ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2021
Implications for emergency response to the severe odor incident occurred in source water: Potential odorants and control strategy.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Sudden odor incidents occurring in the source water have been a severe problem for water suppliers. In order to apply emergency control measures effectively, it is necessary to identify the target compounds responsible for odor incidents rapidly. The present work identified the odorants and explored emergency disposal mechanisms for sudden and severe odors in the QT River's drinking water source (HZ city, China). Medicinal, chemical, septic, and musty odors with strong intensities were detected in the source water. The effect of conventional treatments of drinking water treatment plant (DWTP) on odors' removal was limited, which was evident by the presence of medicinal, chemical, and musty odors with moderate intensities in the effluent of DWTP. Total seventeen odorants were identified successfully in the source water of QT River and the effluent of DWTP. The measured OAVs and reconstituting the identified odorants explained 87, 87, 89, and 94% of medicinal, chemical, septic, and musty odors, respectively, in the source water of the QT River and 90, 87, and 88% of medicinal, chemical, and musty odors in the effluent. Styrene, phenol, 2-chlorophenol, 2-tert-butylphenol, and 2-methylphenol were associated with the medicinal odor, while propyl sulfide, diethyl disulfide, propyl disulfide, and indole were related to the septic odor. Geosmin and 2-methylisoborneol (2-MIB) were responsible for the musty odor, and cyclohexanone, 1,4-dichlorobenzene, and nitrobenzene were involved with the chemical odor. Based on the characteristics of identified odorants, powdered activated carbon (PAC) was applied to control the odors in the QT River. The results indicated that the medicinal, chemical, septic, and musty odors could be removed entirely after adding 15 mg/L PAC, which effectively controlled emergency odor problems. Overall, the study would offer a scientific basis and operational reference for emergency odor management and control in DWTP with similar complicated odor incidents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.