World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Thomas Fruergaard Astrup

Thomas Fruergaard Astrup

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
70
Citations
14606
World Ranking
1713
National Ranking
14

Engineering and Technology

D-Index
66
Citations
13521
World Ranking
1452
National Ranking
21

Thomas Fruergaard Astrup publication distribution in Engineering and Technology in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Engineering and Technology in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Thomas Fruergaard Astrup sits on this spectrum.

38–47 publications: 20 scientists 48–57 publications: 35 scientists 58–67 publications: 96 scientists 68–77 publications: 135 scientists 78–87 publications: 190 scientists 88–97 publications: 259 scientists 98–107 publications: 283 scientists 108–117 publications: 369 scientists 118–127 publications: 341 scientists 128–137 publications: 386 scientists 138–147 publications: 372 scientists 148–157 publications: 457 scientists 158–167 publications: 415 scientists 168–177 publications: 407 scientists 178–187 publications: 421 scientists 188–197 publications: 378 scientists 198–207 publications: 403 scientists 208–217 publications: 317 scientists 218–227 publications: 346 scientists 228–237 publications: 321 scientists 238–247 publications: 260 scientists 248–257 publications: 280 scientists 258–267 publications: 240 scientists 268–277 publications: 214 scientists 278–287 publications: 242 scientists 288–297 publications: 203 scientists 298–307 publications: 166 scientists 308–317 publications: 154 scientists 318–327 publications: 175 scientists 328–337 publications: 159 scientists 338–347 publications: 99 scientists 348–357 publications: 131 scientists 358–367 publications: 106 scientists 368–377 publications: 118 scientists 378–387 publications: 97 scientists 388–397 publications: 108 scientists 398–407 publications: 82 scientists 408–417 publications: 71 scientists 418–427 publications: 64 scientists 428–437 publications: 55 scientists 438–447 publications: 54 scientists 448–457 publications: 60 scientists 458–467 publications: 47 scientists 468–477 publications: 40 scientists 478–487 publications: 30 scientists 488–497 publications: 29 scientists 498–507 publications: 38 scientists 508–517 publications: 40 scientists 518–527 publications: 32 scientists 528–537 publications: 23 scientists 538–547 publications: 28 scientists 548–557 publications: 23 scientists 558–567 publications: 19 scientists 568–577 publications: 16 scientists 578–587 publications: 17 scientists 588–597 publications: 18 scientists 598–607 publications: 22 scientists 608–617 publications: 15 scientists 618–627 publications: 9 scientists 628–637 publications: 11 scientists 638–647 publications: 21 scientists 648–657 publications: 12 scientists 658–667 publications: 9 scientists 668–677 publications: 11 scientists 678–687 publications: 9 scientists 688–697 publications: 6 scientists 698–707 publications: 14 scientists 708–717 publications: 7 scientists 718–727 publications: 8 scientists 728–737 publications: 10 scientists 738–747 publications: 9 scientists 748–757 publications: 5 scientists 758–767 publications: 5 scientists 768–777 publications: 11 scientists 778–787 publications: 7 scientists 788–797 publications: 2 scientists 798–803 publications: 4 scientists 804+ publications: 100 scientists
38 publications 804+

This scientist: 278 publications — 71st percentile

71% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 804 publications or more.

Thomas Fruergaard Astrup D-index placement in Engineering and Technology in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Engineering and Technology scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Thomas Fruergaard Astrup sits on this spectrum.

