Life cycle impact and economic assessment of decentralized strategies to treat source-separated wastewater

被引:1
作者
Thomas, Benjamin D. [1 ,2 ]
Marks, Annaliese [1 ]
Smerigan, Blake [1 ]
Aburto-Vazquez, Gustavo [1 ]
Uludag-Demirer, Sibel [1 ]
Dusenbury, James S. [2 ]
Liao, Wei [1 ]
机构
[1] Michigan State Univ, Anaerob Digest Res & Educ Ctr ADREC, Biosyst & Agr Engn, E Lansing, MI 48824 USA
[2] US ARMY DEVCOM Ground Vehicle Syst Ctr GVSC, Fuel & Water Equipment Branch, Selfridge, ND USA
关键词
Blackwater; Graywater; Mass and energy balance; Economic assessment; Life cycle impact assessment; PERSONAL CARE PRODUCTS; ACTIVATED-SLUDGE; REMOVAL; FATE; PHARMACEUTICALS; DEGRADATION; PERFORMANCE; CHLOROFORM; EFFLUENT; ACETONE;
D O I
10.1016/j.jwpe.2024.105550
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Decentralized wastewater treatment and recycling strategies have the potential to address the water scarcity issues facing a large percentage of the population. Compared to centralized wastewater treatment facilities, decentralized wastewater treatment with source separation is a potential solution to cost-effective wastewater treatment. This study performed a comprehensive life cycle impact assessment and techno-economic analysis comparison on five treatment scenarios for two source-separated wastewaters (blackwater and graywater). The treatment scenarios were composed of different combinations of three currently available and scalable technologies: activated sludge, anaerobic digestion (AD), and membrane filtration. Activated sludge is utilized to treat source-separated wastewater. Anaerobic digestion is applied to convert the sludge to biogas for energy generation. The membrane filtration including ultrafiltration and reverse osmosis further polish the treated wastewater for discharge or recycling. The results elucidated that Treatment B utilizing activated sludge and membrane filtration to treat blackwater and graywater separately, and then applying anaerobic digestion to reduce the activated sludge amount and generate methane energy had overall better environmental and technoeconomic performances among the studied treatment scenarios. Treatment B had a water recovery efficiency of 99.9 % with a minimum net energy demand of 4.2 kWh-e/m3 recycled water, as well as lower treatment cost. As for the pharmaceutical and personal care products (PPCPs) removal and EcoToxicity, Treatment B shows a comparable performance. The study demonstrated that synergistic combination of activated sludge, AD, and membrane technologies on source-separated wastewaters can create an environmentally friendly, technically sound, and economically feasible decentralized solution to treat wastewater. Meanwhile, the study also indicated that biological treatments are critical to remove PPCPs in the wastewater and alleviate their environmental impacts.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Laundry Wastewater Treatment: Review and Life Cycle Assessment
    Santiago, Dunia E.
    Hernandez Rodriguez, M. J.
    Pulido-Melian, E.
    JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, 2021, 147 (10)
  • [32] Life Cycle Assessment of Industrial Wastewater Treatment Trains
    Tran, Dana
    Weidhaas, Jennifer
    ADVANCED SUSTAINABLE SYSTEMS, 2024, 8 (12):
  • [33] Environmental and economic assessment of advanced oxidation for the treatment of unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine wastewater from a life cycle perspective
    Chai, Yuxi
    Chen, Xiaofei
    Wang, Yihuan
    Guo, Xiaoyan
    Zhang, Rongyue
    Wei, Huangzhao
    Jin, Haibo
    Li, Zhiwei
    Ma, Lei
    SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, 2023, 873
  • [34] Biological wastewater treatment: a comprehensive sustainability analysis using life cycle assessment
    Kumar, Ritesh
    Patel, Kulvendra
    Singh, S. K.
    ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT, 2024, 196 (05)
  • [35] Techno-economic Analysis and Life Cycle Assessment of an Integrated Wastewater-Derived Duckweed Biorefinery
    Calicioglu, Ozgul
    Femeena, Pandara Valappil
    Mutel, Christopher L.
    Sills, Deborah L.
    Richard, Tom L.
    Brennan, Rachel A.
    ACS SUSTAINABLE CHEMISTRY & ENGINEERING, 2021, 9 (28): : 9395 - 9408
  • [36] Life cycle assessment and costing of wastewater treatment systems coupled to constructed wetlands
    Resende, Juliana Dalia
    Nolasco, Marcelo Antunes
    Pacca, Sergio Almeida
    RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND RECYCLING, 2019, 148 : 170 - 177
  • [37] Life cycle comparison of centralized wastewater treatment and urine source separation with struvite precipitation: Focus on urine nutrient management
    Ishii, Stephanie K. L.
    Boyer, Treavor H.
    WATER RESEARCH, 2015, 79 : 88 - 103
  • [38] Life cycle assessment of advanced wastewater treatment processes: Involving 126 pharmaceuticals and personal care products in life cycle inventory
    Li, Yi
    Zhang, Shanxue
    Zhang, Wenlong
    Xiong, Wei
    Ye, Quanliang
    Hou, Xing
    Wang, Chao
    Wang, Peifang
    JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2019, 238 : 442 - 450
  • [39] Assessing wastewater treatment in Latin America and the Caribbean: Enhancing life cycle assessment interpretation by regionalization and impact assessment sensibility
    Hernandez-Padilla, Flor
    Margni, Manuele
    Noyola, Adalberto
    Guereca-Hernandez, Leonor
    Bulle, Cecile
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2017, 142 : 2140 - 2153
  • [40] Life cycle assessment of wastewater reclamation in a petroleum refinery in Turkey
    Munoz, Ivan
    Aktuerk, Ali Sinan
    Ayyildiz, Ozguel
    Caglar, Omer
    Meabe, Elena
    Contreras, Sandra
    Toscano, Abel
    Torne, Vanessa
    Llopart, Nil
    San Roma, Clara
    Ferrer, Olga
    Jimenez-Banzo, Ana
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2020, 268 (268)