IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i20p13657-d949583.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prospective Life Cycle Assessment and Cost Analysis of Novel Electrochemical Struvite Recovery in a U.S. Wastewater Treatment Plant

Author

Listed:
  • Karla G. Morrissey

    (Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA)

  • Leah English

    (Department of Agricultural Economics & Agribusiness, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA)

  • Greg Thoma

    (Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA)

  • Jennie Popp

    (Department of Agricultural Economics & Agribusiness, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA)

Abstract

Nutrient recovery in domestic wastewater treatment has increasingly become an important area of study as the supply of non-renewable phosphorus decreases. Recent bench-scale trials indicate that co-generation of struvite and hydrogen using electrochemical methods may offer an alternative to existing recovery options utilized by municipal wastewater treatment facilities. However, implementation has yet to be explored at plant-scale. In the development of novel nutrient recovery processes, both economic and environmental assessments are necessary to guide research and their design. The aim of this study was to conduct a prospective life cycle assessment and cost analysis of a new electrochemical struvite recovery technology that utilizes a sacrificial magnesium anode to precipitate struvite and generate hydrogen gas. This technology was modeled using process simulation software GPS-X and CapdetWorks assuming its integration in a full-scale existing wastewater treatment plant with and without anaerobic digestion. Struvite recoveries of 18–33% were achieved when anaerobic digestion was included, with a break-even price of $6.03/kg struvite and $15.58/kg of hydrogen required to offset increased costs for recovery. Struvite recovery reduced aquatic eutrophication impacts as well as terrestrial acidification impacts. Tradeoffs between benefits from struvite and burdens from electrode manufacturing were found for several impact categories.

