Anaerobic treatment offers a sustainable alternative to aerobic treatment by recovering energy from wastewater. Anaerobic treatment, however, is challenged by reduced performance at lower temperatures and dissolved methane in the effluent, which represents a loss in recoverable energy and a potent greenhouse gas emission. Long-term operation of a bench-scale anaerobic baffled reactor (ABR) at 15–20°C, with domestic wastewater, provided data to evaluate life cycle environmental and economic performances of mainstream anaerobic treatment. Performance of the ABR was compared to a conceptual design of treatment with trickling filter+anaerobic digestion (TF+AD). The ABR and TF were modeled as example low-cost anaerobic and aerobic treatments, respectively, because these technologies may be more easily implemented (compared to membrane systems and activated sludge) in developing countries. This type of comprehensive study, not conducted previously for the ABR, is imperative for selecting appropriate technologies as we determine how to bring sanitation to billions who are unserved. The ABR recovered approximately six times more energy from low-strength wastewater than TF+AD and resulted in significantly more beneficial life cycle impacts for ecosystem quality and human health. Furthermore, technoeconomic analysis showed that the ABR has a life cycle cost that is about 40% lower than TF+AD. Dissolved methane in the effluent of the ABR, however, resulted in a harmful impact on climate change, whereas TF+AD resulted in approximately neutral impacts on climate change. A combined ABR+TF assembly, which was assumed to oxidize residual organics and dissolved methane, resulted in beneficial environmental impacts for four environmental categories. Advancements in synergistic technologies that remove or recover dissolved methane in anaerobic effluent would allow implementation of the ABR without increasing climate change impacts.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AgrawalL.K., HaradaH., and OkuiH. (1997). Treatment of dilute wastewater in a UASB reactor at a moderate temperature: Performance aspects. J. Ferment. Bioeng., 83, 179.
2.
APHA, AWWA, and WEF. (2012). Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 22 edition. Washington, DC: American Water Works Association.
3.
BandaraW.M., KindaichiT., SatohH., SasakawaM., NakaharaY., TakahashiM., and OkabeS. (2012). Anaerobic treatment of municipal wastewater at ambient temperature: Analysis of archaeal community structure and recovery of dissolved methane. Water Res. 46, 5756.
4.
BandaraW.M., SatohH., SasakawaM., NakaharaY., TakahashiM., and OkabeS. (2011). Removal of residual dissolved methane gas in an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor treating low-strength wastewater at low temperature with degassing membrane. Water Res. 45, 3533.
5.
BarberW.P., and StuckeyD.C. (1999). The use of the anaerobic baffled reactor (ABR) for wastewater treatment: A review. Water Res. 33, 1559.
6.
BaumR., LuhJ., and BartramJ. (2013). Sanitation: A global estimate of sewerage connections without treatment and the resulting impact on MDG progress. Environ. Sci. Technol., 47, 1994.
7.
BaumertK.A., HerzogT., and PershingJ. (2005). Navigating the Numbers: Greenhouse Gas Data and International Climate Policy. Available at: www.wri.org/publication/navigating-numbers (accessed March7, 2016).
8.
BealC.M., GerberL.N., SillsD.L., HuntleyM.E., MacheskyS.C., WalshM.J., TesterJ.W., ArchibaldI., GranadosJ., and GreeneC.H. (2015). Algal biofuel production for fuels and feed in a 100-ha facility: A comprehensive techno-economic analysis and life cycle assessment. Algal Res. 10, 266.
9.
ChernicharoC.A., and NascimentoM.C.P. (2001). Feasibility of a pilot-scale UASB/trickling filter system for domestic sewage treatment. Water Sci. Technol., 44, 221.
10.
CookneyJ., McleodA., MathioudakisV., NcubeP., SoaresA., JeffersonB., and McAdamE.J. (2016). Dissolved methane recovery from anaerobic effluents using hollow fibre membrane contactors. J. Membr. Sci., 502, 141.
11.
CornejoP.K., ZhangQ., and MihelcicJ.R. (2013). Quantifying benefits of resource recovery from sanitation provision in a developing world setting. J. Environ. Manage., 131, 7.
12.
CorominasL., FoleyJ., GuestJ.S., HospidoA., LarsenH.F., MoreraS., and ShawA. (2013). Life cycle assessment applied to wastewater treatment: State of the art. Water Res. 47, 5480.
13.
ElmitwalliT.A., Van LierJ., ZeemanG., and LettingaG. (2004). Treatment of domestic sewage at low temperature in a two-anaerobic step system followed by a trickling filter. Water Sci. Technol., 48, 199.
14.
EPA (1999). Biosolids generation, use, and disposal in the United States. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
15.
EPA (2000). Constructed Wetlands Treatment of Municipal Wastewaters. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio.
