Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Biosolids management with net-zero CO2 emissions: a techno-ecological synergy design

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Management of biosolids from industrial and municipal wastewater facilities presents multifaceted issues ranging from greenhouse gas emissions, high odor and high treatment costs. Until now, most studies that have focused on identifying the best treatment pathway are based on optimization of technological alternatives and life cycle analysis studies. Such studies aim toward sustainability but ignore the capacity of local ecological systems to provide ecosystem services, thus leading to design solutions that may be sub-optimal due to shifting of impacts outside the boundary, resulting in degradation. This work uses a techno-ecological synergy design methodology to identify optimal strategies for biosolids treatment and disposal, by balancing the supply and demand for carbon sequestration ecosystem service. Both the technological systems that create the ecosystem service demand and ecological systems that supply those services are included within one design framework. Technological alternatives for biosolids management in Central Ohio considered in this work are land filling, land application, incineration and composting. Approaches for supplying the carbon sequestration capacity include forestation, extension of timber cycles and geological sequestration. An additional case where biomass utilization from extension of timber cycle to produce renewable energy is also explored. Results from this study demonstrate that including carbon sequestration ecosystem service explicitly in the design problem leads to solutions where the ecosystem service demand and supply can be balanced, while also being cost-effective. Thus by including ecological systems in the design boundary, the optimal solution space expands to reveal novel solutions that cannot be found by the conventional techno-centric approach.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

LCA:

Life cycle assessment

ORWARE:

Organic waste research

TES:

Techno-ecological synergy

\(\bar{A}\) :

Flow capacity for arc

C :

Unit processing cost for node in carbon network

D :

Ecosystem service demand

E :

Sets of arcs

i :

Index for arcs or nodes

j :

Index for arcs or nodes

k :

Ecosystem service

K :

Amount of input flow to network

l :

Index for arcs or nodes

m :

Number of arcs

n :

Number of nodes

\(\bar{N}\) :

Flow capacity of node

N :

Sets of nodes

\(N^\mathrm{{fm}}\) :

Set of fixed merging nodes

\(N^\mathrm{{fs}}\) :

Set of fixed splitting nodes

\(N^{\mathrm{I}}\) :

Set of input nodes

P :

Unit processing cost for node in process network

\(r^{\mathrm{I}}\) :

Input flow merging ratio

\(r^{\mathrm{O}}\) :

Output flow splitting ratio

\(R_{i}\) :

Gain or loss ratio for nodes

S :

Ecosystem service supply

T :

Unit transportation cost of arcs

V :

Sustainability index

x :

Amount of flow sent through an arc

References

  • Ashton S, Baker S, Jackson B, Schroeder R (2007) Conventional biomass harvesting systems. In: Hubbard W, Biles L, Mayfield C, Ashton S (eds) Sustainable forestry for bioenergy and bio-based products: trainers curriculum notebook. Southern Forest Research Partnership Inc, Athens

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakshi BR, Ziv G, Lepech MD (2015) Techno-ecological synergy: a framework for sustainable engineering. Environ Sci Technol 49(3):1752–1760

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bettinger P, Boston K, Siry JP, Grebner DL (2010) Forest management and planning. Academic Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown S, Leonard P (2004) Building carbon credits with biosolids recycling. BioCycle 45(9):25–29

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown S, Beecher N, Carpenter A (2010) Calculator tool for determining greenhouse gas emissions for biosolids processing and end use. Environ Sci Technol 44(24):9509–9515

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell H (2000) Sludge management-future issues and trends. Water Sci Technol 41(8):1–8

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chen C, Rubin ES (2009) \({\text {CO}}_2\) control technology effects on IGCC plant performance and cost. Energy Policy 37(3):915–924

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • TSS Consultants (2013) Gasification bioenergy projects: impacts and benefits to air quality. http://ucanr.edu/sites/swet/files/176214.pdf

  • Crohn DM, Thomas AC (1998) Mixed-integer programming approach for designing land application systems at a regional scale. J Environ Eng 124(2):170–177

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dalemo M, Sonesson U, Björklund A, Mingarini K, Frostell B, Jönsson H, Nybrant T, Sundqvist J, Thyselius L (1997) Orware—a simulation model for organic waste handling systems. Part 1: model description. Resour Conserv Recycl 21(1):17–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gabriel S, Sahakij P, Ramirez M, Peot C (2007) A multiobjective optimization model for processing and distributing biosolids to reuse fields. J Oper Res Soc 58(7):850–864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goedkoop M, Oele M, de Schryver A, Vieira M (2008) Simapro database manual methods library. PRé Consultants, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Gopalakrishnan V, Bakshi BR, Ziv G (2016) Assessing the capacity of local ecosystems to meet industrial demand for ecosystem services. AIChE J 62(9):3319–3333

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hanes RJ, Gopalakrishnan V, Bakshi BR (2017) Synergies and trade-offs in renewable energy landscapes: balancing energy production with economics and ecosystem services. Appl Energy 199:25–44

