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 *

97 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23789965)

  • 1. Potential impacts of electric power production utilizing natural gas, renewables and carbon capture and sequestration on US Freshwater resources.
    Tidwell VC; Malczynski LA; Kobos PH; Klise GT; Shuster E
    Environ Sci Technol; 2013 Aug; 47(15):8940-7. PubMed ID: 23789965
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Water use at pulverized coal power plants with postcombustion carbon capture and storage.
    Zhai H; Rubin ES; Versteeg PL
    Environ Sci Technol; 2011 Mar; 45(6):2479-85. PubMed ID: 21329343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Implications of the recent reductions in natural gas prices for emissions of CO2 from the US power sector.
    Lu X; Salovaara J; McElroy MB
    Environ Sci Technol; 2012 Mar; 46(5):3014-21. PubMed ID: 22321206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions and freshwater consumption of Marcellus shale gas.
    Laurenzi IJ; Jersey GR
    Environ Sci Technol; 2013 May; 47(9):4896-903. PubMed ID: 23548112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. SunShot solar power reduces costs and uncertainty in future low-carbon electricity systems.
    Mileva A; Nelson JH; Johnston J; Kammen DM
    Environ Sci Technol; 2013 Aug; 47(16):9053-60. PubMed ID: 23865424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A Techno-Economic Assessment of Hybrid Cooling Systems for Coal- and Natural-Gas-Fired Power Plants with and without Carbon Capture and Storage.
    Zhai H; Rubin ES
    Environ Sci Technol; 2016 Apr; 50(7):4127-34. PubMed ID: 26967583
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Life cycle water consumption for shale gas and conventional natural gas.
    Clark CE; Horner RM; Harto CB
    Environ Sci Technol; 2013 Oct; 47(20):11829-36. PubMed ID: 24004382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Scenarios for Low Carbon and Low Water Electric Power Plant Operations: Implications for Upstream Water Use.
    Dodder RS; Barnwell JT; Yelverton WH
    Environ Sci Technol; 2016 Nov; 50(21):11460-11470. PubMed ID: 27709910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Water footprint of U.S. transportation fuels.
    Scown CD; Horvath A; McKone TE
    Environ Sci Technol; 2011 Apr; 45(7):2541-53. PubMed ID: 21405015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Reducing the energy penalty costs of postcombustion CCS systems with amine-storage.
    Patiño-Echeverri D; Hoppock DC
    Environ Sci Technol; 2012 Jan; 46(2):1243-52. PubMed ID: 22214538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Freshwater Vulnerability beyond Local Water Stress: Heterogeneous Effects of Water-Electricity Nexus Across the Continental United States.
    Wang R; Zimmerman JB; Wang C; Font Vivanco D; Hertwich EG
    Environ Sci Technol; 2017 Sep; 51(17):9899-9910. PubMed ID: 28745496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The United States Department of Energy's Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships program: a collaborative approach to carbon management.
    Litynski JT; Klara SM; McIlvried HG; Srivastava RD
    Environ Int; 2006 Jan; 32(1):128-44. PubMed ID: 16054694
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Water use for Shale-gas production in Texas, U.S.
    Nicot JP; Scanlon BR
    Environ Sci Technol; 2012 Mar; 46(6):3580-6. PubMed ID: 22385152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Options for near-term phaseout of CO(2) emissions from coal use in the United States.
    Kharecha PA; Kutscher CF; Hansen JE; Mazria E
    Environ Sci Technol; 2010 Jun; 44(11):4050-62. PubMed ID: 20429611
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The cost of carbon capture and storage for natural gas combined cycle power plants.
    Rubin ES; Zhai H
    Environ Sci Technol; 2012 Mar; 46(6):3076-84. PubMed ID: 22332665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Global impacts of energy demand on the freshwater resources of nations.
    Holland RA; Scott KA; Flörke M; Brown G; Ewers RM; Farmer E; Kapos V; Muggeridge A; Scharlemann JP; Taylor G; Barrett J; Eigenbrod F
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2015 Dec; 112(48):E6707-16. PubMed ID: 26627262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The hydrogen issue.
    Armaroli N; Balzani V
    ChemSusChem; 2011 Jan; 4(1):21-36. PubMed ID: 21226208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Potential restrictions for CO2 sequestration sites due to shale and tight gas production.
    Elliot TR; Celia MA
    Environ Sci Technol; 2012 Apr; 46(7):4223-7. PubMed ID: 22352312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Characterization factors for water consumption and greenhouse gas emissions based on freshwater fish species extinction.
    Hanafiah MM; Xenopoulos MA; Pfister S; Leuven RS; Huijbregts MA
    Environ Sci Technol; 2011 Jun; 45(12):5272-8. PubMed ID: 21574555
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Exploring the role of natural gas power plants with carbon capture and storage as a bridge to a low-carbon future.
    Babaee S; Loughlin DH
    Clean Technol Environ Policy; 2017 Dec; 20(2):379-391. PubMed ID: 32461751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.