International Research Center in Critical Raw Materials for Advanced Industrial Technologies (ICCRAM), University of Burgos, Centro de I+D+I, Plaza Misael Bañuelos s/n, 09001 Burgos, Spain.
TAUW GmbH, Dept. of Soil & Groundwater, Landsbergerstr. 290, 80687 Munich, Germany.
Sci Total Environ. 2024 Dec 1;954:176720. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.176720. Epub 2024 Oct 7.
Bioremediation can be an alternative or complementary approach to conventional soil and water treatment technologies. Determining the environmental and socio-economic impacts of bioremediation is important but rarely addressed. This work presents a comprehensive sustainability assessment for a specific groundwater bioremediation case study based on In-situ Metal(loid) Precipitation (ISMP) by conducting a social Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) using two different approaches: environmental Life Cycle Costing (eLCC) and Impact Pathway Approach (IPA). Externalities are calculated in two ways: i) using Environmental Prices (EP) to monetize Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) results and metal(loid)s removed at field scale, and ii) following the IPA steps to determine the social costs avoided by removing arsenic contamination at full scale. The results show that, in the baseline scenario, the project is not socio-economically viable in both cases as the Net Present Value (NPV) is -129,512.61 € and - 415,185,140 € respectively. Sensitivity and scenario analyses are performed to identify the key parameters and actions needed to reach a positive NPV. For instance, increasing the amount of water treated per year to 90 m and assuming a 20 % increase in operation costs and a 60 % increase in construction costs can make the project socio-economically viable at the field scale, while a reduction in the social discount rate from a 4 % to a 2 % can lead to a positive NPV at the full scale. The approaches proposed in this work may be useful for practitioners and policymakers when evaluating the environmental and socio-economic impacts of bioremediation technologies at different scales and regions, as well as human health impacts caused by contaminants at the current legal limits.
生物修复可以作为传统土壤和水治理技术的替代或补充方法。确定生物修复的环境和社会经济影响很重要,但很少得到解决。本研究通过使用两种不同方法(环境生命周期成本核算 (eLCC) 和影响途径方法 (IPA))进行社会成本效益分析 (CBA),对基于原位金属(类)沉淀 (ISMP) 的特定地下水生物修复案例研究进行了全面的可持续性评估。通过使用环境价格 (EP) 将生命周期评估 (LCA) 结果和现场规模去除的金属(类)货币化,以及遵循 IPA 步骤确定完全去除砷污染所避免的社会成本,计算了外部性。结果表明,在基准情景下,在两种情况下,该项目在经济上都不可行,因为净现值 (NPV) 分别为-129,512.61 欧元和-415,185,140 欧元。进行了敏感性和情景分析,以确定达到正 NPV 所需的关键参数和行动。例如,将每年处理的水量增加到 90 m,假设运营成本增加 20%,建设成本增加 60%,可以使该项目在现场规模上具有经济可行性,而将社会贴现率从 4%降低到 2%可以使全规模项目产生正 NPV。本研究提出的方法对于评估不同规模和地区的生物修复技术的环境和社会经济影响,以及当前法定限值下污染物对人类健康的影响,对于从业人员和决策者可能是有用的。