  • Hayes SW, Keegan CE, Morgan TA (2011) Estimating harvesting costs. Bureau of Business and Economic Research, The University of Montana. http://www.bber.umt.edu/pubs/forest/prices/loggingCostPoster2011.pdf

  • Houillon G, Jolliet O (2005) Life cycle assessment of processes for the treatment of wastewater urban sludge: energy and global warming analysis. J Clean Prod 13(3):287–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klemes J, Bulatov I, Cockerill T (2005) Techno-economic modelling and cost functions of \({\text {CO}}_2\) capture processes. Comput Aided Chem Eng 20:295–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundin M, Olofsson M, Pettersson G, Zetterlund H (2004) Environmental and economic assessment of sewage sludge handling options. Resour Conserv Recycl 41(4):255–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mavrotas G (2009) Effective implementation of the \(\varepsilon\)-constraint method in multi-objective mathematical programming problems. Appl Math Comput 213(2):455–465

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell G, Beasley JE (2011) Optimisation of sludge treatment and transport. J Oper Res Soc 62(6):939–948

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray A, Horvath A, Nelson KL (2008) Hybrid life-cycle environmental and cost inventory of sewage sludge treatment and end-use scenarios: a case study from China. Environ Sci Technol 42(9):3163–3169

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen ASE, Plantinga AJ, Alig RJ et al (2014) New cost estimates for carbon sequestration through afforestation in the united states. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station

  • Peters GM, Rowley HV (2009) Environmental comparison of biosolids management systems using life cycle assessment. Environ Sci Technol 43(8):2674–2679

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Peters GM, Lundie S (2001) Life-cycle assessment of biosolids processing options. J Ind Ecol 5(2):103–121

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rebitzer G, Hunkeler D, Jolliet O (2003) Lccthe economic pillar of sustainability: methodology and application to wastewater treatment. Environ Prog 22(4):241–249

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Remy C, Lesjean B, Waschnewski J (2012) Identifying energy and carbon footprint optimization potentials of a sludge treatment line with life cycle assessment. Water Sci Technol 67(1):63–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sablayrolles C, Gabrielle B, Montrejaud-Vignoles M (2010) Life cycle assessment of biosolids land application and evaluation of the factors impacting human toxicity through plant uptake. J Ind Ecol 14(2):231–241

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sahakij P, Gabriel SA, Ramirez M, Peot C (2011) Multi-objective optimization models for distributing biosolids to reuse fields: a case study for the blue plains wastewater treatment plant. Netw Spat Econ 11(1):1–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sikdar KJ (2008) Material flow optimization and systems analysis for biosolids management: a study of the city of columbus municipal operations. Dissertation. The Ohio State University

  • Sohngen B, Brown S (2008) Extending timber rotations: carbon and cost implications. Clim Policy 8(5):435–451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sokhansanj S (2011) Biomass energy data book. http://cta.ornl.gov/bedb

  • Sonesson U, Dalemo M, Mingarini K, Jönsson H (1997) Orware—a simulation model for organic waste handling systems. Part 2: case study and simulation results. Resour Conserv Recycl 21(1):39–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suh YJ, Rousseaux P (2002) An lca of alternative wastewater sludge treatment scenarios. Resour Conserv Recycl 35(3):191–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tallaksen J, Kildegaard A (2010) Biomass gasification project biomass gasification: a comprehensive demonstration of a community—scale biomass energy system. USDA final report

  • Tarantini M, Buttol P, Maiorino L (2007) An environmental LCA of alternative scenarios of urban sewage sludge treatment and disposal. Therm Sci 11(3):153–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United States Forest Service (2014) Forest inventory and analysis national program. http://www.fia.fs.fed.us/tools-data/. Accessed 26 Feb 2015

  • Urban RA, Bakshi BR (2013) Techno-ecological synergy as a path toward sustainability of a north american residential system. Environ Sci Technol 47(4):1985–1993

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vadenbo C, Guillén-Gosálbez G, Saner D, Hellweg S (2014a) Multi-objective optimization of waste and resource management in industrial networks—part II: model application to the treatment of sewage sludge. Resour Conserv Recycl 89:41–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vadenbo C, Hellweg S, Guillén-Gosálbez G (2014b) Multi-objective optimization of waste and resource management in industrial networks—part I: model description. Resour Conserv Recycl 89:52–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang H, Brown SL, Magesan GN, Slade AH, Quintern M, Clinton PW, Payn TW (2008) Technological options for the management of biosolids. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 15(4):308–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Partial financial support for this work was provided by the National Science Foundation (CBET-1336872).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bhavik R. Bakshi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gopalakrishnan, V., Grubb, G.F. & Bakshi, B.R. Biosolids management with net-zero CO2 emissions: a techno-ecological synergy design. Clean Techn Environ Policy 19, 2099–2111 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-017-1398-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-017-1398-x

Keywords

Navigation