178 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23959217)
21. Gaseous and bioaerosol emissions from municipal wastewater treatment plants.
Seetha N; Bhargava R; Gurjar BR
J Environ Sci Eng; 2013 Oct; 55(4):517-36. PubMed ID: 25906597
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Model analysis of energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions of sewage sludge treatment systems with different processes and scales.
Soda S; Iwai Y; Sei K; Shimod Y; Ike M
Water Sci Technol; 2010; 61(2):365-73. PubMed ID: 20107263
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Toward better understanding and feasibility of controlling greenhouse gas emissions from treatment of industrial wastewater with activated sludge.
Chen WH; Yang JH; Yuan CS; Yang YH
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int; 2016 Oct; 23(20):20449-20461. PubMed ID: 27460025
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Perspectives on greenhouse gas emission estimates based on Australian wastewater treatment plant operating data.
de Haas DW; Pepperell C; Foley J
Water Sci Technol; 2014; 69(3):451-63. PubMed ID: 24552715
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Thermophilic biological fluidized bed reactor in sludge line reduces greenhouse gas emissions in wastewater treatment system.
Collivignarelli MC; Baldi M; Carnevale Miino M
Sci Total Environ; 2022 Nov; 848():157794. PubMed ID: 35932854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Benchmarking energy consumption in municipal wastewater treatment plants in Japan.
Mizuta K; Shimada M
Water Sci Technol; 2010; 62(10):2256-62. PubMed ID: 21076210
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Evaluation of the effect of accounting method, IPCC v. LCA, on grass-based and confinement dairy systems' greenhouse gas emissions.
O'Brien D; Shalloo L; Patton J; Buckley F; Grainger C; Wallace M
Animal; 2012 Sep; 6(9):1512-27. PubMed ID: 23031525
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Does carbon reduction increase sustainability? A study in wastewater treatment.
Sweetapple C; Fu G; Butler D
Water Res; 2015 Dec; 87():522-30. PubMed ID: 26152903
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Calculation of energy recovery and greenhouse gas emission reduction from palm oil mill effluent treatment by an anaerobic granular-sludge process.
Show KY; Ng CA; Faiza AR; Wong LP; Wong LY
Water Sci Technol; 2011; 64(12):2439-44. PubMed ID: 22170839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Anaerobic digestion: impact of future greenhouse gases mitigation policies on methane generation and usage.
Greenfield PF; Batstone DJ
Water Sci Technol; 2005; 52(1-2):39-47. PubMed ID: 16180407
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Monitoring the aeration efficiency and carbon footprint of a medium-sized WWTP: experimental results on oxidation tank and aerobic digester.
Caivano M; Bellandi G; Mancini IM; Masi S; Brienza R; Panariello S; Gori R; Caniani D
Environ Technol; 2017 Mar; 38(5):629-638. PubMed ID: 27367525
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. China's enhanced urban wastewater treatment increases greenhouse gas emissions and regional inequality.
Huang Y; Meng F; Liu S; Sun S; Smith K
Water Res; 2023 Feb; 230():119536. PubMed ID: 36608525
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Including the effects of filamentous bulking sludge during the simulation of wastewater treatment plants using a risk assessment model.
Flores-Alsina X; Comas J; Rodriguez-Roda I; Gernaey KV; Rosen C
Water Res; 2009 Oct; 43(18):4527-38. PubMed ID: 19695661
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. The potential of bio-methane as bio-fuel/bio-energy for reducing greenhouse gas emissions: a qualitative assessment for Europe in a life cycle perspective.
Tilche A; Galatola M
Water Sci Technol; 2008; 57(11):1683-92. PubMed ID: 18547917
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Calibration and validation of an activated sludge model for greenhouse gases no. 1 (ASMG1): prediction of temperature-dependent N₂O emission dynamics.
Guo L; Vanrolleghem PA
Bioprocess Biosyst Eng; 2014 Feb; 37(2):151-63. PubMed ID: 23728837
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Multi-criteria evaluation of wastewater treatment plant control strategies under uncertainty.
Flores-Alsina X; Rodríguez-Roda I; Sin G; Gernaey KV
Water Res; 2008 Nov; 42(17):4485-97. PubMed ID: 18804255
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Calculator tool for determining greenhouse gas emissions for biosolids processing and end use.
Brown S; Beecher N; Carpenter A
Environ Sci Technol; 2010 Dec; 44(24):9509-15. PubMed ID: 21080649
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Benchmark simulation model no 2: general protocol and exploratory case studies.
Jeppsson U; Pons MN; Nopens I; Alex J; Copp JB; Gernaey KV; Rosen C; Steyer JP; Vanrolleghem PA
Water Sci Technol; 2007; 56(8):67-78. PubMed ID: 17978434
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. BSM-MBR: a benchmark simulation model to compare control and operational strategies for membrane bioreactors.
Maere T; Verrecht B; Moerenhout S; Judd S; Nopens I
Water Res; 2011 Mar; 45(6):2181-90. PubMed ID: 21329957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Effects of ionic strength and ion pairing on (plant-wide) modelling of anaerobic digestion.
Solon K; Flores-Alsina X; Mbamba CK; Volcke EI; Tait S; Batstone D; Gernaey KV; Jeppsson U
Water Res; 2015 Mar; 70():235-45. PubMed ID: 25540837
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
