Assessing the sustainability of modified biosand filters using life cycle assessment, cost and performance factors

被引:0
|
作者
Eniola, Jamiu O. [1 ]
Sizirici, Banu [1 ]
机构
[1] Khalifa Univ Sci & Technol, Civil & Environm Engn Dept, POB 127788, Abu Dhabi, U Arab Emirates
关键词
Biosand filter; Life cycle assessment; Cost; Biochar; Iron oxide coated gravel; Water treatment; OXIDE-COATED GRAVEL; AGGREGATE PRODUCTION; IMPROVEMENT; BIOMASS; SYSTEMS; SAND;
D O I
10.1007/s10668-024-05297-8
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Biosand filter is being used as a low-cost, point-of-use, drinking water treatment technique globally. However, due to the limitations of biosand filter in achieving complete decontamination of drinking water, modification of the biosand filters were proposed which have increased the environmental burden of filter production. This study aims to compare the environmental impact, cost, and performance of the biosand filter (BSF), the physically modified biosand filter with biochar addition (MBSF biochar), and the chemically modified biosand filter (MBSF) by coating the gravel with iron oxide (MBSF IOCG). Life cycle assessment was modeled using the SimaPro version 9.1.17. It was found that natural aggregate extraction has the most impact on BSF and MBSFs fabrication. The total environmental impact of filters were; MBSF IOCG (675.8898 pt), > MBSF biochar (674.9818 pt), > BSF (672.5751 pt). Modification of the BSFs increased the cost and environmental burden of MBSF production. When the modification process in the MBSFs was compared, it was found that the production of biochar was less environmentally friendly (3.34 pt) than the Iron oxide coating of Gravel (IOCG) (3.14 pt). The estimated cost of constructing the filters was; MBSF (IOCG) ($ 37.28) > MBSF (Biochar) ($ 20.99) > BSF ($ 18.49). Although modifications increased the cost and environmental impact of filters, the performance of filters slightly increased for the removal of the tested pollutants. For instance, MBSF (IOCG) showed a removal percentage of 99.27% for Cu, 99.1% for Zn, 95.28% for Fe, 98.6% for Ni, and 95.33% for total coliform. On the other hand, MBSF (biochar) showed 99.2% for Cu, 99% for Zn, 78% for Fe, 75.4% for Ni, and 92.8% for Total coliform removals while the BSF gave a removal percentage of 99% for Cu, 90% for Zn, 60.1% for Fe, 73% for Ni and 93.89% for Total coliform. Accordingly, recommendations were proposed for a more sustainable BSF and its modification to achieve a high treatment efficiency of drinking water.
引用
收藏
页数:25
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Building sustainability assessment model based on life cycle cost analysis and BIM technology
    Y. Lei
    L. Dong
    International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 2024, 21 : 4089 - 4100
  • [32] Life cycle assessment as part of sustainability assessment for chemicals
    Klöpffer, W
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH, 2005, 12 (03) : 173 - 177
  • [33] Life cycle assessment for sustainability assessment of biofuels and bioproducts
    Gheewala, Shabbir H.
    BIOFUEL RESEARCH JOURNAL-BRJ, 2023, 10 (01): : 1810 - 1815
  • [34] A holistic sustainability assessment of a university campus using life cycle approach
    Gulcimen, S.
    Qadri, S.
    Donmez, R. O.
    Uzal, N.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2023, 20 (03) : 3309 - 3322
  • [35] Sustainability Analysis on Polymers Using Life Cycle Assessment Tool (OPENLCA)
    Natarajan, Ganeshan Gujilva
    Kamalakannan, R.
    Vijayakumar, R.
    3RD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON FRONTIERS IN AUTOMOBILE AND MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (FAME 2020), 2020, 2311
  • [36] A holistic sustainability assessment of a university campus using life cycle approach
    S. Gulcimen
    S. Qadri
    R. O. Donmez
    N. Uzal
    International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 2023, 20 : 3309 - 3322
  • [37] A framework for using the handprint concept in attributional life cycle (sustainability) assessment
    Alvarenga, R. A. F.
    Huysveld, S.
    Taelman, S. E.
    Sfez, S.
    Preat, N.
    Cooreman-Algoed, M.
    Sanjuan-Delmas, D.
    Dewulf, J.
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2020, 265
  • [38] Proposed Framework for Assessing the Sustainability of Membrane Life Cycle
    Mahmood, Salwa
    Saman, Muhamad Zameri Mat
    Yusof, Noordin Mohd
    12TH GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON SUSTAINABLE MANUFACTURING - EMERGING POTENTIALS, 2015, 26 : 35 - 39
  • [39] Can Precise Irrigation Support the Sustainability of Protected Cultivation? A Life-Cycle Assessment and Life-Cycle Cost Analysis
    Canaj, Kledja
    Parente, Angelo
    D'Imperio, Massimiliano
    Boari, Francesca
    Buono, Vito
    Toriello, Michele
    Mehmeti, Andi
    Montesano, Francesco Fabiano
    WATER, 2022, 14 (01)
  • [40] Seismic performance assessment of buildings based on life-cycle cost
    Dang, Yu, 1600, Chinese Society of Civil Engineering (47):