Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30591973›Full record

ArticleCarbon balance and management2018

Carbon dynamics of paper, engineered wood products and bamboo in landfills: evidence from reactor studies.

Fabiano A Ximenes, Amrit Kathuria, Morton A Barlaz, Annette L Cowie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Carbon balance and management, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Fabiano A XimenesForest Science Unit, Department of Primary Industries, Level 12 New South Wales, 10 Valentine Ave, Parramatta, NSW, 2150, Australia. fabiano.ximenes@dpi.nsw.gov.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0516-9414
Amrit KathuriaForest Science Unit, Department of Primary Industries, Level 12 New South Wales, 10 Valentine Ave, Parramatta, NSW, 2150, Australia.
Morton A BarlazDept. of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Eng., North Carolina State University, Box 7908, Raleigh, NC, 27695-7908, USA.
Annette L CowieNSW Department of Primary Industries, Beef Industry Centre, University of New England, Trevenna Rd, Armidale, NSW, 2351, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere has been growing interest in the development of waste-specific decay factors for estimation of greenhouse gas emissions from landfills in national greenhouse gas inventories. Although engineered wood products (EWPs) and paper represent a substantial component of the solid waste stream, there is limited information available on their carbon dynamics in landfills. The objective of this study was to determine the extent of carbon loss for EWPs and paper products commonly used in Australia. Experiments were conducted under laboratory conditions designed to simulate optimal anaerobic biodegradation in a landfill.

resultsMethane generation rates over incubations of 307-677 days ranged from zero for medium-density fibreboard (MDF) to 326 mL CH

conclusionsThe new suggested combined decay factor for wood and EWPs represents a significant reduction from the current factor used in the Australian greenhouse gas inventory; whereas the suggested decay factor for paper is similar to the current decay factor. Our results improve current understanding of the carbon dynamics of harvested wood products, and allow more refined estimates of methane emissions from landfills.

Indexed as

CarbonDecayEngineered wood productsGreenhouse gas inventoryLandfillMethanePaper

Identifiers

PMID30591973
PMCPMC6419946

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.