Water resource recovery facilities (WRRFs) contribute to climate change and air pollution, as they are anthropogenic potential sources of direct and indirect emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs). Studies concerning the monitoring and accounting for GHG emissions fromWRRFs are of increasing interest. In this study, the floating hood technique for gas collection was coupled with the off-gasmethod tomonitor and apportion nitrous oxide (N2O) and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from both aerated and non-aerated tanks in a municipal water resource recovery facility, in order to investigate its carbon footprint (CFP). To our knowledge, this is the first time that the chamber technique was applied to evaluate gas fluxes from the settler, where an emission factor (EF) of 4.71 ∗ 10−5 kgCO2,eq kgbCOD −1 was found. Interesting results were found in the disinfection unit, which was the major contributor to direct N2O emissions (with a specific emission factor of 0.008 kgCO2,eq kgbCOD−1 ), due to the chemical interaction between hydroxylamine and the disinfectant agent (hypochlorite). The specific emission factor of the biological aerated tank was 0.00112 kgCO2,eq kgbCOD−1 . The average direct CO2 emission was equal to 0.068 kgCO2 kgbCOD−1 from the activated sludge tank and to 0.00017 kgCO2 kgbCOD−1 from the secondary clarifier. Therefore, taking into account the contribution of both directN2OandCO2 emissions, values of 0.069 kgCO2,eq kgbCOD −1 , 0.008 kgCO2,eq kgbCOD−1 and 0.00022 kgCO2,eq kgbCOD−1, were found for the net CFP of the aerated compartment, the disinfection unit and the clarifier, respectively.

CO2 and N2O from water resource recovery facilities: Evaluation of emissions from biological treatment, settling, disinfection, and receiving water body

D. Caniani
;
M. Caivano;R. Pascale;G. Bianco;I. M. Mancini;S. Masi;G. Mazzone;
2019-01-01

Abstract

Water resource recovery facilities (WRRFs) contribute to climate change and air pollution, as they are anthropogenic potential sources of direct and indirect emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs). Studies concerning the monitoring and accounting for GHG emissions fromWRRFs are of increasing interest. In this study, the floating hood technique for gas collection was coupled with the off-gasmethod tomonitor and apportion nitrous oxide (N2O) and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from both aerated and non-aerated tanks in a municipal water resource recovery facility, in order to investigate its carbon footprint (CFP). To our knowledge, this is the first time that the chamber technique was applied to evaluate gas fluxes from the settler, where an emission factor (EF) of 4.71 ∗ 10−5 kgCO2,eq kgbCOD −1 was found. Interesting results were found in the disinfection unit, which was the major contributor to direct N2O emissions (with a specific emission factor of 0.008 kgCO2,eq kgbCOD−1 ), due to the chemical interaction between hydroxylamine and the disinfectant agent (hypochlorite). The specific emission factor of the biological aerated tank was 0.00112 kgCO2,eq kgbCOD−1 . The average direct CO2 emission was equal to 0.068 kgCO2 kgbCOD−1 from the activated sludge tank and to 0.00017 kgCO2 kgbCOD−1 from the secondary clarifier. Therefore, taking into account the contribution of both directN2OandCO2 emissions, values of 0.069 kgCO2,eq kgbCOD −1 , 0.008 kgCO2,eq kgbCOD−1 and 0.00022 kgCO2,eq kgbCOD−1, were found for the net CFP of the aerated compartment, the disinfection unit and the clarifier, respectively.
2019
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/11563/133994
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 42
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 37
social impact