Life cycle assessment of introducing an anaerobic digester in a municipal wastewater treatment plant in Spain

2015 ◽  
Vol 73 (4) ◽  
pp. 835-842 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Blanco ◽  
Sergio Collado ◽  
Adriana Laca ◽  
Mario Díaz
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Carbon Dioxide Emissions ◽  
Municipal Wastewater ◽  
Treatment Plant ◽  
Impact Category ◽  
Treatment Scenario ◽  
The Impact

Anaerobic digestion (AD) is being established as a standard technology to recover some of the energy contained in the sludge in wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) as biogas, allowing an economy in electricity and heating and a decrease in climate gas emission. The purpose of this study was to quantify the contributions to the total environmental impact of the plant using life cycle assessment methodology. In this work, data from real operation during 2012 of a municipal WWTP were utilized as the basis to determine the impact of including AD in the process. The climate change human health was the most important impact category when AD was included in the treatment (Scenario 1), especially due to fossil carbon dioxide emissions. Without AD (Scenario 2), increased emissions of greenhouse gases, mostly derived from the use of electricity, provoked a rise in the climate change categories. Biogas utilization was able to provide 47% of the energy required in the WWTP in Scenario 1. Results obtained make Scenario 1 the better environmental choice by far, mainly due to the use of the digested sludge as fertilizer.

scholarly journals Investigating the wastewater treatment system of the Tehran Oil Industry Research Institute using the Life Cycle Assessment Method

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Afsaneh Eskandari Ashgofti ◽  
Maryam Morovati ◽  
Ebrahim Alaiee ◽  
Kamelia Alavi
Keyword(s):  
Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Raw Materials ◽  
Industrial Effluent ◽  
Treatment Plant ◽  
Industrial Effluents ◽  
Assessment Method ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Research Institute

Introduction: Due to population growth and subsequent limited water resources, the use of treatment plant effluents is of particular importance. Therefore, this study was conducted to identify the environmental effects of the treatment plant and also to identify critical points or weaknesses of the treatment plant system and provide corrective action to reduce the severity of the effects.  Methods: After visiting the research institute and collecting data (during the years 2017-2018), the energy, consuming materials and output of the system were calculated using the life cycle assessment method. Finally, information on the spread of pollution and consumption was included in the list of index effects. To analyze the obtained information, Simapro software (using ILCD 2011 Midpoint V1.03 method) version 8.5.0.0. was applied. Results: Based on the research findings, the software depicted the evaluation of the effects in 13 categories and all the information entered in the software according to the impact, has participated in each category of effects, the most effective factors related to chloride, energy consumption and oil. Conclusion: The results of this study show that the main critical point identified in the treatment plant is related to electricity and the sanitary effluent is in a worse condition than the industrial effluent. However, the environmental impact of industrial effluents should not be neglected. Due to the fact that the MBR method is considered as one of the best methods of wastewater treatment, it is not recommended to change the treatment method, but with continuous monitoring and management of the system, it is possible to reduce the consumption of raw materials.

Life Cycle Assessment of Urban Wastewater Treatment

2014 ◽  
Vol 535 ◽  
pp. 346-349
Author(s):  
Mei Wang ◽  
Ming Yang ◽  
Jun Liu ◽  
Jian Fen Li
Keyword(s):  
Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Wastewater Treatment Plant ◽  
Sewage Treatment ◽  
Treatment Plant ◽  
Urban Wastewater ◽  
Urban Sewage ◽  
Urban Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Whole Life Cycle

Effect and benefits of a product or service could be analyzed and evaluated by life cycle assessment during the whole life cycle. Urban sewage treatment plants could improve and control urban water pollution escalating, but it also had certain harm to environment. Effect and benefits of urban wastewater treatment plant A and B were analyzed and evaluated, 13 factors were selected, and comprehensive benefits were researched quantificationally using the method of analytic hierarchy process. It found that urban wastewater treatment plant A who applied A/O process had better benefits than urban wastewater treatment plant B who applied BIOLAK process.

Impact of a wastewater treatment plant on Cryptosporidium oocysts and Giardia cysts occurring in a surface water

2000 ◽  
Vol 41 (7) ◽  
pp. 31-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Carraro ◽  
E. Fea ◽  
S. Salva ◽  
G. Gilli
Keyword(s):  
Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Wastewater Treatment Plant ◽  
Municipal Wastewater ◽  
Treatment Plant ◽  
Municipal Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Mean Values ◽  
Cryptosporidium Oocysts ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Receiving Water ◽  
Giardia Cysts

The aim of this study was to assess the impact of a municipal wastewater treatment plant (MWTP) on the occurrence of Cryptosporidium oocysts and Giardia cysts in the receiving water. All MWTP effluent samples were Giardia and Cryptosporidium contaminated, although low mean values were found for both parasites (0.21±0.06 oocysts/L; 1.39±0.51 cysts/L). Otherwise, in the raw sewage a greater concentration was detected (4.5±0.3 oocysts/L; 53.6±6.8 cysts/L). The major occurrence of Giardia over Cryptosporidium, both in the influent and in the effluent of the MWTP, is probably related to the human sewage contribution to the wastewater. Data on protozoa contamination of the receiving water body demonstrated similar concentrations in the samples collected before (0.21±0.07 oocysts/L; 1.31±0.38 cysts/L) and after (0.17±0.09 oocysts/L and 1.01±1.05 cysts/L) the plant effluent discharge. The results of this study suggest that the MWTP has no impact related to Giardia and Cryptosporidium river water contamination, and underline the need for investigation into the effectiveness of these protozoa removal by less technologically advanced MWTPs which are the most widespread and could probably show a lower ability to reduce protozoa.

