Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 287

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Remediation Technologies for Marine Oil Spills: A Critical Review and Comparative Analysis

Open access
Dave·2011·American Journal of Environmental Sciences

Abstract

Problem statement: Anthropogenic activities pollute the oceans with oil through land run off, vessels accidents, periodic tanker discharges and bilge discharges.Oil spills are environmental disasters that impact human, plants and wild life including birds, fish and mammals.Approach: In this study, the International Guidelines for Preventing Oils Spills and Response to Disasters were reviewed and the characteristics of oil spills were discussed.The advantages and disadvantages of various oil spill response methods were evaluated.A comparative analysis were performed on the currently available remediation technologies using 10 evaluation criteria that included cost, efficiency, time, impact on wild life, reliability, level of difficulty, oil recovery, weather, effect on physical/chemical characteristics of oil and the need for further treatment.The advantages and disadvantages of each response method were used to determine the score assigned to that method.Results: There are many government regualtions for individual countries that serve as prevention mesures for oil spills in the offshore environment.They have to do with the design of equipment and machinery used in the offshore environment and performing the necessary safety inspections.The primary objectives of response to oil spill are: to prevent the spill from moving onto shore, reduce the impact on marine life and speed the degradation of any unrecovered oil.There are several physical, chemical, thermal and biological remediation technologies for oil spills including booms, skimmers, sorbents, dispersants, insitu burning and bioremediation.Each technique has its advantages and disadvantages and the choice of a particular technique will depend on: type of oil, physical, biological and economical characteristics of the spill, location, weather and sea conditions, amount spilled and rate of spillage, depth of water column, time of the year and effectiveness of technique.Coclusion: Based on the comparative analysis, oil recovery with mechanical methods and the application of dispersants followed by bioremediation is the most effective response for marine oil spill.

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 · 10.3844/ajessp.2011.423.440

Cites

25 of 25 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 25 references

Cited by

See all 287

Metadata

Authors
Dave
Venue
American Journal of Environmental Sciences
Published
2011-05-01
Volume
7
Issue
5
Pages
423-440
ISSN
1553-345X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2145474868
Cited by
287
References
25
FWCI
3.70
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: Remediation Technologies for Marine Oil Spills: A Critical Review and Comparative Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3844/ajessp.2011.423.440
The paper
Dave. (2011). Remediation Technologies for Marine Oil Spills: A Critical Review and Comparative Analysis. American Journal of Environmental Sciences. https://doi.org/10.3844/ajessp.2011.423.440

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.