Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Chunyan Chai; Dawei Zhang; Yanling Yu; Yujie Feng; Man Sing Wong (2015)
Publisher: MDPI AG
Journal: Water
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: sludge treatment, carbon footprint, greenhouse gas emission, Water supply for domestic and industrial purposes, TD201-500, nitrous oxide, TC1-978, wastewater treatment, Hydraulic engineering, energy recovery

Classified by OpenAIRE into

mesheuropmc: equipment and supplies
With rapid urbanization and infrastructure investment, wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) in Chinese cities are putting increased pressure on energy consumption and exacerbating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. A carbon footprint is provided as a tool to quantify the life cycle GHG emissions and identify opportunities to reduce climate change impacts. This study examined three mainstream wastewater treatment technologies: Anaerobic–Anoxic–Oxic (A–A–O), Sequencing Batch Reactor (SBR) and Oxygen Ditch, considering four different sludge treatment alternatives for small-to-medium-sized WWTPs. Following the life cycle approach, process design data and emission factors were used by the model to calculate the carbon footprint. Results found that direct emissions of CO2 and N2O, and indirect emissions of electricity use, are significant contributors to the carbon footprint. Although sludge anaerobic digestion and biogas recovery could significantly contribute to emission reduction, it was less beneficial for Oxygen Ditch than the other two treatment technologies due to its low sludge production. The influence of choosing “high risk” or “low risk” N2O emission factors on the carbon footprint was also investigated in this study. Oxygen Ditch was assessed as “low risk” of N2O emissions while SBR was “high risk”. The carbon footprint of A–A–O with sludge anaerobic digestion and energy recovery was more resilient to changes of N2O emission factors and control of N2O emissions, though process design parameters (i.e., effluent total nitrogen (TN) concentration, mixed-liquor recycle (MLR) rates and solids retention time (SRT)) and operation conditions (i.e., nitrite concentration) are critical for reducing carbon footprint of SBR. Analyses of carbon footprints suggested that aerobic treatment of sludge not only favors the generation of large amounts of CO2, but also the emissions of N2O, so the rationale of reducing aerobic treatment and maximizing anaerobic treatment applies to both wastewater and sludge treatment for reducing the carbon footprint, i.e., the annamox process for wastewater nutrient removal and the anaerobic digestion for sludge treatment.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 1. OECD Economic Surveys: China 2013; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2013.
    • 2. Corominas, L.; Foley, J.; Guest, J.S.; Hospido, A.; Larsen, H.F.; Morera, S.; Shaw, A. Life cycle assessment applied to wastewater treatment: State of the art. Water Res. 2013, 47, 5480-5492.
    • 3. Zhou, Y.Z.; Zhang, D.Q.; Le, M.T.; Puah, A.N.; Ng, W.J. Energy utilization in sewage treatment-A review with comparisons. J. Water Clim. Chang. 2013, 4, 1.
    • 4. Sahely, H.R.; Monteith, H.D.; MacLean, H.L.; Bagley, D.M. Comparison of on-site and upstream greenhouse gas emissions from canadian municipal wastewater treatment facilities. J. Environ. Eng. Sci. 2006, 5, 405-415.
    • 5. Technical Speification for Management of Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plant Operaion (HJ 2038-2014); Ministry of Environmental Protection of the People's Republic of China, China Environmental Science Press: Beijing, China, 2014. (In Chinese)
    • 6. Second National Communication on Climate Change of the People's Republic of China; Climate Change Division of National Development and Reform Commission of the People's Republic of China, China Economic Press: Beijing, China, 2013. (In Chinese)
    • 7. Yu, J.; Tian, N.; Wang, K.; Ren, Y. Analysis and discussion of sludge disposal and treatment of sewage treatment plants in China. Chin. J. Environ. Eng. 2007, 1, 5. (In Chinese)
    • 8. Wang, X.; Liu, J.; Ren, N.Q.; Yu, H.Q.; Lee, D.J.; Guo, X. Assessment of multiple sustainability demands for wastewater treatment alternatives: A refined evaluation scheme and case study. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46, 5542-5549.
    • 9. De Haas, D.; Foley, J.; Barr, K. Greenhouse gas inventories from WWTPs-The trade-off with nutrient removal. In Sustainability 2008 Green Practices for the Water Environment; Water Environment Federation: National Harbor, MD, USA, 2008.
    • 10. Gustavsson, D.J.; Tumlin, S. Carbon footprints of scandinavian wastewater treatment plants. Water Sci. Technol. 2013, 68, 887-893.
    • 11. Zhang, Q.H.; Wang, X.C.; Xiong, J.Q.; Chen, R.; Cao, B. Application of life cycle assessment for an evaluation of wastewater treatment and reuse project-Case study of Xi'an, China. Bioresour. Technol. 2010, 101, 1421-1425.
    • 12. Mo, W.; Zhang, Q. Can municipal wastewater treatment systems be carbon neutral? J. Environ. Manag. 2012, 112, 360-367.
