Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 829

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 179 of the 179 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Consolidated vs new advanced treatment methods for the removal of contaminants of emerging concern from urban wastewater

Open access
Rizzo, Luigi, Malato, Sixto, Antakyali, Demet, Beretsou, Vasiliki G., Đolić, Maja B., Gernjak, Wolfgang, Heath, Ester, Ivancev-Tumbas, Ivana, Karaolia, Popi, Lado Ribeiro, Ana R., Mascolo, Giuseppe, McArdell, Christa S., Schaar, Heidemarie, Silva, Adrián M.T., Fatta-Kassinos, Despo·2019·Science of The Total Environment

Abstract

Urban wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) are among the main anthropogenic sources for the release of contaminants of emerging concern (CECs) into the environment, which can result in toxic and adverse effects on aquatic organisms and consequently on humans. Unfortunately, WWTPs are not designed to remove CECs and secondary (e.g., conventional activated sludge process, CAS) and tertiary (such as filtration and disinfection) treatments are not effective in the removal of most CECs entering WWTP. Accordingly, several advanced treatment methods have been investigated for the removal of CECs from wastewater, including consolidated (namely, activated carbon (AC) adsorption, ozonation and membranes) and new (such as advanced oxidation processes (AOPs)) processes/technologies. This review paper gathers the efforts of a group of international experts, members of the NEREUS COST Action ES1403 who for three years have been constructively discussing the state of the art and the best available technologies for the advanced treatment of urban wastewater. In particular, this work critically reviews the papers available in scientific literature on consolidated (ozonation, AC and membranes) and new advanced treatment methods (mainly AOPs) to analyse: (i) their efficiency in the removal of CECs from wastewater, (ii) advantages and drawbacks, (iii) possible obstacles to the application of AOPs, (iv) technological limitations and mid to long-term perspectives for the application of heterogeneous processes, and (v) a technical and economic comparison among the different processes/technologies.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.11.265

Cites

179 of 179 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 179 references

Cited by

See all 829

Metadata

Authors
Rizzo, L., Malato, S., Antakyali, D., Beretsou, V. G., Đolić, M. B., Gernjak, W., Heath, E., Ivancev-Tumbas, I., Karaolia, P., Lado Ribeiro, A. R., Mascolo, G., McArdell, C. S., Schaar, H., Silva, A. M. T., & Fatta-Kassinos, D.
Venue
Science of The Total Environment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-03
Volume
655
Pages
986-1008
ISSN
0048-9697 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2900684995
Cited by
829
References
179
FWCI
30.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Consolidated vs new advanced treatment methods for the removal of contaminants of emerging concern from urban wastewater. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.11.265
The paper
Rizzo, L., Malato, S., Antakyali, D., Beretsou, V. G., Đolić, M. B., Gernjak, W., Heath, E., Ivancev-Tumbas, I., Karaolia, P., Lado Ribeiro, A. R., Mascolo, G., McArdell, C. S., Schaar, H., Silva, A. M. T., & Fatta-Kassinos, D. (2019). Consolidated vs new advanced treatment methods for the removal of contaminants of emerging concern from urban wastewater. Science of The Total Environment. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.11.265

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.