Life cycle assessment and costing of urine source separation: Focus on nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug removal.

Clicks: 355
ID: 77982
2016
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #30 of 168 articles by views in Water research

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 168 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
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.
Reference Key
landry2016lifewater Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Landry, Kelly A;Boyer, Treavor H;
Journal Water research
Year 2016
DOI
S0043-1354(16)30701-1
URL
Keywords
wastewater treatment life cycle assessment ion-exchange life cycle costing nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs urine source separation

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.