Comparison of Alternative Wastewater Treatment Plants Using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)

Ferreira, Anna Carolina Dall’Aneze; Oliveira, Sueli Aparecida de; Benassi, Roseli Frederigi

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-55374-6_43

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Para el año 2021 el curso de los documentos reportados está enfocados en sistemas de tratamiento para efluentes residuales industriales (48) o comparación de tecnologías basadas en su viabilidad tecno económica y ambiental (49), biorrefinerías para la obtención de bioproductos a partir de residuos (50-52), como la implementación de microalgas en aguas residuales para la obtención de metabolitos de interés industrial y simultanea remoción de carga contaminante(53). Las áreas de conocimiento involucradas están representadas en la figura 3, de las cuales la temática que posee mayor porcentaje de registro es la ciencia medioambiental con un 27% del total evaluado, seguida por energía con 19% e ingeniería con 18%, lo cual corresponde con la esencia misma de los ACV.…”

Section: Producción Bibliográfica Y Su Comportamiento En El Tiempounclassified

Análisis bibliométrico del ciclo de vida aplicado a procesos de tratamientos de agua residual con microalgas

Pérez Roa,

Barajas Solano,

García Martínez

et al. 2023

inycomp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Este trabajo realizó un análisis bibliométrico de correlación entre palabras claves relacionadas al análisis de ciclo de vida (ACV) y sistemas de tratamiento de agua residual, buscando identificar la relevancia del tratamiento con microalgas. La biomasa de estos microorganismos permite la valorización del efluente residual ya que puede ser empleada en la obtención de energía a través del biogás generado en la digestión de reactores anaerobios y también como fuente potencial para la producción de metabolitos de alto valor industrial. La mayoría de los ACV obtenidos en la búsqueda emplean flujos de referencia como la cantidad de biomasa producida, volumen de agua tratada y equivalentes producidos por persona. Las unidades funcionales más reportadas corresponden a 1m3 de agua residual tratada y aguas residuales producidas por equivalente poblacional. La herramienta predominante para el desarrollo de los ACV correspondió al software SimaPro, aplicando la metodología de impactos ReCiPe.

show abstract

Section: Producción Bibliográfica Y Su Comportamiento En El Tiempounclassified

Análisis bibliométrico del ciclo de vida aplicado a procesos de tratamientos de agua residual con microalgas

Pérez Roa,

Barajas Solano,

García Martínez

et al. 2023

inycomp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Alongside the fruitful applications in a variety of manufacturing sectors (from textiles to detergent products to food), in the field of wastewater treatment facilities, the PEF/OEF can be utilized to determine the optimal upgrade choices or the optimal operation decision from an environmental footprint perspective. Specifically, this methodology can be applied to estimate the overall environmental impact in terms of both direct impacts and indirect impacts [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22]. The direct impacts are linked to effluents and other emissions, whereas the indirect impacts are linked to energy and resources consumed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond the Black Box of Life Cycle Assessment in Wastewater Treatment Plants: Which Help from Bioassays?

Menghini

Pedrazzani

Feretti

et al. 2023

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The assessment of the environmental footprint of an organization or product is based on methods published by the European Union Joint Research Centre, which take 16 impact areas into account. Among the listed categories are human and freshwater ecosystem toxicities. Standard protocols utilize just chemical parameters as input data, hindering the determination of the full impact of complex mixes, such as pollutants released into the environment. Biological assays enable us to overcome this gap: in the present work, assays were employed to determine both baseline and specific toxicity to aquatic species (green algae, luminescent bacteria, and crustacean cladocera) as well as specific toxicity (mutagenicity and carcinogenicity). Ecological footprint was estimated with regard to the impact categories “freshwater toxicity” and “human cancer toxicity” following the standard methodology. In parallel, the impact on the above categories was estimated using the results of biological assays as input. Standard and bioassay-based results are not always congruent, and conventional methods generally underestimate the effects. Likewise, the choice of reference substance (metals or organics) influences the quantification of impact. Appropriate batteries of biological assays could therefore be utilized to complement LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) techniques in order to make them more sensitive when considering toxicity in mid-term impact categories.

show abstract

“…Within the field of wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs), the PEF/OEF can be leveraged to identify the best alternatives to adopt in an upgrade scenario or to establish the best operation decision from an environmental footprint standpoint. Furthermore, this methodology can be applied to estimate the overall environmental impact in terms of both direct impacts and indirect impacts [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22]. The direct impacts are linked to effluents and other emissions, whereas the indirect impacts are linked to energy and resources consumed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond the Black Box of Life Cycle Assessment in the Wastewater Treatment Plants: Which Help from the Bioassays?

Menghini¹,

Pedrazzani²,

Feretti³

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The assessment of an organization/product's environmental footprint is based on the protocols developed by the Joint Research Centre of the European Union, which take into account 16 impact categories. Among the categories covered are toxicity to freshwater ecosystems and to humans. Standard protocols use only chemical parameters as input data, preventing the true impact of entire complex mixtures, such as emissions discharged into the environment, from being determined. Biological assays allow us to bridge this gap: in the current study, assays were used to determine baseline toxicity towards aquatic organisms (green algae, luminescent bacteria, and crustaceans) as well as specific toxicity (mutagenicity and carcinogenicity). Expected impacts were compared using two approaches (standard and bioassay-centered results obtained are not always in line and, in general, the traditional method underestimates impacts). This demonstrates the importance of these assays and suggests that they be used in LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) protocols as well.

show abstract

Comparison of Alternative Wastewater Treatment Plants Using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)

Cited by 4 publications

References 9 publications

Análisis bibliométrico del ciclo de vida aplicado a procesos de tratamientos de agua residual con microalgas

Análisis bibliométrico del ciclo de vida aplicado a procesos de tratamientos de agua residual con microalgas

Beyond the Black Box of Life Cycle Assessment in Wastewater Treatment Plants: Which Help from Bioassays?

Beyond the Black Box of Life Cycle Assessment in the Wastewater Treatment Plants: Which Help from the Bioassays?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About