    • 13. De Haas, D.W.; Pepperell, C.; Foley, J. Perspective on greenhouse gas emission estimates based on australian wastewater treatment plant operating data. Water Sci. Technol. 2014, 69, 451-463.
    • 14. Suh, Y.-J.; Rousseaux, R. An lca of alternative wastewater sludge treatment scenarios. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2002, 35, 10.
    • 15. Liu, B.; Wei, Q.; Zhang, B.; Bi, J. Life cycle ghg emissions of sewage sludge treatment and disposal options in tai lake watershed, china. Sci. Total Environ. 2013, 447, 361-369.
    • 16. Cao, Y.; Pawlowski, A. Life cycle assessment of two emerging sewage sludge-to-energy systems: Evaluating energy and greenhouse gas emissions implications. Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 127, 81-91.
    • 17. Griffith, D.R.; Barnes, R.T.; Raymond, P.A. Inputs of fossil carbon from wastewater treatment plants to U.S. rivers and oceans. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2009, 43, 5.
    • 18. Law, Y.; Jacobsen, G.E.; Smith, A.M.; Yuan, Z.; Lant, P. Fossil organic carbon in wastewater and its fate in treatment plants. Water Res. 2013, 47, 5270-5281.
    • 19. Rodriguez-Garcia, G.; Hospido, A.; Bagley, D.M.; Moreira, M.T.; Feijoo, G. A methodology to estimate greenhouse gases emissions in life cycle inventories of wastewater treatment plants. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2012, 37, 37-46.
    • 20. Chen, S.; Chen, B. Net energy production and emissions mitigation of domestic wastewater treatment system: A comparison of different biogas-sludge use alternatives. Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 144, 296-303.
    • 21. Doorn, M.R.J.; Towprayoon, S.; Vieira, S.M.M.; Irving, W.; Palmer, C.; Pipatti, R.; Wang, C. Chapter 6 Wastewater Treatment and Emissions; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: New York, NY, USA, 2006.
    • 22. Average CO2 Emission Factors of Regional Electric Grids in China during 2011 and 2012; National Development and Reform Commission of People's Republic of China, Climate Change Division: Beijing, China, 2014. (In Chinese)
    • 23. Cakir, F.Y.; Stenstrom, M.K. Greenhouse gas production: A comparison between aerobic and anaerobic wastewater treatment technology. Water Res. 2005, 39, 4197-4203.
    • 24. Foley, J.; de Haas, D.; Yuan, Z.; Lant, P. Nitrous oxide generation in full-scale biological nutrient removal wastewater treatment plants. Water Res. 2010, 44, 831-844.
    • 25. Foley, J.; Lant, P. Fugitive greenhouse gas emissions from wastewater treatment. Water J. Aust. Water Assoc. 2008, 38, 6.
    • 26. Brown, S.; Beecher, N.; Carpenter, A. Calculator tool for determining greenhouse gas emissions for biosolids processing and end use. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 44, 7.
    • 27. Carr, M. Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions Industrial Biotechnology And Biorefining. In 2007 Taiwan International Chemical Industry Forum; Taiwan Chemical Industry Association: Taipei, Taiwan, 2007.
    • 28. Sharaai, A.H.; Mahmood, N.Z.; Sulaiman, A.H. Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) using the ecological scaricity (ecopoints) method: A potential impact analysis to potable water production. World Applied Sci. J. 2010, 11, 12.
    • 29. MOHUD. Municipal Projects Investment Estimation Index Book IV Drainage Project; China Planning Press: Beijing, China, 2008.
    • 30. Hammond, G.; Jones, C. Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE) Version 1.6a; University of Bath: Bath, UK, 2008. Available online: www.bath.ac.uk/mech-eng/sert/embodied/ (accessed on 13 November 2014).
    • 31. Lu, H.; Price, L. China's industrial carbon dioxide emissions in manufacturing subsectors and in selected provinces. In Proceeedings of ECEEE Industrial Summer Study, Arnhem, the Netherlands, 11-14 September 2012; Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory: Berkeley, CA, USA, 2013. Available online: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/917755dp (accessed on 15 November 2014).
    • 32. China Energy Statistical Yearbook 2013; National Bureau of Statistics of the People's Republic of China, China Statistics Press: Beijing, China, 2013.
    • 33. Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories: Energy Workbook (Volume 2); Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): New York, NY, USA, 1997.
    • 34. Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories: Reference Manual (Volume 3); Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): New York, NY, USA, 1997.
    • 35. Monteith, H.D.; Sahely, H.R.; MacLean, H.L.; Bagley, D.M. A rational procedure for estimation of greenhouse-gas emissions from municipal wastewater treatment plants. Water Environ. Res. 2005, 77, 390-403.
    • 36. Kampschreur, M.J.; Temmink, H.; Kleerebezem, R.; Jetten, M.S.; van Loosdrecht, M.C. Nitrous oxide emission during wastewater treatment. Water Res. 2009, 43, 4093-4103.
  • Inferred research data

    The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    Title Trust
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Download from

Cite this article