Sustainability of municipal wastewater treatment

1997 ◽  
Vol 35 (10) ◽  
pp. 221-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. J. Roeleveld ◽  
A. Klapwijk ◽  
P. G. Eggels ◽  
W. H. Rulkens ◽  
W. van Starkenburg
Keyword(s):  
Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Energy Demand ◽  
Municipal Wastewater ◽  
National Level ◽  
Treatment Plant ◽  
Municipal Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Lca Methodology ◽  
Life Cycle Assessments ◽  
High Nutrient

In this study the insustainability of the treatment of municipal wastewater is evaluated with the LCA-methodology. Life-Cycle Assessments (LCA) analyze and assess the environmental profile over the entire life cycle of a product or process. The LCA-methodology proved to be a proper instrument to evaluate the wastewater treatment plant on the sustainability. However, environmental impacts which are caused by sludge handling should still be classified. Besides that, the LCA should be carried out on regional level instead of on national level. In a situation of high nutrient removal the contribution of the treatment of municipal wastewater to the total insustainability level in the Netherlands is relatively low. When the sustainability of the WWTP has to be improved, the most attention has to be paid to the minimization of discharge from pollutions with the effluent and minimization of the sludge production. Because the contribution of energy consumption is relatively low, less attention can be paid to the minimization of the energy demand. The building of a WWTP and the use of chemicals are not determining the insustainability of the WWTP.

Implementation of Life Cycle Assessment Method (LCA) and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to Determine the Development of Recycling Unit of Waste Water in Grati CCPP PT Indonesia Power up Perak Grati

2018 ◽  
Vol 874 ◽  
pp. 18-26
Author(s):  
Mila Tartiarini ◽  
Udisubakti Ciptomulyono
Keyword(s):  
Waste Water ◽  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Power Plant ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Waste Water Treatment ◽  
Treatment Plant ◽  
Waste Water Treatment Plant ◽  
Service Water ◽  
The Impact

Waste water result from operating activities of Grati Combined Cycled Power Plant (CCPP) is significant amount and has potentially to be reutilized. A recycling unit as the pilot project has been applied in Grati CCPP PT Indonesia Power UP Perak Grati for capacity 4 tons/hour of service water product. Development plant of Grati CCPP up to year 2018 will produce more amounts of waste water, and potentially increase the pollution load in the unit area.Considering the use of alternative development for unit recycled waste water effluent from the Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) has implications to the environmental and cost aspects, therefore a proper assessment to decide the alternative is needed. Proposed method of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is to measure the impact to the environment. And the Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) is to measure the economic criteria. To integrate the results of the two methods, it is used and calculated by using Hierarcy Analytical Process (AHP).The result of the study about the environmental impact and economic analysis, the development of the recycling unit is required to process all waste water produced by power plants. Focus group by experts in power plant operation using AHP is based on the results of SimaPro 7.0 and CBA. The most beneficial result is with a single score of 0.2314 Pt / 1 ton of water service, the payback period of 2.5 years, 37.5% IRR and NPV US$ 88,577.23 and the MMF-RO unit for total capacity of 14 tons/hour has become the most alternative of development.

Case study on technical feasibility of galvanic wastewater treatment plant based on life cycle assessment and costing approach

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 104535
Author(s):  
Valentina Innocenzi ◽  
Federica Cantarini ◽  
Alessia Amato ◽  
Barbara Morico ◽  
Nicolò Maria Ippolito ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Wastewater Treatment Plant ◽  
Treatment Plant ◽  
Technical Feasibility

scholarly journals LCA of a Membrane Bioreactor Compared to Activated Sludge System for Municipal Wastewater Treatment

Membranes ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 421
Author(s):  
Dimitra C. Banti ◽  
Michail Tsangas ◽  
Petros Samaras ◽  
Antonis Zorpas
Keyword(s):  
Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Activated Sludge ◽  
Membrane Bioreactor ◽  
Municipal Wastewater ◽  
Wastewater Treatment Plants ◽  
Treatment Plant ◽  
Real Data ◽  
Municipal Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Conventional Activated Sludge

Membrane bioreactor (MBR) systems are connected to several advantages compared to the conventional activated sludge (CAS) units. This work aims to the examination of the life cycle environmental impact of an MBR against a CAS unit when treating municipal wastewater with similar influent loading (BOD = 400 mg/L) and giving similar high-quality effluent (BOD < 5 mg/L). The MBR unit contained a denitrification, an aeration and a membrane tank, whereas the CAS unit included an equalization, a denitrification, a nitrification, a sedimentation, a mixing, a flocculation tank and a drum filter. Several impact categories factors were calculated by implementing the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology, including acidification potential, eutrophication potential, global warming potential (GWP), ozone depletion potential and photochemical ozone creation potential of the plants throughout their life cycle. Real data from two wastewater treatment plants were used. The research focused on two parameters which constitute the main differences between the two treatment plants: The excess sludge removal life cycle contribution—where GWPMBR = 0.50 kg CO2-eq*FU−1 and GWPCAS = 2.67 kg CO2-eq*FU−1 without sludge removal—and the wastewater treatment plant life cycle contribution—where GWPMBR = 0.002 kg CO2-eq*FU−1 and GWPCAS = 0.14 kg CO2-eq*FU−1 without land area contribution. Finally, in all the examined cases the environmental superiority of the MBR process was found.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document