30 D-Index: 59 scientists 31 D-Index: 114 scientists 32 D-Index: 129 scientists 33 D-Index: 189 scientists 34 D-Index: 200 scientists 35 D-Index: 262 scientists 36 D-Index: 311 scientists 37 D-Index: 312 scientists 38 D-Index: 350 scientists 39 D-Index: 385 scientists 40 D-Index: 348 scientists 41 D-Index: 362 scientists 42 D-Index: 426 scientists 43 D-Index: 380 scientists 44 D-Index: 310 scientists 45 D-Index: 341 scientists 46 D-Index: 301 scientists 47 D-Index: 306 scientists 48 D-Index: 271 scientists 49 D-Index: 246 scientists 50 D-Index: 210 scientists 51 D-Index: 253 scientists 52 D-Index: 213 scientists 53 D-Index: 221 scientists 54 D-Index: 195 scientists 55 D-Index: 186 scientists 56 D-Index: 170 scientists 57 D-Index: 167 scientists 58 D-Index: 166 scientists 59 D-Index: 144 scientists 60 D-Index: 152 scientists 61 D-Index: 141 scientists 62 D-Index: 138 scientists 63 D-Index: 131 scientists 64 D-Index: 118 scientists 65 D-Index: 114 scientists 66 D-Index: 119 scientists 67 D-Index: 95 scientists 68 D-Index: 87 scientists 69 D-Index: 77 scientists 70 D-Index: 89 scientists 71 D-Index: 69 scientists 72 D-Index: 54 scientists 73 D-Index: 46 scientists 74 D-Index: 55 scientists 75 D-Index: 54 scientists 76 D-Index: 49 scientists 77 D-Index: 53 scientists 78 D-Index: 46 scientists 79 D-Index: 28 scientists 80 D-Index: 39 scientists 81 D-Index: 36 scientists 82 D-Index: 24 scientists 83 D-Index: 26 scientists 84 D-Index: 36 scientists 85 D-Index: 18 scientists 86 D-Index: 25 scientists 87 D-Index: 19 scientists 88 D-Index: 26 scientists 89 D-Index: 27 scientists 90 D-Index: 23 scientists 91 D-Index: 15 scientists 92 D-Index: 12 scientists 93 D-Index: 9 scientists 94 D-Index: 15 scientists 95 D-Index: 10 scientists 96 D-Index: 13 scientists 97 D-Index: 13 scientists 98 D-Index: 9 scientists 99 D-Index: 7 scientists 100 D-Index: 7 scientists 101 D-Index: 8 scientists 102 D-Index: 7 scientists 103 D-Index: 7 scientists 104 D-Index: 9 scientists 105 D-Index: 6 scientists 106 D-Index: 9 scientists 107+ D-Index: 99 scientists
30 D-Index 107+

This scientist: 66 D-Index — 86th percentile

86% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 107 D-Index or more.

Overview

Thomas Fruergaard Astrup is affiliated with the Technical University of Denmark in Denmark. Their research is situated primarily within the field of Environmental Science, with a significant focus on subfields such as Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering, Pollution, Environmental Engineering, Strategy and Management, and Building and Construction.

The scientist's work concentrates on several main topics, including:

  • Recycling and Waste Management Techniques
  • Microplastics and Plastic Pollution
  • Municipal Solid Waste Management
  • Environmental Impact and Sustainability
  • Sustainable Supply Chain Management
  • Food Waste Reduction and Sustainability
  • Biodegradable Polymer Synthesis and Properties

Thomas Fruergaard Astrup has published extensively, with frequent contributions to key academic venues. The most common publication venues include:

  • Waste Management
  • Resources Conservation and Recycling
  • Environmental Science & Technology
  • Journal of Industrial Ecology
  • Journal of Cleaner Production

Some selected recent papers are:

  • Application of LCA modelling in integrated waste management, 2020, Waste Management
  • Extended producer responsibility: How to unlock the environmental and economic potential of plastic packaging waste?, 2020, Resources Conservation and Recycling
  • Organic waste biorefineries: Looking towards implementation, 2020, Waste Management
  • Dynamic Material Flow Analysis of PET, PE, and PP Flows in Europe: Evaluation of the Potential for Circular Economy, 2020, Environmental Science & Technology
  • Future scenarios and life cycle assessment: systematic review and recommendations, 2021, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment

The scientist collaborates regularly with several frequent co-authors, including:

  • Anders Damgaard
  • Davide Tonini
  • Alessio Boldrin
  • Susanna Andreasi Bassi
  • Kim Ragaert

Best Publications

  • Life cycle assessment (LCA) of electricity generation technologies: Overview, comparability and limitations

    Roberto Turconi;Alessio Boldrin;Thomas Fruergaard Astrup

  • Management of municipal solid waste incineration residues

    T. Sabbas;A. Polettini;R. Pomi;Thomas Astrup

  • Municipal solid waste composition: Sampling methodology, statistical analyses, and case study evaluation

    Maklawe Essonanawe Edjabou;Morten Bang Jensen;Ramona Götze;Kostyantyn Pivnenko

  • Life cycle assessment of thermal waste-to-energy technologies: review and recommendations.

    Thomas Fruergaard Astrup;Davide Tonini;Roberto Turconi;Alessio Boldrin

  • Environmental impacts of food waste: Learnings and challenges from a case study on UK.

    Davide Tonini;Paola Federica Albizzati;Thomas Fruergaard Astrup

  • Plastic waste from recycling centres: Characterisation and evaluation of plastic recyclability.

    Giorgia Faraca;Thomas Fruergaard Astrup

  • Closing the loop for PET, PE and PP waste from households: Influence of material properties and product design for plastic recycling.

