128 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35987055)
1. Environmental assessment model for scrubbers versus alternative mitigation systems for feeder vessels in liner shipping.
Martínez-López A; Marrero Á; Martín-Cruz Y; González MM
J Environ Manage; 2022 Nov; 321():115954. PubMed ID: 35987055
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Evaluation of Methane Emissions Originating from LNG Ships Based on the Measurements at a Remote Marine Station.
Grönholm T; Mäkelä T; Hatakka J; Jalkanen JP; Kuula J; Laurila T; Laakso L; Kukkonen J
Environ Sci Technol; 2021 Oct; 55(20):13677-13686. PubMed ID: 34623135
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Optimization of Liner Operations and Fuel Selection considering Emission Control Areas.
Yang B; Zou J
J Environ Public Health; 2023; 2023():6351337. PubMed ID: 37457598
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Continuous measurements of ammonia, nitrous oxide and methane from air scrubbers at pig housing facilities.
Van der Heyden C; Brusselman E; Volcke EIP; Demeyer P
J Environ Manage; 2016 Oct; 181():163-171. PubMed ID: 27341376
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Valuating environmental impacts from ship emissions - The marine perspective.
Ytreberg E; Åström S; Fridell E
J Environ Manage; 2021 Mar; 282():111958. PubMed ID: 33461092
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Total Methane and CO
Balcombe P; Heggo DA; Harrison M
Environ Sci Technol; 2022 Jul; 56(13):9632-9640. PubMed ID: 35699220
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Environmental policy constraints for acidic exhaust gas scrubber discharges from ships.
Ülpre H; Eames I
Mar Pollut Bull; 2014 Nov; 88(1-2):292-301. PubMed ID: 25284442
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Biofouling in-water cleaning and scrubbers wash waters, potential sources of marine pollution: the Brazilian case.
Trindade de Castro MC; Peixoto Scapolatempore M; da Silva Rangel-Pereira F
Environ Monit Assess; 2023 Nov; 195(12):1551. PubMed ID: 38030801
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Health, safety, and environmental failure evaluation by hybridizing fuzzy multi-attribute decision-making methods for maritime scrubber systems.
Başhan V; Yucesan M; Demirel H; Gul M
Environ Monit Assess; 2022 Aug; 194(9):641. PubMed ID: 35930143
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Air quality in Canadian port cities after regulation of low-sulphur marine fuel in the North American Emissions Control Area.
Anastasopolos AT; Sofowote UM; Hopke PK; Rouleau M; Shin T; Dheri A; Peng H; Kulka R; Gibson MD; Farah PM; Sundar N
Sci Total Environ; 2021 Oct; 791():147949. PubMed ID: 34119798
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Air treatment technologies in pig farms. Life cycle assessment of dry and wet scrubbers in Northern Italy and Northeastern Spain.
Ruiz-Colmenero M; Costantini M; Bàllega A; Zoli M; Andón M; Cerrillo M; Fàbrega E; Bonmatí A; Guarino M; Bacenetti J
Sci Total Environ; 2024 Apr; 922():171197. PubMed ID: 38408674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Shipping Remains a Globally Significant Source of Anthropogenic PN Emissions Even after 2020 Sulfur Regulation.
Kuittinen N; Jalkanen JP; Alanen J; Ntziachristos L; Hannuniemi H; Johansson L; Karjalainen P; Saukko E; Isotalo M; Aakko-Saksa P; Lehtoranta K; Keskinen J; Simonen P; Saarikoski S; Asmi E; Laurila T; Hillamo R; Mylläri F; Lihavainen H; Timonen H; Rönkkö T
Environ Sci Technol; 2021 Jan; 55(1):129-138. PubMed ID: 33290058
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Ship Compliance in Emission Control Areas: Technology Costs and Policy Instruments.
Carr EW; Corbett JJ
Environ Sci Technol; 2015 Aug; 49(16):9584-91. PubMed ID: 26258438
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. An assessment of air emissions from liquefied natural gas ships using different power systems and different fuels.
Afon Y; Ervin D
J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2008 Mar; 58(3):404-11. PubMed ID: 18376643
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A review of NOx and SOx emission reduction technologies for marine diesel engines and the potential evaluation of liquefied natural gas fuelled vessels.
Deng J; Wang X; Wei Z; Wang L; Wang C; Chen Z
Sci Total Environ; 2021 Apr; 766():144319. PubMed ID: 33421776
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Framework for the environmental impact assessment of operational shipping.
Moldanová J; Hassellöv IM; Matthias V; Fridell E; Jalkanen JP; Ytreberg E; Quante M; Tröltzsch J; Maljutenko I; Raudsepp U; Eriksson KM
Ambio; 2022 Mar; 51(3):754-769. PubMed ID: 34292520
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Energy use and emissions from marine vessels: a total fuel life cycle approach.
Winebrake JJ; Corbett JJ; Meyer PE
J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2007 Jan; 57(1):102-10. PubMed ID: 17269235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Demonstration of fuel switching on oceangoing vessels in the Gulf of Mexico.
Browning L; Hartley S; Bandemehr A; Gathright K; Miller W
J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2012 Sep; 62(9):1093-101. PubMed ID: 23019823
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Real-world particle emissions and secondary aerosol formation from a diesel oxidation catalyst and scrubber equipped ship operating with two fuels in a SECA area.
Karjalainen P; Teinilä K; Kuittinen N; Aakko-Saksa P; Bloss M; Vesala H; Pettinen R; Saarikoski S; Jalkanen JP; Timonen H
Environ Pollut; 2022 Jan; 292(Pt A):118278. PubMed ID: 34634405
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Costs and benefits of low-sulphur fuel standard for Baltic Sea shipping.
Antturi J; Hänninen O; Jalkanen JP; Johansson L; Prank M; Sofiev M; Ollikainen M
J Environ Manage; 2016 Dec; 184(Pt 2):431-440. PubMed ID: 27742151
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
