-1. The life cycle (LC) benefits by avoiding fossil-based formic acid production (93%) and electricity for wastewater treatment (12%) outweigh LC costs of operation and assemblage of BES (-5%), giving a net 61MJkg-1 HCOOH saving.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 290 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 290 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 51 18%
Student > Master 37 13%
Researcher 31 11%
Student > Bachelor 18 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 6%
Other 44 15%
Unknown 93 32%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 52 18%
Chemical Engineering 28 10%
Environmental Science 26 9%
Chemistry 14 5%
Social Sciences 8 3%
Other 43 15%
Unknown 119 41%
Attention Score in Context

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 26 February 2018.
All research outputs
#15,523,434
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Bioresource Technology
#4,666
of 8,265 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,229
of 446,732 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bioresource Technology
#62
of 132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,265 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 446,732 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 132 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 52% of its contemporaries.