↓ Skip to main content

The Threats from Oil Spills: Now, Then, and in the Future

Overview of attention for article published in Ambio: A Journal of the Human Environment, August 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
109 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
308 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
The Threats from Oil Spills: Now, Then, and in the Future
Published in
Ambio: A Journal of the Human Environment, August 2010
DOI 10.1007/s13280-010-0085-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arne Jernelöv

Abstract

The ongoing oil spill from the blown-out well by the name of Macondo, drilled by the ill-fated rig Deepwater Horizon, has many features in common with another blowout in the Mexican Gulf that happened three decades ago. Then the oil gushed out from the Ixtoc I well drilled by the Sedco 135-F semi-submersible rig. In the years between these catastrophes, the source and nature of oil spills have undergone large changes. Huge spills from tankers that ran aground or collided used to be what caught the headlines and caused large ecological damage. The number and size of such accidental spills have decreased significantly. Instead, spills from ageing, ill-maintained or sabotaged pipelines have increased, and places like Arctic Russia, the Niger Delta, and the northwestern Amazon have become sites of reoccurring oil pollution. As for blowouts, there is no clear trend with regard to the number of incidences or amounts of spilled oil, but deepwater blowouts are much harder to cap and thus tend to go on longer and result in the release of larger quantities of oil. Also, oil exploration and extraction is moving into ever-deeper water and into stormier and icier seas, increasing potential risks. The risk for reoccurring spills like the two huge Mexican Gulf ones is eminent and must be reduced.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 308 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 7 2%
Canada 3 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Libya 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Other 3 <1%
Unknown 286 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 66 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 61 20%
Student > Master 59 19%
Researcher 42 14%
Student > Postgraduate 17 6%
Other 63 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 87 28%
Environmental Science 82 27%
Engineering 29 9%
Unspecified 23 7%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 21 7%
Other 66 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 April 2019.
All research outputs
#3,735,577
of 13,184,150 outputs
Outputs from Ambio: A Journal of the Human Environment
#455
of 902 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,157
of 189,143 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio: A Journal of the Human Environment
#9
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,184,150 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 902 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 189,143 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.