EPA (2015). Catalog of CHP Technologies, Section 5. Technology Characterization–Microturbines. USEPA Combined Heat and Power Partnership.
18.
FoleyJ.M., RozendalR.A., HertleC.K., LantP.A., and RabaeyK. (2010). Life cycle assessment of high-rate anaerobic treatment, microbial fuel cells, and microbial electrolysis cells. Environ. Sci. Technol., 44, 3629.
19.
FoxonK.M., PillayS., LalbahadurT., RoddaN., HolderF., and BuckleyC.A. (2004). The anaerobic baffled reactor (ABR): an appropriate technology for on-site sanitation. Water SA,, 30, 44.
20.
GerberL.N., TesterJ.W., BealC.M., HuntleyM.E., and SillsD.L. (2016). Target cultivation and financing parameters for sustainable production of fuel and feed from microalgae. Environ. Sci. Technol., 50, 3333.
21.
Gopala KrishnaG.V.T., KumarP., and KumarP. (2008). Treatment of low strength complex wastewater using an anaerobic baffled reactor (ABR). Bioresour. Technol., 99, 8193.
22.
GuineeJ.B. (2002). Handbook on life cycle assessment operational guide to the ISO standards. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess., 7, 311.
HatamotoM., MiyauchiT., KindaichiT., OzakiN., and OhashiA. (2011). Dissolved methane oxidation and competition for oxygen in down-flow hanging sponge reactor for post-treatment of anaerobic wastewater treatment. Bioresour. Technol., 102, 10299.
25.
HatamotoM., YamamotoH., KindaichiT., OzakiN., and OhashiA. (2010). Biological oxidation of dissolved methane in effluents from anaerobic reactors using a down-flow hanging sponge reactor. Water Res. 44, 1409.
26.
HospidoA., MoreiraM.T., and FeijooG. (2008). A comparison of municipal wastewater treatment plants for big centres of population in Galicia (Spain). Int. J. Life Cycle Assess., 13, 57.
27.
IPCC (2013). Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis: Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. United Kingdom and New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
28.
ISO (2006a). ISO 14040: Environmental management–Life cycle assessment–Principles and framework, ISO Technical Report ISO 14040:2006(E).
29.
ISO (2006b). ISO 14044: Environmental management–Life cycle assessment–Requirements and guidelines, ISO Technical Report ISO 14044:2006(E).
30.
IttenR., and FrischknechtR. (2012). Life Cycle Inventory of Electricity Mixes and Grid.
31.
JamesK., CampbellS.L., GodlobeC.E., and Energy, A. to S. (2002). Watergy: Taking advantage of untapped energy and water efficiency opportunities in municipal water systems [www Document]. Available at: https://www.ase.org/sites/ase.org/files/watergy_2002.pdf (accessed March7, 2016).
32.
JollietO., MargniM., CharlesR., HumbertS., PayetJ., RebitzerG., and RosenbaumR. (2003). IMPACT 2002+: A new life cycle impact assessment methodology. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess., 8, 324.
33.
KalbarP.P., KarmakarS., and AsolekarS.R. (2013). Assessment of wastewater treatment technologies: Life cycle approach. Water Environ. J., 27, 261.
34.
KampmanC., HendrickxT.L.G., LueskenF.A., van AlenT.A., Op den CampH.J.M., JettenM.S.M., ZeemanG., BuismanC.J.N., and TemminkH. (2012). Enrichment of denitrifying methanotrophic bacteria for application after direct low-temperature anaerobic sewage treatment. J. Hazard. Mater.227–228, 164.
35.
KimJ., KimK., YeH., LeeE., ShinC., McCartyP.L., and BaeJ. (2011). Anaerobic fluidized bed membrane bioreactor for wastewater treatment. Environ. Sci. Technol., 45, 576.
36.
LiuZ., YinH., DangZ., and LiuY. (2014). Dissolved methane: A hurdle for anaerobic treatment of municipal wastewater. Environ. Sci. Technol., 48, 889.
37.
ManariotisI.D., and GrigoropoulosS.G. (2002). Low-strength wastewater treatment using an anaerobic baffled reactor. Water Environ. Res., 74, 170.
38.
ManserN.D., WaldI., ErgasS.J., IzurietaR., and MihelcicJ.R. (2015). Assessing the fate of Ascaris suum ova during mesophilic anaerobic digestion. Environ. Sci. Technol., 49, 3128.
MatsuuraN., HatamotoM., SuminoH., SyutsuboK., YamaguchiT., and OhashiA. (2015). Recovery and biological oxidation of dissolved methane in effluent from UASB treatment of municipal sewage using a two-stage closed downflow hanging sponge system. J. Environ. Manage., 151, 200.
41.
MoW., and ZhangQ. (2012). Can municipal wastewater treatment systems be carbon neutral?. J. Environ. Manage., 112, 360.
42.
