Carbon footprint of constructed wetlands for winery wastewater treatment

Flores, Laura; García, Joan; Pena, Rocío; Garfí, Marianna

doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2020.105959

Cited by 25 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To calculate the sustainability of the winery wastewater treatment system, we evaluated and compared the Emergy value and indices of the CW system and microalgae-based treatment system by using the following scenarios. The quantities of materials used, such as machinery, glass, plastics, pumps, pipes, liners, and concrete, were assumed and estimated based on the plant design and from previous studies. ,− The lifetimes of the materials and machinery were estimated to be 20 years.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the data related to infrastructure and background processes, such as the transportation of building materials, land stabilization, screening of microalgae, utilities, and infrastructure placement, are excluded from the system boundary. Using the previously published data, ,− the specification and parameters for each case study were constructed, and detailed technical parameters and specifications are provided in the SI.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Tables S2–S4 lists the Emergy calculation results (sej year –1 ) of various inputs and outputs of CW, HRAP, and PBR winery wastewater treatment plants in a year. The resource input values for the Emergy analysis were estimated based on the designed scenario of the wastewater treatment plants. ,, Detailed specifications are summarized in the SI. All of the energy and material flow are transformed into specific Emergy requirements based on the unit Emergy value or transformity, which are determined relative to a particular planetary baseline.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Constructed wetland (CW) systems have emerged as a reliable and sustainable technology for wastewater treatment, offering a cost-effective and environmentally friendly approach . These wetlands utilize the combined action of soil, plants, and microorganisms to treat various types of wastewaters, demonstrating high removal efficiency for pollutants such as dyes, heavy metals, micropollutants, organic pollutants, nutrients, and bacteria. − In fact, the CW system has been recommended as an alternative to the conventional activated sludge system due to its low cost, low energy requirement, easy operation, and maintenance benefits . Similarly, microalgae-based wastewater treatment has been an alternative to conventional wastewater treatment in terms of energy consumption. , Although anaerobic digestion is effective, it often requires significant investment in infrastructure and energy input, which can be a limiting factor, especially in contexts where resource efficiency and low environmental impact are paramount …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Emergy Analysis and Life Cycle Assessment for Evaluating the Sustainability of Solar-Integrated Ecotechnologies in Winery Wastewater Treatment

Praveen,

Abinandan,

Venkateswarlu

et al. 2024

ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Innovative approaches in sustainable wastewater management are vital in addressing climate change. This study introduces a novel assessment of solar-integrated ecotechnologies, focusing on the constructed wetland (CW) and microalgae-based systems, viz., high-rate algal pond (HRAP) and photobioreactor (PBR), for the treatment of winery wastewater. Utilizing Emergy analysis and life cycle assessment (LCA), we comprehensively compared these technologies in terms of environmental impact, resource recovery efficiency, and circular economy integration. Our Emergy analysis of the HRAP revealed a substantial reliance on renewable inputs (94%) and its lower nonrenewable resource consumption compared to the CW system. The Emergy sustainability index initially indicated a preference for the CW system (42.93 sej year −1 ; sej = solar emjoule), but deeper analysis showed greater sustainability in the HRAP (341 sej year −1 ) and PBR (118 sej year −1 ). LCA results further revealed that PBR systems had a significant land-use footprint, impacting other environmental indices such as photochemical ozone formation and freshwater eutrophication. Additionally, the HRAP and PBR demonstrated a marked reduction in greenhouse gas emissions (−24800 and −23700 kg of CO 2 -eq, respectively) compared to the CW system (320 kg of CO 2 -eq). Life cycle cost analysis underscored the economic viability of these systems, with Scenario 3 (PBR) emerging as the most economically sustainable, exhibiting the highest internal rate of return (IRR) at 21.11% and a positive net present value after 20 years. Conversely, Scenario 1 (CW system), with its significant initial investment of AU$741220, showed no IRR due to the absence of revenue generation. Importantly, our study introduces circularity index scores as a novel element, revealing that the HRAP and PBR effectively incorporate circularity measures across various impact categories. These measures had moderate impacts, as indicated by scores close to but not exceeding 0.10, whereas the CW system showed no significant improvement, highlighting the need for more robust circularity strategies. Overall, our integrated framework provides a holistic view of the environmental impact and economic aspects, emphasizing the potential of solarintegrated microalgal systems in promoting circular (bio)economy practices and sustainable environmental management in the viticulture sector.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Emergy Analysis and Life Cycle Assessment for Evaluating the Sustainability of Solar-Integrated Ecotechnologies in Winery Wastewater Treatment

Praveen,

Abinandan,

Venkateswarlu

et al. 2024

ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, sustainability of these systems is also an important factor beyond technical aspects to choose the most appropriate treatment technology for each specific case (Flores et al, 2020). Thus, it is important to quantify their environmental impacts and their greenhouse gases (GHG) emission rates, including carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N2O) and methane (CH4).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%