ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2019
Risk assessment of groundwater environmental contamination: a case study of a karst site for the construction of a fossil power plant.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recent Review on the Extraction and Qualitative Assay of Cysteine and Other Amino Acids from Vellore Feather Waste and Molecular Docking Studies of Cysteine for Pharmacological Applications.Molecular biotechnology · 2025Review
- Groundwater flow velocities in karst aquifers; importance of spatial observation scale and hydraulic testing for contaminant transport prediction.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2021Review
- Application of Geophysical and Hydrogeochemical Methods to the Protection of Drinking Groundwater in Karst Regions.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Water environment protection and contamination treatment.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This paper presents a demonstration of an integrated risk assessment and site investigation for groundwater contamination through a case study, in which the geologic and hydrogeological feature of the site and the blueprint of the fossil power plant (FPP) were closely analyzed. Predictions for groundwater contamination in case of accidents were performed by groundwater modeling system (GMS) and modular three-dimensional multispecies transport model (MT3DMS). Results indicate that the studied site area presents a semi-isolated hydrogeological unit with multiplicity in stratum lithology, the main aquifers at the site are consisted of the filled karst development layer with a thickness between 6.0 and 40.0 m. The poor permeability of the vadose zone at the FPP significantly restricted the infiltration of contaminants through the vadose zone to the subsurface. The limited influence of rarely isotropic porous karstified carbonate rocks on the groundwater flow system premised the simulate scenarios of plume migration. Analysis of the present groundwater chemistry manifested that that the groundwater at the site and the local area are of the HCO
Indexed as
Identifiers
29264850What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.