Case study on sustainability of textile wastewater treatment plant based on lifecycle assessment approach

Nakhate, Pranav H.; Moradiya, Keyur K.; Patil, Hrushikesh; Marathe, Kumudini V.; Yadav, Ganapati D.

doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118929

Cited by 40 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous studies have estimated the environmental impacts generated by one or combined units of treatment plants for textile wastewater. Nakhate et al evaluated the environmental footprints of a textile wastewater treatment plant and found out that consumption of electricity dominated in most of the environmental burden [23]. Cetinkaya and Bilgili compared, in another study, the environmental impacts caused by two desalination systems, and they found that using LCA could assess the environmentally friendlier treatment system for textile wastewater [24].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment of Textile Wastewater by CAS, MBR, and MBBR: A Comparative Study from Technical, Economic, and Environmental Perspectives

Yang

López‐Grimau

Vilaseca

et al. 2020

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, three different biological methods—a conventional activated sludge (CAS) system, membrane bioreactor (MBR), and moving bed biofilm reactor (MBBR)—were investigated to treat textile wastewater from a local industry. The results showed that technically, MBR was the most efficient technology, of which the chemical oxygen demand (COD), total suspended solids (TSS), and color removal efficiency were 91%, 99.4%, and 80%, respectively, with a hydraulic retention time (HRT) of 1.3 days. MBBR, on the other hand, had a similar COD removal performance compared with CAS (82% vs. 83%) with halved HRT (1 day vs. 2 days) and 73% of TSS removed, while CAS had 66%. Economically, MBBR was a more attractive option for an industrial-scale plant since it saved 68.4% of the capital expenditures (CAPEX) and had the same operational expenditures (OPEX) as MBR. The MBBR system also had lower environmental impacts compared with CAS and MBR processes in the life cycle assessment (LCA) study, since it reduced the consumption of electricity and decolorizing agent with respect to CAS. According to the results of economic and LCA analyses, the water treated by the MBBR system was reused to make new dyeings because water reuse in the textile industry, which is a large water consumer, could achieve environmental and economic benefits. The quality of new dyed fabrics was within the acceptable limits of the textile industry.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment of Textile Wastewater by CAS, MBR, and MBBR: A Comparative Study from Technical, Economic, and Environmental Perspectives

Yang

López‐Grimau

Vilaseca

et al. 2020

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It can be deduced that only 0.081 (COD removal), 0.109 (color removal), 0.048 (turbidity removal), and 0.011 (OC) in the response variable were not explained by the models in the EC process; however, 0.16 (COD removal), 0.154 (color removal), 0.107 (turbidity removal), and 0.001 (OC) in the response variable were not explained by the models of the CC process. The R adj 2 were also high and equal to 0.914, 0.815, 0.914, and 0.980 for the EC process and 0.753, 0.781, 0.813, and 0.99 for the CC process on COD, color, and turbidity removal and OC, for the color removal and turbidity models, and A and B for the OC model. Table 9 gives a statistical summary of the quadratic order polynomial regression models for EC and CC.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Textile industrial processing needs a massive supply of clean water estimated to be ∼200–250 L of water per kg of cotton cloth. 2 Thus, the textile industry has been the epicenter of important pollutant sources, mainly coming from sizing, scouring, bleaching, mercerizing, dyeing, printing, and finishing processes. 3 The major contaminant in the textile effluents is the coloring material in addition to dissolved organic and inorganic matter such as salts, toxic substances such as heavy metals, and so on.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Water scarcity threatens several industries that have become vital to global fabric trade, and those industries are considered the ones with the most water consumption. Textile industrial processing needs a massive supply of clean water estimated to be ∼200–250 L of water per kg of cotton cloth . Thus, the textile industry has been the epicenter of important pollutant sources, mainly coming from sizing, scouring, bleaching, mercerizing, dyeing, printing, and finishing processes .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparative Study of Chemical Coagulation and Electrocoagulation for the Treatment of Real Textile Wastewater: Optimization and Operating Cost Estimation

