Overview of enhancing biological treatment of coal chemical wastewater: New strategies and future directions
Journal of Environmental Sciences, ISSN: 1001-0742, Vol: 135, Page: 506-520
2024
- 32Citations
- 71Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations32
- Citation Indexes32
- 32
- CrossRef10
- Captures71
- Readers71
- 71
Review Description
Coal chemical wastewater (CCW) is a type of refractory industrial wastewater, and its treatment has become the main bottleneck restricting the sustainable development of novel coal chemical industry. Biological treatment is considered as an economical, effective and environmentally friendly technology for CCW treatment. However, conventional biological process is difficult to achieve the efficient removal of refractory organics because of CCW with the characteristics of composition complexity and high toxicity. Therefore, seeking the novel enhancement strategy appears to be a favorable solution for enhancing biological treatment efficiency of CCW. This review focuses on presenting a comprehensive picture about the exogenous enhancement strategies for CCW biological treatment. The performance and potential application of exogenous enhancement strategies, including co-metabolic substrate enhancement, biofilm filler enhancement, adsorption material enhancement and conductive mediator enhancement, were expounded. Meanwhile, the enhancing mechanisms of different strategies were comprehensively discussed from a biological perspective. Furthermore, the prospects of enhancement strategies based on the engineering performance, economic cost and environmental impact (3E) evaluation were introduced. And novel enhancement strategy based on “low carbon emissions”, “resource recycling” and “water environment security” in the context of carbon neutrality was proposed. Taken together, this review provides technical reference and new direction to facilitate the regulation and optimization of typical industrial wastewater biological treatment.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1001074222005605; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jes.2022.11.008; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85147539773&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37778822; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1001074222005605; http://sciencechina.cn/gw.jsp?action=cited_outline.jsp&type=1&id=7632095&internal_id=7632095&from=elsevier; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jes.2022.11.008
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know