Different technological schemes for treating the leachate generated by an existing landfill were compared in a life cycle perspective. On-site advanced processes based on reverse osmosis and evaporation were compared to conventional off-site co-treatment with civil sewage in wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). The inventories of the different scenarios were built by both direct observation of existing facilities and by retrieving data from the literature and similar equipment. Particular care was given for evaluating the energetic and chemical needs for operating the on-site advanced treatments. The evaporation system required 40 kW h/m3 of electricity and 18.5 kW h/m3 of heat, whereas reverse osmosis needed only 8.5 kW h/m3 of electricity. On the other hand the amount of liquid concentrate returned by the evaporation system was only about 0.03 m3/m3 instead of about 0.30 m3/m3 returned by reverse osmosis. The evaporation system also consumed the highest amount of chemicals. Life cycle analysis showed that the impact categories most affected by the different options were human toxicity, both non-cancer and cancer, together with freshwater ecotoxicity. The uncertainty analysis highlighted the major contribution associated with direct emissions from the processes. On the basis of mean values, the qualitative trends were substantially confirmed.

Impact of different schemes for treating landfill leachate

Di Maria, Francesco
Methodology
;
Sisani, Federico
Software
;
Contini, Stefano
Software
;
2018

Abstract

Different technological schemes for treating the leachate generated by an existing landfill were compared in a life cycle perspective. On-site advanced processes based on reverse osmosis and evaporation were compared to conventional off-site co-treatment with civil sewage in wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). The inventories of the different scenarios were built by both direct observation of existing facilities and by retrieving data from the literature and similar equipment. Particular care was given for evaluating the energetic and chemical needs for operating the on-site advanced treatments. The evaporation system required 40 kW h/m3 of electricity and 18.5 kW h/m3 of heat, whereas reverse osmosis needed only 8.5 kW h/m3 of electricity. On the other hand the amount of liquid concentrate returned by the evaporation system was only about 0.03 m3/m3 instead of about 0.30 m3/m3 returned by reverse osmosis. The evaporation system also consumed the highest amount of chemicals. Life cycle analysis showed that the impact categories most affected by the different options were human toxicity, both non-cancer and cancer, together with freshwater ecotoxicity. The uncertainty analysis highlighted the major contribution associated with direct emissions from the processes. On the basis of mean values, the qualitative trends were substantially confirmed.
2018
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11391/1425233
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 36
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 35
social impact