use of lca for the environmental evaluation of end ...regpalzs/ppt_pdf/e_kilic.pdf · use of lca...
Post on 09-Jul-2020
3 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Eylem KILIEylem KILIÇÇ
Usak University Leather Research Centre Usak University Leather Research Centre
17th SETAC Europe LCA Case Studies Symposium
28 February-1 March 2011
Use of LCA for the environmental evaluation of Use of LCA for the environmental evaluation of Use of LCA for the environmental evaluation of Use of LCA for the environmental evaluation of Use of LCA for the environmental evaluation of Use of LCA for the environmental evaluation of Use of LCA for the environmental evaluation of Use of LCA for the environmental evaluation of
endendendendendendendend--------ofofofofofofofof--------pipe processes: a case study on pipe processes: a case study on pipe processes: a case study on pipe processes: a case study on pipe processes: a case study on pipe processes: a case study on pipe processes: a case study on pipe processes: a case study on
tannery sludge treatmenttannery sludge treatmenttannery sludge treatmenttannery sludge treatmenttannery sludge treatmenttannery sludge treatmenttannery sludge treatmenttannery sludge treatment
Problem: Problem: Problem: Problem: Problem: Problem: Problem: Problem:
� Basic chromium sulfate (BCS) is the most widely used tanning agent in leather industry. But only 54-57% of the chromium reacts with the hides and skin.
� Cr(III) is less toxic and soluble according to Cr(VI); however under certain circumstances Cr(III) maybe oxidized to Cr(VI)
� Landfilling of these wastes is loss of potential resource in the form of “chromium”.
Environmental contamination due to Environmental contamination due to Environmental contamination due to Environmental contamination due to Environmental contamination due to Environmental contamination due to Environmental contamination due to Environmental contamination due to
disposal of chromium containing sludgedisposal of chromium containing sludgedisposal of chromium containing sludgedisposal of chromium containing sludgedisposal of chromium containing sludgedisposal of chromium containing sludgedisposal of chromium containing sludgedisposal of chromium containing sludge
Solution:Solution:Solution:Solution:Solution:Solution:Solution:Solution:
� Recovery of chromium from tannery sludge in order to reduce:� Chromium discharged
� Raw chromium extracted from nature
� Evaluation of the environmental impacts of the chromium recovery process in comparison with the conventional landfilling performing a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) using GaBi software
SLUDGE TREATMENT
Recovery of chromium from tannery Recovery of chromium from tannery Recovery of chromium from tannery Recovery of chromium from tannery Recovery of chromium from tannery Recovery of chromium from tannery Recovery of chromium from tannery Recovery of chromium from tannery
sludgesludgesludgesludgesludgesludgesludgesludge
Basic Chromium Sulfate
Tannery sludge
Treated sludge
2952mgCr/kg sludge
8041mgCr/kg sludge
H2O2
DecompositionChromium Recovery
Chromium Precipitation
� Recovery yield 70%
� Cheap chemical (H2O2)
� Nontoxic reaction product
Environmental evaluation of chromium Environmental evaluation of chromium Environmental evaluation of chromium Environmental evaluation of chromium Environmental evaluation of chromium Environmental evaluation of chromium Environmental evaluation of chromium Environmental evaluation of chromium
recovery processrecovery processrecovery processrecovery processrecovery processrecovery processrecovery processrecovery process
� LCA METHODOLOGY
� Goal of the study: to identify the environmental impacts of chromium recovery from sludge prior to landfilling compared to the conventional direct landfilling.
� Functional unit: treatment of 100 m3 of wastewater
� System under study:
� Conventional System
� Sludge Treatment System
System boundariesSystem boundariesLife cycle inventoryLife cycle inventoryWastewater Treatment PlantWastewater Treatment Plant
Composting plant & Composting plant & GaBi DatabaseGaBi Database
Experimental studiesExperimental studies Industrial plant Industrial plant
100 m3
16.4 kg
� CML 2001 impact assessment methodology
� Quantification and evaluation of the environmental impacts of both systems were performed by analyzing:
� Energy Consumption (EC)� Abiotic Depletion Potential (ADP)� Acidification Potential (AP) � Eutrophication Potential (EP) � Freshwater Aquatic Ecotoxicity Potential (FAETP)� Global Warming Potential (GWP)� Human Toxicity Potential (HTP)� Marine Aquatic Ecotoxicity Potential (MAETP)� Ozone Layer Depletion Potential (ODP) � Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential (POCP) � Terrestrial Ecotoxicity Potential (TETP) impact categories.
Impact assessmentImpact assessmentImpact assessmentImpact assessmentImpact assessmentImpact assessmentImpact assessmentImpact assessment
Results and Results and Results and Results and Results and Results and Results and Results and interpretationinterpretationinterpretationinterpretationinterpretationinterpretationinterpretationinterpretation�� Environmental evaluation of sludge treatmentEnvironmental evaluation of sludge treatment
-0,5
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
4
-0,2
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
1,4
-0,05
0
0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2
0,25
0,3
0,35
-0,5
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
-0,1
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
0,8
0,9
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
-1,E-05
0,E+00
1,E-05
2,E-05
3,E-05
4,E-05
5,E-05
6,E-05
7,E-05
8,E-05
-10000
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
-1000
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
WWTP
Cr recovery
H2O2 decomposition
Cr precipitation
BCS production
Sludge drying&Landfilling
Environmental comparison between sludge and conventional treatmeEnvironmental comparison between sludge and conventional treatmentnt
Reduction of environmental impacts achievable by:Reduction of environmental impacts achievable by:Reduction of environmental impacts achievable by:Reduction of environmental impacts achievable by:Reduction of environmental impacts achievable by:Reduction of environmental impacts achievable by:Reduction of environmental impacts achievable by:Reduction of environmental impacts achievable by:
0
200
400
600
800
1000
GWP
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
4
ADP
0
0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2
0,25
0,3
0,35
POCP
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
AP
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
EP
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
FAETP
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
HTTP
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
MAETP
0,E+00
1,E-05
2,E-05
3,E-05
4,E-05
5,E-05
6,E-05
7,E-05
8,E-05
ODP
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
1,4
TETP
Conventional treatment
Sludge treatment
Chromium recovery using 50% less process water
Chromium recovery using byproduct
Chromium recovery using byproduct and 50% less process water
Sludge treatment with anaerobic digestion
�reduction of water consumption (50%)
�use of by-products�anaerobic digestion
Conclusion Conclusion Conclusion Conclusion Conclusion Conclusion Conclusion Conclusion
� The end-of-pipe treatments increase the environmental impactdue to, material and energy use unless the treatment is simpleand recovers a significant amount of waste.
� More efficient chromium recovery process can be achieved by “anaerobic or aerobic digestion of sludge”
� The results can serve as a basis to improve the chromium recovery and tannery sludge management options and should be used in decision-making processes especially for end-of-pipe treatments.
Thank you for your
kind attention…
top related