Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee, Uttrakhand, 247667, India.
Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee, Uttrakhand, 247667, India.
Chemosphere. 2022 Oct;304:135243. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.135243. Epub 2022 Jun 6.
The human health-related issues originating from the consumption of arsenic and fluoride-containing drinking water are major challenges worldwide. Amongst the different technologies available, electrocoagulation and adsorption are two promising technologies for simultaneous remediation of contaminants from groundwater. The present study evaluates and compares the environmental impacts of aluminium hydroxide/oxide nanoparticles (AHNP) adsorption and aluminium electrode electrocoagulation processes by performing their LCA. The Environmental impacts of both technologies were evaluated using Gabi software with the help of two mid-point methods (CML 2001 and TRACI). Evaluations are based on the treatment of 720 L of arsenic(III) and fluoride contaminated water from initial concentrations of 0.5 and 10 mg/L, respectively, to their WHO permissible limits. The management of spent materials has been considered for environmental impacts. The LCA analysis has shown that dissolution of aluminium electrode and electricity consumption in the electrochemical process are the significant contributors to environmental impacts in GWP, AP, ODP, ADP fossil, FAETP and HTP categories. Adsorption (GWP 35.2 kg CO eq.) has almost eight times higher environmental impacts than electrocoagulation (GWP 4.5 kg CO eq.) because in-situ generated coagulant has higher adsorption capacity than pre-precipitated adsorbents. The scenario analysis was performed with four different sources of electricity. The economic evaluation concludes that the combined cost of material and energy involved in the adsorption process (INR 0.7 per litre) is almost seven times higher than that of the electrocoagulation process (INR 0.1 per litre). Hence electrocoagulation is a more environment-friendly, low-cost technology to treat groundwater for community purposes.
人类健康相关问题源于饮用含砷和氟的饮用水，这是全球面临的主要挑战。在现有的各种技术中，电凝聚和吸附是两种很有前途的同时修复地下水污染物的技术。本研究通过进行生命周期评估（LCA）来评估和比较氢氧化铝/氧化 铝纳米颗粒（AHNP）吸附和铝电极电凝聚过程的环境影响。使用 Gabi 软件并借助两种中点方法（CML 2001 和 TRACI）评估了这两种技术的环境影响。评估是基于处理初始浓度分别为 0.5 和 10 mg/L 的 720 L 砷(III)和氟污染水，直至达到世界卫生组织允许的限值。已考虑处理用过的材料来管理环境影响。LCA 分析表明，在 GWP、AP、ODP、ADP 化石、FAETP 和 HTP 类别中，铝电极的溶解和电化学过程中的电力消耗是对环境影响的主要贡献者。吸附（GWP 35.2 kg CO eq.）的环境影响几乎比电凝聚（GWP 4.5 kg CO eq.）高八倍，因为原位生成的混凝剂比预沉淀的吸附剂具有更高的吸附能力。进行了四种不同电力来源的情景分析。经济评估得出的结论是，吸附过程中涉及的材料和能源的综合成本（每升 0.7 卢比）几乎是电凝聚过程（每升 0.1 卢比）的七倍。因此，电凝聚是一种更环保、低成本的技术，可用于社区目的处理地下水。
