LCA of Disposal Practices for Arsenic-Bearing Iron Oxides Reveals the Need for Advanced Arsenic Recovery
Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Standard
LCA of Disposal Practices for Arsenic-Bearing Iron Oxides Reveals the Need for Advanced Arsenic Recovery. / Van Genuchten, C. M.; Etmannski, T. R.; Jessen, S.; Breunig, H. M.
I: Environmental Science and Technology, Bind 56, Nr. 19, 2022, s. 14109–14119.Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - LCA of Disposal Practices for Arsenic-Bearing Iron Oxides Reveals the Need for Advanced Arsenic Recovery
AU - Van Genuchten, C. M.
AU - Etmannski, T. R.
AU - Jessen, S.
AU - Breunig, H. M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2022 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - Iron (Fe)-based groundwater treatment removes carcinogenic arsenic (As) effectively but generates toxic As-rich Fe oxide water treatment residuals (As WTRs) that must be managed appropriately to prevent environmental contamination. In this study, we apply life cycle assessment (LCA) to compare the toxicity impacts of four common As WTR disposal strategies that have different infrastructure requirements and waste control: (i) landfilling, (ii) brick stabilization, (iii) mixture with organic waste, and (iv) open disposal. The As disposal toxicity impacts (functional unit = 1.0 kg As) are compared and benchmarked against impacts of current methods to produce marketable As compounds via As mining and concentrate processing. Landfilling had the lowest non-carcinogen toxicity (2.0 × 10-3 CTUh), carcinogen toxicity (3.8 × 10-5 CTUh), and ecotoxicity (4.6 × 103 CTUe) impacts of the four disposal strategies, with the largest toxicity source being As emission via sewer discharge of treated landfill leachate. Although landfilling had the lowest toxicity impacts, the stored toxicity of this strategy was substantial (ratio of stored toxicity/emitted As = 13), suggesting that landfill disposal simply converts direct As emissions to an impending As toxicity problem for future generations. The remaining disposal strategies, which are frequently practiced in low-income rural As-affected areas, performed poorly. These strategies yielded ~3-10 times greater human toxicity and ecotoxicity impacts than landfilling. The significant drawbacks of each disposal strategy indicated by the LCA highlight the urgent need for new methods to recover As from WTRs and convert it into valuable As compounds. Such advanced As recovery technologies, which have not been documented previously, would decrease the stored As toxicity and As emissions from both WTR disposal and from mining As ore.
AB - Iron (Fe)-based groundwater treatment removes carcinogenic arsenic (As) effectively but generates toxic As-rich Fe oxide water treatment residuals (As WTRs) that must be managed appropriately to prevent environmental contamination. In this study, we apply life cycle assessment (LCA) to compare the toxicity impacts of four common As WTR disposal strategies that have different infrastructure requirements and waste control: (i) landfilling, (ii) brick stabilization, (iii) mixture with organic waste, and (iv) open disposal. The As disposal toxicity impacts (functional unit = 1.0 kg As) are compared and benchmarked against impacts of current methods to produce marketable As compounds via As mining and concentrate processing. Landfilling had the lowest non-carcinogen toxicity (2.0 × 10-3 CTUh), carcinogen toxicity (3.8 × 10-5 CTUh), and ecotoxicity (4.6 × 103 CTUe) impacts of the four disposal strategies, with the largest toxicity source being As emission via sewer discharge of treated landfill leachate. Although landfilling had the lowest toxicity impacts, the stored toxicity of this strategy was substantial (ratio of stored toxicity/emitted As = 13), suggesting that landfill disposal simply converts direct As emissions to an impending As toxicity problem for future generations. The remaining disposal strategies, which are frequently practiced in low-income rural As-affected areas, performed poorly. These strategies yielded ~3-10 times greater human toxicity and ecotoxicity impacts than landfilling. The significant drawbacks of each disposal strategy indicated by the LCA highlight the urgent need for new methods to recover As from WTRs and convert it into valuable As compounds. Such advanced As recovery technologies, which have not been documented previously, would decrease the stored As toxicity and As emissions from both WTR disposal and from mining As ore.
KW - arsenic contamination
KW - circular economy
KW - landfill disposal
KW - life cycle assessment
KW - waste management
KW - water treatment residuals
U2 - 10.1021/acs.est.2c05417
DO - 10.1021/acs.est.2c05417
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 36126259
AN - SCOPUS:85138877573
VL - 56
SP - 14109
EP - 14119
JO - Environmental Science & Technology
JF - Environmental Science & Technology
SN - 0013-936X
IS - 19
ER -
ID: 322653438