    Marie Kampmann Eriksen;Jesper deClaville Christiansen;Anders Egede Daugaard;Thomas Fruergaard Astrup

  • Incineration and co-combustion of waste: accounting of greenhouse gases and global warming contributions

    Thomas Astrup;Jacob Møller;Thilde Fruergaard

  • Optimal utilization of waste-to-energy in an LCA perspective.

    Thilde Fruergaard;Thomas Astrup

  • Life cycle assessment of construction and demolition waste management.

    Stefania Butera;Thomas Højlund Christensen;Thomas Fruergaard Astrup

  • Life cycle costing of waste management systems: overview, calculation principles and case studies.

    Veronica Martinez-Sanchez;Mikkel A. Kromann;Thomas Fruergaard Astrup

  • Systematic Evaluation of Uncertainty in Material Flow Analysis

    David Laner;Helmut Rechberger;Thomas Fruergaard Astrup

  • Waste paper for recycling: Overview and identification of potentially critical substances

    Kostyantyn Pivnenko;Eva Eriksson;Thomas Fruergaard Astrup

  • Recycling of plastic waste: Presence of phthalates in plastics from households and industry

    Kostyantyn Pivnenko;Marie Kampmann Eriksen;J. A. Martín-Fernández;Eva Eriksson

  • Quality Assessment and Circularity Potential of Recovery Systems for Household Plastic Waste

    Marie Kampmann Eriksen;Anders Damgaard;Alessio Boldrin;Thomas Fruergaard Astrup

  • Life cycle assessment of biofuel production from brown seaweed in Nordic conditions.

    Merlin Alvarado-Morales;Alessio Boldrin;Dimitar Borisov Karakashev;Susan Løvstad Holdt

  • Mechanical-biological treatment: performance and potentials. An LCA of 8 MBT plants including waste characterization.

    Cristina Montejo;Davide Tonini;María del Carmen Márquez;Thomas Fruergaard Astrup

  • Quantification of the resource recovery potential of municipal solid waste incineration bottom ashes

    Elisa Allegrini;Alberto Maresca;Mikael Emil Olsson;Maria Sommer Holtze

  • Bisphenol A and its structural analogues in household waste paper

    Kostyantyn Pivnenko;Gitte Alsing Pedersen;Eva Eriksson;Thomas Fruergaard Astrup

  • Let's Be Clear(er) about Substitution A Reporting Framework to Account for Product Displacement in Life Cycle Assessment: A Framework to Account for Substitution in LCA

    Carl O. Vadenbo;Stefanie Hellweg;Thomas Fruergaard Astrup

  • Composition and leaching of construction and demolition waste: inorganic elements and organic compounds.

    Stefania Butera;Thomas Højlund Christensen;Thomas Fruergaard Astrup

Frequent Co-Authors

Alessio Boldrin
Alessio Boldrin Technical University of Denmark
Thomas Højlund Christensen
Thomas Højlund Christensen Technical University of Denmark
Charlotte Scheutz
Charlotte Scheutz Technical University of Denmark
Flemming Frandsen
Flemming Frandsen Technical University of Denmark
Alessandra Polettini
Alessandra Polettini Sapienza University of Rome
Raffaella Pomi
Raffaella Pomi Sapienza University of Rome
Henrik Wenzel
Henrik Wenzel University of Southern Denmark
Morton A. Barlaz
Morton A. Barlaz North Carolina State University

If you think any of the details on this page are incorrect, let us know.

Report an issue

We appreciate your kind effort to assist us to improve this page, it would be helpful providing us with as much detail as possible in the text box below:

Related Online Degrees & Career Pathways

When considering a degree in Engineering and Technology in the USA, you may discover other online paths that can enhance your skills and expand your career options. Flexible online degrees offer the convenience to study while working or managing other responsibilities.

For those looking to blend technical know-how with business expertise, an advanced business degree is a strong choice. Programs like the cheapest aacsb online mba no gmat can help engineers transition into leadership positions, focusing on management without GMAT requirements.

Alternatively, developing skills in legal compliance is increasingly valuable in technology fields. A paralegal certificate online aba-approved may be ideal for those interested in tech law, intellectual property, or regulatory affairs.

Human resources is another relevant area, particularly for those interested in organizational leadership or people management within tech firms. Consider options like a 1 year online master's in human resources for accelerated career advancement.

Finally, communication is critical in any tech-focused role. Studying for an online master’s in communication can improve your ability to lead teams, present complex ideas, or manage public relations within technology environments.

Best Scientists Citing Thomas Fruergaard Astrup

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles