↓ Skip to main content

Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology Volume 246

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 10: How to Adapt Chemical Risk Assessment for Unconventional Hydrocarbon Extraction Related to the Water System
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Chapter title
How to Adapt Chemical Risk Assessment for Unconventional Hydrocarbon Extraction Related to the Water System
Chapter number 10
Book title
Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology Volume 246
Published in
Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, January 2017
DOI 10.1007/398_2017_10
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-31-997739-3, 978-3-31-997740-9
Authors

Ann-Hélène Faber, Mark Annevelink, Herman Kasper Gilissen, Paul Schot, Marleen van Rijswick, Pim de Voogt, Annemarie van Wezel, Faber, Ann-Hélène, Annevelink, Mark, Gilissen, Herman Kasper, Schot, Paul, van Rijswick, Marleen, de Voogt, Pim, van Wezel, Annemarie

Abstract

We identify uncertainties and knowledge gaps of chemical risk assessment related to unconventional drillings and propose adaptations. We discuss how chemical risk assessment in the context of unconventional oil and gas (UO&G) activities differs from conventional chemical risk assessment and the implications for existing legislation. A UO&G suspect list of 1,386 chemicals that might be expected in the UO&G water samples was prepared which can be used for LC-HRMS suspect screening. We actualize information on reported concentrations in UO&G-related water. Most information relates to shale gas operations, followed by coal-bed methane, while only little is available for tight gas and conventional gas. The limited research on conventional oil and gas recovery hampers comparison whether risks related to unconventional activities are in fact higher than those related to conventional activities. No study analyzed the whole cycle from fracturing fluid, flowback and produced water, and surface water and groundwater. Generally target screening has been used, probably missing contaminants of concern. Almost half of the organic compounds analyzed in surface water and groundwater exceed TTC values, so further risk assessment is needed, and risks cannot be waived. No specific exposure scenarios toward groundwater aquifers exist for UO&G-related activities. Human errors in various stages of the life cycle of UO&G production play an important role in the exposure. Neither at the international level nor at the US federal and the EU levels, specific regulations for UO&G-related activities are in place to protect environmental and human health. UO&G activities are mostly regulated through general environmental, spatial planning, and mining legislation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 23%
Student > Master 5 19%
Other 4 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 15%
Unspecified 3 12%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 1 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 7 27%
Environmental Science 5 19%
Unspecified 3 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Chemistry 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 5 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 October 2018.
All research outputs
#7,648,602
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
#68
of 186 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,683
of 427,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
#3
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 186 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 427,294 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.