MyhreG., ShindellD., BréonF.M., CollinsW., FuglestvedtJ., HuangJ., KochD., LamarqueJ.F., LeeD., MendozaB., NakajimaT., RobockA., StephensG., TakemuraT., and ZhangH. (2013). Anthropogenic and natural radiative forcing. In: StockerTF, QinD, PlattnerG-K, TignorM, AllenSK, BoschungJ, NauelsA, XiaY, BexV, and MidgleyPM, Eds. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
43.
NachaiyasitS., and StuckeyD.C. (1997). The effect of shock loads on the performance of an anaerobic baffled reactor (ABR). 2. Step and transient hydraulic shocks at constant feed strength. Water Res., 31, 2747.
44.
NazI., SarojD.P., MumtazS., AliN., and AhmedS. (2015). Assessment of biological trickling filter systems with various packing materials for improved wastewater treatment. Environ. Technol., 36, 424.
45.
NorrisG.A. (2004). SimaPro Database Manual: The Franklin US LCI Library. Amersfoort, The Netherlands: PRé Consultants and Sylvatica.
46.
RenouS., ThomasJ.S., AoustinE., and PonsM.N. (2008). Influence of impact assessment methods in wastewater treatment LCA. J. Clean. Prod., 16, 1098.
47.
ReynaudN., and BuckleyC.A. (2015). The anaerobic baffled reactor (ABR) treating communal wastewater under mesophilic conditions: A review. Water Sci. Technol., 7, 6.
48.
RoyP.-O., DeschênesL., and MargniM. (2013). Uncertainty and spatial variability in characterization factors for aquatic acidification at the global scale. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess., 19, 882.
49.
SatoN., OkuboT., OnoderaT., OhashiA., and HaradaH. (2006). Prospects for a self-sustainable sewage treatment system: A case study on full-scale UASB system in India's Yamuna River Basin. J. Environ. Manage., 80, 198.
50.
ShahzadM., KhanS.J., and PaulP. (2015). Influence of temperature on the performance of a full-scale activated sludge process operated at varying solids retention times while treating municipal sewage. Water. 7, 855.
51.
ShinC., McCartyP.L., KimJ., and BaeJ. (2014). Pilot-scale temperate-climate treatment of domestic wastewater with a staged anaerobic fluidized membrane bioreactor (SAF-MBR). Bioresour. Technol., 159, 95.
52.
ShoenerB.D., BradleyI.M., CusickR.D., and GuestJ. (2014). Energy positive domestic wastewater treatment: The roles of anaerobic and phototrophic technologies. Environ. Sci. Process. Impacts., 16, 1204.
53.
ShoenerB.D., ZhongC., GreinerA.D., KhunjarW.O., HongP.-Y., and GuestJ.S. (2016). Design of anaerobic membrane bioreactors for the valorization of dilute organic carbon waste streams. Energy Environ. Sci., 9, 1102.
54.
SillsD.L., ParamitaV., FrankeM.J., JohnsonM.C., AkabasT.M., GreeneC.H., and TesterJ.W. (2013). Quantitative uncertainty analysis of life cycle assessment for algal biofuel production. Environ. Sci. Technol., 47, 687.
55.
SinghS., HaberlR., MoogO., ShresthaR.R., ShresthaP., and ShresthaR. (2009). Performance of an anaerobic baffled reactor and hybrid constructed wetland treating high-strength wastewater in Nepal—A model for DEWATS. Ecol. Eng., 35, 654.
56.
SmithA.L., StadlerL.B., CaoL., LoveN.G., RaskinL., and SkerlosS.J. (2014). Navigating wastewater energy recovery strategies: A life cycle comparison of anaerobic membrane bioreactor and conventional treatment systems with anaerobic digestion. Environ. Sci. Technol., 48, 5972.
57.
TauseefS.M., AbassiT., and AbassiS.A. (2013). Energy recovery from wastewaters with high-rate anaerobic digesters. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev., 19, 704.
58.
TchobanoglousG., BurtonF.L., and StenselH.D. (2003). Wastewater Engineering: Treatment and Reuse, 4th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill Science/Engineering/Math.
United Nations General Assembly (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. A/RES/70/1.
61.
van der HaD., BundervoetB., VerstraeteW., and BoonN. (2011). A sustainable, carbon neutral methane oxidation by a partnership of methane oxidizing communities and microalgae. Water Res. 45, 2845.
62.
von SperlingM. (1996). Comparison among the most frequently used systems for wastewater treatment in developing countries. Water Sci. Technol., 33, 59.
63.
WeidemaB.P., BauerC., HirchierR., MutelCh., NemecekT., ReinhardJ., VadenboC.O., and WernetG. (2013). The ecoinvent database: Overview and methodology, Data quality guideline for the ecoinvent database version 3. Available at: www.ecoinvent.org (accessed March7, 2016).
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
