Cargando…

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

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Banti, Dimitra C., Tsangas, Michail, Samaras, Petros, Zorpas, Antonis
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7765054/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33327549
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes10120421
_version_ 1783628401533255680
author Banti, Dimitra C.
Tsangas, Michail
Samaras, Petros
Zorpas, Antonis
author_facet Banti, Dimitra C.
Tsangas, Michail
Samaras, Petros
Zorpas, Antonis
author_sort Banti, Dimitra C.
collection PubMed
description 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 GWP(MBR) = 0.50 kg CO(2)-eq*FU(−1) and GWP(CAS) = 2.67 kg CO(2)-eq*FU(−1) without sludge removal—and the wastewater treatment plant life cycle contribution—where GWP(MBR) = 0.002 kg CO(2)-eq*FU(−1) and GWP(CAS) = 0.14 kg CO(2)-eq*FU(−1) without land area contribution. Finally, in all the examined cases the environmental superiority of the MBR process was found.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7765054
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77650542020-12-27 LCA of a Membrane Bioreactor Compared to Activated Sludge System for Municipal Wastewater Treatment Banti, Dimitra C. Tsangas, Michail Samaras, Petros Zorpas, Antonis Membranes (Basel) Article 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 GWP(MBR) = 0.50 kg CO(2)-eq*FU(−1) and GWP(CAS) = 2.67 kg CO(2)-eq*FU(−1) without sludge removal—and the wastewater treatment plant life cycle contribution—where GWP(MBR) = 0.002 kg CO(2)-eq*FU(−1) and GWP(CAS) = 0.14 kg CO(2)-eq*FU(−1) without land area contribution. Finally, in all the examined cases the environmental superiority of the MBR process was found. MDPI 2020-12-14 /pmc/articles/PMC7765054/ /pubmed/33327549 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes10120421 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Banti, Dimitra C.
Tsangas, Michail
Samaras, Petros
Zorpas, Antonis
LCA of a Membrane Bioreactor Compared to Activated Sludge System for Municipal Wastewater Treatment
title LCA of a Membrane Bioreactor Compared to Activated Sludge System for Municipal Wastewater Treatment
title_full LCA of a Membrane Bioreactor Compared to Activated Sludge System for Municipal Wastewater Treatment
title_fullStr LCA of a Membrane Bioreactor Compared to Activated Sludge System for Municipal Wastewater Treatment
title_full_unstemmed LCA of a Membrane Bioreactor Compared to Activated Sludge System for Municipal Wastewater Treatment
title_short LCA of a Membrane Bioreactor Compared to Activated Sludge System for Municipal Wastewater Treatment
title_sort lca of a membrane bioreactor compared to activated sludge system for municipal wastewater treatment
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7765054/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33327549
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes10120421
work_keys_str_mv AT bantidimitrac lcaofamembranebioreactorcomparedtoactivatedsludgesystemformunicipalwastewatertreatment
AT tsangasmichail lcaofamembranebioreactorcomparedtoactivatedsludgesystemformunicipalwastewatertreatment
AT samaraspetros lcaofamembranebioreactorcomparedtoactivatedsludgesystemformunicipalwastewatertreatment
AT zorpasantonis lcaofamembranebioreactorcomparedtoactivatedsludgesystemformunicipalwastewatertreatment