The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Metal Extraction Processes for Electronic Waste and Existing Industrial Routes: A Review and Australian Perspective
Open accessAbstract
The useful life of electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) has been shortened as a consequence of the advancement in technology and change in consumer patterns. This has resulted in the generation of large quantities of electronic waste (e-waste) that needs to be managed. The handling of e-waste including combustion in incinerators, disposing in landfill or exporting overseas is no longer permitted due to environmental pollution and global legislations. Additionally, the presence of precious metals (PMs) makes e-waste recycling attractive economically. In this paper, current metallurgical processes for the extraction of metals from e-waste, including existing industrial routes, are reviewed. In the first part of this paper, the definition, composition and classifications of e-wastes are described. In the second part, separation of metals from e-waste using mechanical processing, hydrometallurgical and pyrometallurgical routes are critically analyzed. Pyrometallurgical routes are comparatively economical and eco-efficient if the hazardous emissions are controlled. Currently, pyrometallurgical routes are used initially for the segregation and upgrading of PMs (gold and silver) into base metals (BMs) (copper, lead and nickel) and followed by hydrometallurgical and electrometallurgical processing for the recovery of pure base and PMs. For the recycling of e-waste in Australia, challenges such as collection, transportation, liberation of metal fractions, and installation of integrated smelting and refining facilities are identified.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Does WEEE recycling make sense from an environmental perspective?
Hischier, R., Wäger, P., & Gauglhofer, J. (2005) · Environmental Impact Assessment Review · doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2005.04.003 · Cited by 301 · cited 1×
“Several investigators reported on the individual countries and global legislations on managing and handling of e-waste [1,23–29].”
Background
Cited by
Design, management and control of demanufacturing and remanufacturing systems
Tolio, T., Bernard, A., Colledani, M., Kara, S., Seliger, G., Duflou, J., Battaia, O., & Takata, S. (2017) · CIRP Annals · doi:10.1016/j.cirp.2017.05.001 · Cited by 277
Ravindra, K., & Mor, S. (2019) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.02.158 · Cited by 123
Vats, M. C., & Singh, S. K. (2015) · Waste Management · doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2015.06.002 · Cited by 114
WEEE Treatment in Developing Countries: Environmental Pollution and Health Consequences—An Overview
Vaccari, M., Vinti, G., Cesaro, A., Belgiorno, V., Salhofer, S., Dias, M. I., & Jandric, A. (2019) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph16091595 · Cited by 92
An integrated SWOT-multi-criteria analysis of implementing sustainable waste-to-energy in Pakistan
Longsheng, C., Ali Shah, S. A., Solangi, Y. A., Ahmad, M., & Ali, S. (2022) · Renewable Energy · doi:10.1016/j.renene.2022.06.112 · Cited by 57
Metadata
- Authors
- Khaliq, A., Rhamdhani, M., Brooks, G., & Masood, S.
- Venue
- Resources
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2014-02-19
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 152-179
- ISSN
- 2079-9276 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2086176981
- Cited by
- 511
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 43.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Metal Extraction Processes for Electronic Waste and Existing Industrial Routes: A Review and Australian Perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3390/resources3010152
- The paper
- Khaliq, A., Rhamdhani, M., Brooks, G., & Masood, S. (2014). Metal Extraction Processes for Electronic Waste and Existing Industrial Routes: A Review and Australian Perspective. Resources. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources3010152
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.
