These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

103 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20049185)

  • 1. HAZARDOUS WASTE: GAO grades hanford cleanup.
    Black H
    Environ Health Perspect; 2009 Dec; 117(12):A539. PubMed ID: 20049185
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Separation and preconcentration of strontium from biological, environmental, and nuclear waste samples by extraction chromatography using a crown ether.
    Horwitz EP; Dietz ML; Fisher DE
    Anal Chem; 1991 Mar; 63(5):522-5. PubMed ID: 1829590
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluation of ecological resources at operating facilities at contaminated sites: The Department of Energy's Hanford Site as a case study.
    Burger J; Gochfeld M; Kosson DS; Brown KG; Salisbury JA; Jeitner C
    Environ Res; 2019 Mar; 170():452-462. PubMed ID: 30640079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Risk valuation of ecological resources at contaminated deactivation and decommissioning facilities: methodology and a case study at the Department of Energy's Hanford site.
    Burger J; Gochfeld M; Jeitner C
    Environ Monit Assess; 2018 Jul; 190(8):478. PubMed ID: 30030638
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Quantification of Raman-Interfering Polyoxoanions for Process Analysis: Comparison of Different Chemometric Models and a Demonstration on Real Hanford Waste.
    Tse P; Shafer J; Bryan SA; Lines AM
    Environ Sci Technol; 2021 Oct; 55(19):12943-12950. PubMed ID: 34529406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Depth of the biologically active zone in upland habitats at the Hanford Site, Washington: Implications for remediation and ecological risk management.
    Sample BE; Lowe J; Seeley P; Markin M; McCarthy C; Hansen J; Aly AH
    Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2015 Jan; 11(1):150-60. PubMed ID: 25209119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Remediation of Hanford's N-reactor liquid waste disposal sites.
    Sitsler RB; DeMers SK
    Health Phys; 2003 Feb; 84(2 Suppl):S41-6. PubMed ID: 12564346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Colloid formation in Hanford sediments reacted with simulated tank waste.
    Mashal K; Harsh JB; Flury M; Felmy AR; Zhao H
    Environ Sci Technol; 2004 Nov; 38(21):5750-6. PubMed ID: 15575296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Hazardous Waste Treatment Technologies.
    Wang PY; Li M; Huang CP
    Water Environ Res; 2016 Oct; 88(10):1467-86. PubMed ID: 27620099
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The need for an integrated approach to the global challenge of POPs management.
    Weber R; Aliyeva G; Vijgen J
    Environ Sci Pollut Res Int; 2013 Apr; 20(4):1901-6. PubMed ID: 23143820
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Risk to ecological resources following remediation can be due mainly to increased resource value of successful restoration: A case study from the Department of Energy's Hanford Site.
    Burger J; Gochfeld M; Kosson DS; Brown KG; Salisbury JA; Jeitner C
    Environ Res; 2020 Jul; 186():109536. PubMed ID: 32344209
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Decommissioning strategy for liquid low-level radioactive waste surface storage water reservoir.
    Utkin SS; Linge II
    J Environ Radioact; 2019 Jan; 196():164-170. PubMed ID: 27887973
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Radiometrical and physico-chemical characterisation of contaminated glass waste from a glass dump in Sweden.
    Mutafela RN; Mantero J; Jani Y; Thomas R; Holm E; Hogland W
    Chemosphere; 2020 Feb; 241():124964. PubMed ID: 31604195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Bioindication of the anthropogenic effects on micropopulations of Pinus sylvestris, L. in the vicinity of a plant for the storage and processing of radioactive waste and in the Chernobyl NPP zone.
    Geraskin SA; Zimina LM; Dikarev VG; Dikareva NS; Zimin VL; Vasiliyev DV; Oudalova AA; Blinova LD; Alexakhin RM
    J Environ Radioact; 2003; 66(1-2):171-80. PubMed ID: 12590076
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. One perspective on stakeholder involvement at Hanford.
    Martin T
    Health Phys; 2011 Nov; 101(5):536-8. PubMed ID: 21979534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Protecting Children from Toxic Waste: Data-Usability Evaluation Can Deter Flawed Cleanup.
    Shrader-Frechette KS; Biondo AM
    Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2020 Jan; 17(2):. PubMed ID: 31936349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Hazardous waste in the Asian Pacific region.
    Prasad R; Khwaja MA
    Rev Environ Health; 2011; 26(1):31-8. PubMed ID: 21714379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Promoting transparency of long-term environmental decisions: the Hanford Decision Mapping System pilot project.
    Drew CH; Nyerges TL; Leschine TM
    Risk Anal; 2004 Dec; 24(6):1641-64. PubMed ID: 15660618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A new Hazardous Waste Index.
    Gupta JP; Babu BS
    J Hazard Mater; 1999 May; 67(1):1-7. PubMed ID: 10334829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Plasma filtering techniques for nuclear waste remediation.
    Gueroult R; Hobbs DT; Fisch NJ
    J Hazard Mater; 2015 Oct; 297():153-9. PubMed ID: 25956646
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.