ArticleJournal of environmental management2025
Evaluation of testing approaches for constituent leaching from electric arc furnace (EAF) slags.
Article in Journal of environmental management, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- From leaching data to release estimates: Screening and scenario assessments of electric arc furnace (EAF) slag under unencapsulated use.Journal of hazardous materials · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Increased usage of electric arc furnace (EAF) slags as soil amendments and surface aggregates raises concerns regarding heavy metal release. However, no standardized leaching characterization approach exists for EAF slags and other industrial materials. This study compares test results for three EAF slags using several testing approaches: (i) total content analysis, (ii) single-batch extractions (i.e., TCLP, SPLP, and in-vitro bioaccessibility assay), and (iii) evaluation for the fine fraction (<2 mm) and ingestion fraction (<250 μm). Test results were compared to the pH-dependent liquid-solid partitioning (LSP) and percolation column testing. Constituent screening based on total content identified As, Cr, Fe, Li, Mn, Sb, Se, Tl and V as constituents of potential concern (COPCs); however, pH-dependent LSP curves indicated that only Fe, Mn, and possibly Cr have the potential to exceed regional residential soil screening levels. Additional COPCs (Al, Ba, Cd, Cu, Cr(VI), Hg, Mo, Ni, Pb, and Sn) exceeded example thresholds at one or more of three plausible release conditions. LSP curves and column test results indicated that most COPCs are in equilibrium at test conditions. Although leaching evaluation indicated the potential for concentrations greater than thresholds, assessments incorporating test results with scenario-specific parameters provide a more precise basis for evaluating COPC release. This study demonstrates that the applicability of single-batch extraction tests is limited to conditions simulated by the test, while a well-defined LSP curve is representative of leaching over conditions of all single-batch tests. Therefore, pH-dependent and percolation column testing provides a baseline characterization to support environmental decision making.
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.