TY - JOUR
T1 - Life cycle assessment and costing of urine source separation
T2 - Focus on nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug removal
AU - Landry, Kelly A.
AU - Boyer, Treavor
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors would like to thank Dr. Guenther Hochhaus at the University of Florida for his assistance with sample analysis, the UF Physical Plant Department, and UF Water Reclamation Facility. This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship under Grant No. DGE-1315138 and the NSF CAREER grant CBET-1150790 . This article was greatly improved by the thoughts and insightful comments from two anonymous reviewers. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of NSF. KAL also received support from the FSAWWA Roy W. Likins Scholarship.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2016/11/15
Y1 - 2016/11/15
N2 - Urine source separation has the potential to reduce pharmaceutical loading to the environment, while enhancing nutrient recovery. The focus of this life cycle assessment (LCA) was to evaluate the environmental impacts and economic costs to manage nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (i.e., diclofenac, ibuprofen, ketoprofen and naproxen) and nutrients in human urine. Urine source separation was compared with centralized wastewater treatment (WWT) (biological or upgraded with ozonation). The current treatment method (i.e., centralized biological WWT) was compared with hypothetical treatment scenarios (i.e., centralized biological WWT upgraded with ozonation, and urine source separation). Alternative urine source separation scenarios included varying collection and handling methods (i.e., collection by vacuum truck, vacuum sewer, or decentralized treatment), pharmaceuticals removal by ion-exchange, and struvite precipitation. Urine source separation scenarios had 90% lower environmental impact (based on the TRACI impact assessment method) compared with the centralized wastewater scenarios due to reduced potable water production for flush water, reduced electricity use at the wastewater treatment plant, and nutrient offsets from struvite precipitation. Despite the greatest reduction of pharmaceutical toxicity, centralized treatment upgraded with ozone had the greatest ecotoxicity impacts due to ozonation operation and infrastructure. Among urine source separation scenarios, decentralized treatment of urine and centralized treatment of urine collected by vacuum truck had negligible cost differences compared with centralized wastewater treatment. Centralized treatment of urine collected by vacuum sewer and centralized treatment with ozone cost 30% more compared with conventional wastewater treatment.
AB - Urine source separation has the potential to reduce pharmaceutical loading to the environment, while enhancing nutrient recovery. The focus of this life cycle assessment (LCA) was to evaluate the environmental impacts and economic costs to manage nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (i.e., diclofenac, ibuprofen, ketoprofen and naproxen) and nutrients in human urine. Urine source separation was compared with centralized wastewater treatment (WWT) (biological or upgraded with ozonation). The current treatment method (i.e., centralized biological WWT) was compared with hypothetical treatment scenarios (i.e., centralized biological WWT upgraded with ozonation, and urine source separation). Alternative urine source separation scenarios included varying collection and handling methods (i.e., collection by vacuum truck, vacuum sewer, or decentralized treatment), pharmaceuticals removal by ion-exchange, and struvite precipitation. Urine source separation scenarios had 90% lower environmental impact (based on the TRACI impact assessment method) compared with the centralized wastewater scenarios due to reduced potable water production for flush water, reduced electricity use at the wastewater treatment plant, and nutrient offsets from struvite precipitation. Despite the greatest reduction of pharmaceutical toxicity, centralized treatment upgraded with ozone had the greatest ecotoxicity impacts due to ozonation operation and infrastructure. Among urine source separation scenarios, decentralized treatment of urine and centralized treatment of urine collected by vacuum truck had negligible cost differences compared with centralized wastewater treatment. Centralized treatment of urine collected by vacuum sewer and centralized treatment with ozone cost 30% more compared with conventional wastewater treatment.
KW - Ion-exchange
KW - Life cycle assessment
KW - Life cycle costing
KW - Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs
KW - Urine source separation
KW - Wastewater treatment
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84988640167&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84988640167&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.watres.2016.09.024
DO - 10.1016/j.watres.2016.09.024
M3 - Article
C2 - 27668993
AN - SCOPUS:84988640167
VL - 105
SP - 487
EP - 495
JO - Water Research
JF - Water Research
SN - 0043-1354
ER -