College of Energy and Safety Engineering, Tianjin Chengjian University, Tianjin, 300384, China.
College of Science, Tianjin Chengjian University, Tianjin, 300384, China.
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2023 Oct;30(48):106598-106610. doi: 10.1007/s11356-023-29849-z. Epub 2023 Sep 21.
Harmless disposal and reutilization of electroplating sludge (ES) attract growing interests due to the high content of heavy metals, which requires economical-affordable and environmentally friendly processing technologies. Main reutilization alternatives in China, i.e., acid leaching, bioleaching, smelting, ironmaking blast furnace co-processing (IBFC), and cement kiln co-processing (CKC), were evaluated and compared via life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle costing (LCC) methods. In addition, the heavy metal recovery potential of these scenarios was also evaluated to focus on the sustainable use of metal resources. LCA results show that acid leaching outperforms other scenarios due to the environmental benefits originating from recovering heavy metals, while smelting exhibits the worst due to high energy consumption. The environmental contribution analysis reveals that the product nickel sulfate has a significant positive impact on acid leaching and bioleaching scenarios, and energy consumption is the key factor for smelting, IBFC, and CKC. LCC results show that bioleaching outperforms others, while CKC performs the worst because only inorganic materials are utilized. Bioleaching has the lowest externality cost while CKC has the highest. The heavy metal recovery assessment indicates that bioleaching exhibits the greatest potential with recovery rates of 99%, 99%, 93%, 96%, and 95% for Cu, Cr, Ni, Zn, and Fe, respectively. In contrast, the target heavy metal recovery rate for both acid leaching and smelting is 93%. Acid leaching and bioleaching scenarios are more advantageous from a comprehensive comparison.
无害处理和再利用电镀污泥(ES)由于其重金属含量高,引起了越来越多的关注,这需要经济实惠且环保的处理技术。中国主要的再利用替代方案,即酸浸、生物浸出、熔炼、炼铁高炉共处理(IBFC)和水泥窑共处理(CKC),通过生命周期评估(LCA)和生命周期成本(LCC)方法进行了评估和比较。此外,还评估了这些方案的重金属回收潜力,以关注金属资源的可持续利用。LCA 结果表明,酸浸由于从回收重金属中获得的环境效益而优于其他方案,而熔炼由于高能耗表现最差。环境贡献分析表明,产品硫酸镍对酸浸和生物浸出方案有重大积极影响,而能源消耗是熔炼、IBFC 和 CKC 的关键因素。LCC 结果表明,生物浸出优于其他方案,而 CKC 表现最差,因为只利用了无机材料。生物浸出的外部性成本最低,而 CKC 的外部性成本最高。重金属回收评估表明,生物浸出具有最大的潜力,Cu、Cr、Ni、Zn 和 Fe 的回收率分别为 99%、99%、93%、96%和 95%。相比之下,酸浸和熔炼的目标重金属回收率均为 93%。从综合比较来看,酸浸和生物浸出方案更具优势。