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pollutants derived from real textile wastewater present a high environmental risk. This work involves the study of the removal of chemical oxygen demand (COD), color, and turbidity from Tunisian real textile wastewater by two different water treatment technologies: chemical coagulation (CC) and electrocoagulation (EC). A comparative study between these two methods was conducted based on the separation performance and operating cost (OC). The effects of different operational parameters including electrolysis time ( t ), voltage, and pH for EC and the coagulant concentration, initial pH, and time of slow mixing ( t sm ) for CC were studied using response surface methodology. The developed quadratic models for the responses were in good agreement with the experimental data. The experiments proved the efficiency of both chemical and electrochemical techniques for the treatment of textile effluent. Indeed, by using EC, the reduction efficiencies of COD, color, and turbidity were 63.05, 99.07, and 96.31%, respectively, under optimal conditions (pH 9, t = 36.26 min, and voltage 4 V). For CC treatment, the achieved removal efficiencies of COD, color, and turbidity were 54.02, 96.21, and 93.7%, respectively, at pH 8.57, a coagulant concentration of 204.75 mg/L, and a t sm of 28.41 min as optimal operating conditions. The OC obtained for EC and CC was about 0.47 and 0.2 USD/m 3 , respectively. Even if the OC of the EC process was higher as compared to the CC process, the treated water obtained by EC meets the Tunisian Standards (NT 106.03 and NT 09-14) for textile wastewater discharge into the environment and demonstrates a high potential for its reuse in various industrial activities. EC technology can be integrated into a wastewater management system that ensures a zero liquid discharge of wastewater into the environment.

show abstract

“…Due to limited information available on TEMPO's environmental impact, it was not included in the inventory. Furthermore, NaBr is not listed in any of the OpenLCA databases, and NaCl was substituted for it to estimate impacts due to their similar production processes and environmental impacts [23]. We also estimated a value from experience for some process data such as the volume of wastewater produced during the washing process.…”

Section: Goal and Scope Definitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Life Cycle Assessment of Electrospun Cellulose-Based Nanocomposite Membrane Fabrication

Attari,

hausler

2023

Proceedings of the 9th World Congress on New Technologies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Polymer nanocomposite membrane is an innovative and promising approach with a broad spectrum of potential applications in filtration processes. It is used to selectively separate molecules and ions. A comprehensive understanding of its environmental impacts, covering the life cycle of the used materials and the fabrication process, is crucial for its long-term sustainable success. This research aims to elaborate and implement a decision-making tool for greener membrane fabrication process. The environmental impacts of synthesizing one batch of Nanocomposite cellulose nanofibrils/cellulose acetate membrane using 50 gr polymer dope solution by electrospinning technique was determined based on a life cycle assessment methodology. The eco-sufficiency and sustainability of the electrospinning method were evaluated through a cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment (LCA) adopting the Cumulative Energy Demand (CED), and IMPACT2002+ impact assessment methods. According to CED assessment, the majority of energy consumed during electrospun membrane synthesis, amounting to 382 MJ, was consumed by the production of cellulose nanofibers. This is related to nonrenewable fossil energy consumed in Ethanol production. As per IMPACT2002+ impact assessment, cellulose acetate and cellulose nanofiber manufacturing, and medium voltage electricity are the main contributors to the overall midpoint environmental effects.

show abstract

Case study on sustainability of textile wastewater treatment plant based on lifecycle assessment approach

Cited by 40 publications

References 33 publications

Treatment of Textile Wastewater by CAS, MBR, and MBBR: A Comparative Study from Technical, Economic, and Environmental Perspectives

Treatment of Textile Wastewater by CAS, MBR, and MBBR: A Comparative Study from Technical, Economic, and Environmental Perspectives

Comparative Study of Chemical Coagulation and Electrocoagulation for the Treatment of Real Textile Wastewater: Optimization and Operating Cost Estimation

Life Cycle Assessment of Electrospun Cellulose-Based Nanocomposite Membrane Fabrication

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About