Life-Cycle Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of a Building-Scale Wastewater Treatment and Nonpotable Reuse System

Hendrickson, Thomas P.; Nguyen, Mi T.; Sukardi, Marsha; Miot, Alexandre; Horvath, Arpad; Nelson, Kara L.

doi:10.1021/acs.est.5b01677

Cited by 58 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Related results for economic cost and GHG emissions can be found in the SI in figure S-3 and figure S-4. The component breakdown for GHG emissions follows a similar trend as the energy breakdown in all locations with a higher impact of piping construction as the embodied GHG emissions from that process are higher than the San Francisco electricity emissions which is 100% hydropower (a low carbon electricity source) [13]. The breakdown for cost reveals the high impact of the treatment capital costs and the piping infrastructure.…”

Section: Location Analysismentioning

confidence: 63%

“…This work aims to add to the literature on the optimal scale of wastewater treatment and reuse to improve the sustainability of wastewater management by minimizing either the energy intensity, the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and/or the financial cost of the system. Experience with urban decentralized water reuse systems is still limited, but a few systems have been established using commercially-available technologies [12,13]. To support data-driven water management, we aim to provide quantitative information of the impacts of scale and spatial conditions on decentralized NPR systems and expand the understanding of their environmental and economic performance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Spatial optimization for decentralized non-potable water reuse

Kavvada

Nelson

Horvath

2018

Environ. Res. Lett.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Decentralization has the potential to reduce the scale of the piped distribution network needed to enable non-potable water reuse (NPR) in urban areas by producing recycled water closer to its point of use. However, tradeoffs exist between the economies of scale of treatment facilities and the size of the conveyance infrastructure, including energy for upgradient distribution of recycled water. To adequately capture the impacts from distribution pipes and pumping requirements, site-specific conditions must be accounted for. In this study, a generalized framework (a heuristic modeling approach using geospatial algorithms) is developed that estimates the financial cost, the energy use, and the greenhouse gas emissions associated with NPR (for toilet flushing) as a function of scale of treatment and conveyance networks with the goal of determining the optimal degree of decentralization. A decision-support platform is developed to assess and visualize NPR system designs considering topography, economies of scale, and building size. The platform can be used for scenario development to explore the optimal system size based on the layout of current or new buildings. The model also promotes technology innovation by facilitating the systems-level comparison of options to lower costs, improve energy efficiency, and lower greenhouse gas emissions.

show abstract

Section: Location Analysismentioning

confidence: 63%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial optimization for decentralized non-potable water reuse

Kavvada

Nelson

Horvath

2018

Environ. Res. Lett.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When the investigations addressed the environmental domain, approaches were once again diversified. Chang et al [2] evaluated energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for urban water reuse systems in Korea, while Hendrickson et al [3] evaluated the same parameters for an operating Living Machine (LM) wetland treatment system, which recycles wastewater in an office building. The study also assessed the performance of the local utility's centralized wastewater treatment plant, which was found to be significantly more efficient than the LM.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Performance of Effluent Conditioning Systems for Reuse in Oil Refining Plants: A Case Study in Brazil

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to evaluate the environmental and energy effects of the reuse of 1.0 m³ of water in a cooling tower obtained from an oil refinery effluent. An arrangement comprising reverse osmosis (RO), evaporation (EV), and crystallization (CR) was created for water desalination. Six process routes were evaluated; for this purpose, each of them was converted into an specific scenario of analysis: S1: pre-treatment with Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) + RO + EV (multi-effect distillation) + CR; S2: S1 with pre-treatment by BaSO4; S3: with Ca(OH)2/CaCO3/HCl; S4: S3 with waste heat to supply the thermal demand of EV; S5: S3 with steam recompression in EV; and, S6: S3 with HNO3 in place of HCl. The analysis was carried out by attributional LCA for primary energy demand (PED) and global warming (GW) impacts. The comparison was carried out for a reference flow (RF) of: add 1.0 m3 of reused water to a cooling tower with quality to proper functioning of this equipment. S4 presented the best performance among the analyzed possibilities (PED: 11.9 MJ/RF; and GW: 720 gCO2,eq/RF). However, dependence on other refinery sectors makes it inadvisable as a regular treatment option. Thus, S5 appears as the lowest impact scenario in the series (PED: 17.2 MJ/RF; and GW: 1.24 kgCO2,eq/RF), given the pre-treatment technique of RO-fed effluent, and the exclusive use of steam recompression to meet total EV energy demands. Finally, an intrinsic correlation was identified between RO water recovery efficiency and the accumulated PED and GW impacts on the arrangements that operate with heat and electricity.

show abstract

“…Also LCA has been used extensively to assess urban water and sanitation systems, amongst others for water reuse (e.g. García-Montoya et al 2015, Hendrickson et al 2015. While QMRA per definition concerns microbial risks, the adverse effects of pathogens on human health are not routinely included in LCA, as no standard LCIA methodology for pathogen impact potential is currently available.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using quantitative microbial risk assessment and life cycle assessment to assess management options in urban water and sanitation infrastructures: Opportunities and unresolved issues

Harder

Peters

Ashbolt

et al. 2017

Microbial Risk Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA) and life cycle assessment (LCA) are two distinct environmental management techniques that can provide complementary perspectives when assessing management options for urban water and sanitation infrastructure. While QMRA per definition concerns microbial risks, accounting for pathogens in LCA has received little attention. A few case studies, however, have explored the concurrent use of QMRA and LCA. These studies were motivated by the perceived need to address trade-offs between local health burdens associated with pathogens and global health burdens associated with other stressors at different spatial and temporal scales. Along with the LCA, the QMRA results were sought to provide the basis for addressing such trade-offs, rather than for deciding whether pathogen-related adverse effects experienced by specific individuals or populations are acceptable, or which scenario leads to the highest overall health burden for a given community, as is traditionally the case in QMRA. This paper highlights opportunities and unresolved issues related to the concurrent use of QMRA and LCA, such as assumptions in translating chemical and pathogen health impacts to a common metric or other mode structure and parameterisation aspects. Our aim is to facilitate more consistent design and transparent communication of future case studies of this type, and to highlight opportunities for QMRA experts to contribute to LCA method development so as to include pathogen health impacts. While most examples provided in this paper focus on water reuse, the findings apply more broadly and can also be extrapolated to other pathogen exposures in the context of urban water and sanitation systems as well as other contexts.

show abstract

Life-Cycle Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of a Building-Scale Wastewater Treatment and Nonpotable Reuse System

Cited by 58 publications

References 25 publications

Spatial optimization for decentralized non-potable water reuse

Spatial optimization for decentralized non-potable water reuse

Environmental Performance of Effluent Conditioning Systems for Reuse in Oil Refining Plants: A Case Study in Brazil

Using quantitative microbial risk assessment and life cycle assessment to assess management options in urban water and sanitation infrastructures: Opportunities and unresolved issues

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About