Life cycle assessment of struvite recovery and wastewater sludge end-use: A Flemish illustration

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Dokumenter

  • Fulltext

    Forlagets udgivne version, 1,8 MB, PDF-dokument

Phosphate rock (PR) has been designated as a Critical Raw Material in the European Union (EU). This has led to increased emphasis on alternative P recovery (APR) from secondary streams like wastewater sludge (WWS). However, WWS end-use is a contentious topic, and EU member states prefer different end-use pathways (land application/incineration/valorisation in cement kilns). Previous Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) on APRs from WWS reached contrasting conclusions; while most considered WWS as waste and highlighted a net benefit relative to PR mining and beneficiation, others viewed WWS as a resource and highlighted a net burden of the treatment. We used a combined functional unit (that views WWS from a waste as well as a resource perspective) and applied it on a Flemish wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) with struvite recovery as APR technology. Firstly, a retrospective comparison was performed to measure the WWTP performance before and after struvite recovery and the analysis was complemented by uncertainty and global sensitivity analyses. The results showed struvite recovery provides marginal environmental benefits due to improved WWS dewatering and reduced polymer use. Secondly, a prospective LCA approach was performed to reflect policy changes regarding WWS end-use options in Flanders. Results indicated complete mono-incineration of WWS, ash processing to recover P and the subsequent land application appears to be less sustainable in terms of climate change, human toxicity, and terrestrial acidification relative to the status quo, i.e., co-incineration with municipal solid waste and valorisation at cement kilns. Impacts on fossil depletion, however, favour mono-incineration over the status quo.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
Artikelnummer106325
TidsskriftResources, Conservation and Recycling
Vol/bind182
Antal sider11
ISSN0921-3449
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 2022

Bibliografisk note

Funding Information:
This work was supported by the European Union's Horizon 2020 project Nutri2Cycle (Grant agreement No. 773682) and Interreg North-West Europe's ReNu2Farm (Grant: NEW601). This manuscript reflects the authors? views and not the EU nor Aquafin. The EU is not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained therein. We thank Bart Saerens from Aquafin Inc for providing primary data to build the LCI. We thank Aleksandra Bogdan and Ana Robles Aguilar from Ghent University for the data on P-uptake and their inputs on the agronomic performance of WWS and ash. We also take the opportunity to express our gratitute to Prof. Massimo Pizzol from Aalborg University for introducing us to the world of Brightway2. Special mentions to Bernhard Steubing from Leiden University and Chris Mutel for their guidance on the Activity Browser and Brightway2. Finally, we thank the anonymous reviewers for their suggestions and comments.

Funding Information:
This work was supported by the European Union's Horizon 2020 project Nutri2Cycle (Grant agreement No. 773682) and Interreg North-West Europe's ReNu2Farm (Grant: NEW601). This manuscript reflects the authors’ views and not the EU nor Aquafin. The EU is not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2022

Antal downloads er baseret på statistik fra Google Scholar og www.ku.dk


Ingen data tilgængelig

ID: 310964016