Life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions assessment and extended exergy accounting of a horizontal-flow constructed wetland for municipal wastewater treatment: A case study in Chile

Ledón, Yannay Casas; Rivas, Ariel L.; López, Daniela; Vidal, Gladys

doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.11.014

Cited by 30 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The most common type of wastewater in the reviewed articles is urban effluent (representing 26 from the 43 studies, 60% of the total, refer to Figure 1 and Table S1 in supporting information (SI)), related to combined discharges to sewage systems from households, septic tanks, industries, commerce and storm water. The domestic or residential wastewaters were specifically considered in four occasions (Zhang et al, 2010;Risch et al, 2014;García-Montoya et al, 2016;Kamble et al 2017) and from rural locations in another four (Cornejo et al 2013;Lam et al 2015;Casas Ledón et al 2017;Lutterbeck et al 2017). For developed countries, the review of Corominas et al (2013) found that the majority of the LCAs in developed countries considered urban or domestic wastewaters in their studies (over 90% of the articles compared to 70% in this review).…”

Section: Type Of Wastewatersmentioning

confidence: 84%

“…For larger centralized plants, common assumptions for infrastructure endurance were 50 years (Li et al, 2013;Singh et al, 2016;Laitinen et al, 2017;Singh and Kansal, 2018). The assumption for wastewater treatments located in rural communities were shorter, from 10 to 20 years (Cornejo et al, 2013;Lam et al, 2015;Lutterbeck et al, 2017;Casas Ledón et al, 2017).…”

Section: Treatments Size and Lifespanmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The decentralized wastewater systems in rural areas was the main topic in four other articles. The most prevalent treatment were CWs, either as a single vertical-flow (VFCW) (Lam et al, 2015) or horizontal subsurface-flow (HSSF) (Casas Ledón et al, 2017), and after a UASB followed by biological filter (Lutterbeck et al, 2017). The UASB followed by ponds was evaluated by Cornejo et al (2013) in rural Bolivia.…”

Section: Treatment Technologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…as FU from different approaches like p.e./household (Kulak et al, 2017), the urine, faeces and grey water discharged annually by p.e. (Lam et al (2015) (Pan et al, 2011;Casas Ledón et al, 2017)). Finally, other studies which relate the impacts to the amount of by-product produced like kg of algae biomass (Diniz et al, 2017) or m 3 biogas (Meneses-Jácome et al, 2015).…”

Section: Functional Unit (Fu)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Life cycle assessment of wastewater treatment in developing countries: A review

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Within developing countries, wastewater treatment (WWT) has improved in recent years in but remains a high priority sustainability challenge. Accordingly, life cycle assessment (LCA) studies have recently started to analyse the environmental impacts of WWT technologies on the specific context of less developed countries, mainly in China and India. This work presents a comprehensive review of this knowledge with the aim of critically analysing the main conclusions, gaps and challenges for future WWT-related LCAs in developing countries. The most commonly assessed technologies in the 43 reviewed articles are different variations of activated sludge and extensive treatments applied in decentralized systems; however, studies focused on advanced technologies or new sources of pollution (e.g. micropollutants) are still lacking. Goal and system boundaries are normally clearly defined, but significant stages for some technologies such as the construction and sludge management are frequently not included and functional units should be defined accordingly to specific conditions in developing countries. At the inventory level, a more concise description of sources and technical parameters would greatly improve the quality of the LCAs along with accountability of direct greenhouse gas emissions. Eutrophication and global warming are the two

show abstract

Section: Type Of Wastewatersmentioning

confidence: 84%

Section: Treatments Size and Lifespanmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Treatment Technologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Functional Unit (Fu)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Life cycle assessment of wastewater treatment in developing countries: A review

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…CWs are commonly used in countries such as Chile, Spain and Canada (Vera et al, 2013, Casas-Ledón et al, 2017, Caselles-Osorio et al, 2017, mainly in post-treatment, because they have plants that have the capacity to absorb macronutrients (N and P), which are released in the process of decomposing matter, as well as in the nitrification process that occurs in bacteria related to the roots of plants (according to Li et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Constructed wetlands as post treatment of a decanter digester followed by an anaerobic filter

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The amount of wastewater has increased due to the considerable expansion of higher education institutions. When wastewater is released without treatment or with inefficient treatment, it causes significant water pollution. In this context, this study evaluated the performance of Constructed Wetlands as a post-treatment of a decanter digester followed by an anaerobic filter, operated with effluent from the Federal University of Mato Grosso, Cuiabá Campus, Mato Grosso State. Four wetlands were constructed to develop the research: planted with Typha domingensis, planted with Heliconia psittacorum, planted with Pontederia parviflora, and not planted. The following physicochemical parameters were analyzed: Color, Turbidity, pH, Temperature, Total Solids, Total Dissolved Solids (TDS), Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Total Nitrogen, Sulfate, Nitrate and Nitrite. The results show an organic matter removal efficiency with mean removal results: 70% BOD5 for TCW, HCW and PCW; and COD 76% for PCW. The mean removal of total phosphorus was 78% for PCW and 92% NO-2, as macronutrients. Analysis of variance ANOVA shows significance in the results of TDS, SO4 and COD removal.

show abstract