Suggested Citation

  • Karla G. Morrissey & Leah English & Greg Thoma & Jennie Popp, 2022. "Prospective Life Cycle Assessment and Cost Analysis of Novel Electrochemical Struvite Recovery in a U.S. Wastewater Treatment Plant," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-23, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:20:p:13657-:d:949583
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/20/13657/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/20/13657/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rickard Arvidsson & Anne‐Marie Tillman & Björn A. Sandén & Matty Janssen & Anders Nordelöf & Duncan Kushnir & Sverker Molander, 2018. "Environmental Assessment of Emerging Technologies: Recommendations for Prospective LCA," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 22(6), pages 1286-1294, December.
    2. John F. Hallas & Cheryl L. Mackowiak & Ann C. Wilkie & Willie G. Harris, 2019. "Struvite Phosphorus Recovery from Aerobically Digested Municipal Wastewater," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-12, January.
    3. Nils Thonemann & Anna Schulte & Daniel Maga, 2020. "How to Conduct Prospective Life Cycle Assessment for Emerging Technologies? A Systematic Review and Methodological Guidance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-23, February.
    4. Whiting, Andrew & Azapagic, Adisa, 2014. "Life cycle environmental impacts of generating electricity and heat from biogas produced by anaerobic digestion," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 181-193.
    5. William Larson, 2015. "New Estimates of Value of Land of the United States," BEA Working Papers 0120, Bureau of Economic Analysis.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anna Furberg & Rickard Arvidsson & Sverker Molander, 2022. "A practice‐based framework for defining functional units in comparative life cycle assessments of materials," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(3), pages 718-730, June.
    2. Sacchi, R. & Terlouw, T. & Siala, K. & Dirnaichner, A. & Bauer, C. & Cox, B. & Mutel, C. & Daioglou, V. & Luderer, G., 2022. "PRospective EnvironMental Impact asSEment (premise): A streamlined approach to producing databases for prospective life cycle assessment using integrated assessment models," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    3. Paul Baustert & Elorri Igos & Thomas Schaubroeck & Laurent Chion & Angelica Mendoza Beltran & Elke Stehfest & Detlef van Vuuren & Hester Biemans & Enrico Benetto, 2022. "Integration of future water scarcity and electricity supply into prospective LCA: Application to the assessment of water desalination for the steel industry," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(4), pages 1182-1194, August.
    4. Moritz Ostermann & Julian Grenz & Marcel Triebus & Felipe Cerdas & Thorsten Marten & Thomas Tröster & Christoph Herrmann, 2023. "Integrating Prospective Scenarios in Life Cycle Engineering: Case Study of Lightweight Structures," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-24, April.
    5. Julian Grenz & Moritz Ostermann & Karoline Käsewieter & Felipe Cerdas & Thorsten Marten & Christoph Herrmann & Thomas Tröster, 2023. "Integrating Prospective LCA in the Development of Automotive Components," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-26, June.
    6. Emblemsvåg, Jan, 2022. "Wind energy is not sustainable when balanced by fossil energy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 305(C).
    7. Zhang, Jingxin & Li, Wangliang & Lee, Jonathan & Loh, Kai-Chee & Dai, Yanjun & Tong, Yen Wah, 2017. "Enhancement of biogas production in anaerobic co-digestion of food waste and waste activated sludge by biological co-pretreatment," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 479-486.
    8. Khalifa Mohammed Al-Sobai & Shaligram Pokharel & Galal M. Abdella, 2020. "Perspectives on the Capabilities for the Selection of Strategic Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-20, October.
    9. Grim, Johanna & Malmros, Peter & Schnürer, Anna & Nordberg, Åke, 2015. "Comparison of pasteurization and integrated thermophilic sanitation at a full-scale biogas plant – Heat demand and biogas production," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 419-427.
    10. Zhang, Xiaoyue & Huang, Guohe & Liu, Lirong & Li, Kailong, 2022. "Development of a stochastic multistage lifecycle programming model for electric power system planning – A case study for the Province of Saskatchewan, Canada," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    11. Bacenetti, Jacopo & Sala, Cesare & Fusi, Alessandra & Fiala, Marco, 2016. "Agricultural anaerobic digestion plants: What LCA studies pointed out and what can be done to make them more environmentally sustainable," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 669-686.
    12. Johannes Morfeldt & Daniel J. A. Johansson, 2022. "Impacts of shared mobility on vehicle lifetimes and on the carbon footprint of electric vehicles," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-11, December.
    13. Carlos Pablo Sigüenza & Bernhard Steubing & Arnold Tukker & Glenn A. Aguilar‐Hernández, 2021. "The environmental and material implications of circular transitions: A diffusion and product‐life‐cycle‐based modeling framework," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(3), pages 563-579, June.
    14. Ingrao, Carlo & Bacenetti, Jacopo & Adamczyk, Janusz & Ferrante, Valentina & Messineo, Antonio & Huisingh, Donald, 2019. "Investigating energy and environmental issues of agro-biogas derived energy systems: A comprehensive review of Life Cycle Assessments," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 296-307.
    15. Nils Thonemann & Anna Schulte & Daniel Maga, 2020. "How to Conduct Prospective Life Cycle Assessment for Emerging Technologies? A Systematic Review and Methodological Guidance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-23, February.
    16. Eleni Iacovidou & Jonathan Busch & John N. Hahladakis & Helen Baxter & Kok Siew Ng & Ben M. J. Herbert, 2017. "A Parameter Selection Framework for Sustainability Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-18, August.
    17. Kjersti Wergeland Krakhella & Marjorie Morales & Robert Bock & Frode Seland & Odne Stokke Burheim & Kristian Etienne Einarsrud, 2020. "Electrodialytic Energy Storage System: Permselectivity, Stack Measurements and Life-Cycle Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-26, March.
    18. Tappen, S.J. & Aschmann, V. & Effenberger, M., 2017. "Lifetime development and load response of the electrical efficiency of biogas-driven cogeneration units," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(PB), pages 857-865.
    19. Rafael Barbosa & Simon Skipka, 2019. "Tax Housing or Land? Distributional Effects of Property Taxation in Germany," CESifo Working Paper Series 8039, CESifo.
    20. Lijó, Lucía & González-García, Sara & Bacenetti, Jacopo & Moreira, Maria Teresa, 2017. "The environmental effect of substituting energy crops for food waste as feedstock for biogas production," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 1130-1143.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:20:p:13657-:d:949583. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.